|
Post by mgbpuff on Jan 13, 2018 7:36:16 GMT -5
Emersa is a line conjured up to appease the feminists, a la Bose, rather than practical design. It was conceived for looks. It dilutes the Emotiva product offering, doesn't really fit in, and violates the core principle of offering value and performance with technological step ups between lines, all with minimal expense packaging. The MC-700 is fine in the Bass-X line up (it doesn't have balanced outputs and it doesn't have Dirac). If Emotiva tries to be all things to all people, it will fail. Adopting Class D turns you into a electronic repackager instead of a electronics designer much like store brands in the supermarkets.
|
|
|
Post by MusicHead on Jan 13, 2018 8:58:39 GMT -5
Emersa is a line conjured up to appease the feminists, a la Bose, rather than practical design. It was conceived for looks. It dilutes the Emotiva product offering, doesn't really fit in, and violates the core principle of offering value and performance with technological step ups between lines, all with minimal expense packaging. The MC-700 is fine in the Bass-X line up (it doesn't have balanced outputs and it doesn't have Dirac). If Emotiva tries to be all things to all people, it will fail. Adopting Class D turns you into a electronic repackager instead of a electronics designer much like store brands in the supermarkets. I believe many of us are not necessarily referring to the Emersa linea, but "something" between a ~$700 preprocessor and a +$2,000 one. As for the amp, I'd rather spend $1,000-$1,200 on a good mid-tier prepro and splurge a on amplification, i.e.: one of the Emotiva in-house designed X-series. Prepros come and go, good amps stay. As much as I would like it, I do not see myself spending $2,500 to $5,000 every other year or so on a pre pro to keep up with HDMI 5.0 or HDCP 4.2 or Dolby UltraMegaOloSmellTheMovie or whatever other standards and format will be released.
|
|
|
Post by tutetibiimperes on Jan 13, 2018 11:08:24 GMT -5
Emersa is a line conjured up to appease the feminists, a la Bose, rather than practical design. It was conceived for looks. It dilutes the Emotiva product offering, doesn't really fit in, and violates the core principle of offering value and performance with technological step ups between lines, all with minimal expense packaging. The MC-700 is fine in the Bass-X line up (it doesn't have balanced outputs and it doesn't have Dirac). If Emotiva tries to be all things to all people, it will fail. Adopting Class D turns you into a electronic repackager instead of a electronics designer much like store brands in the supermarkets. I’d consider the EMP-1 with 5.1.2 ATMOS and Dirac to be a better value than the XMC-1 or RMC-1, at least for my use case if it lands in the $1,000-$1,500 range as predicted. I don’t care about the small form factor, and would be just as interested if it came in a 4U chassis for some reason, but I imagine making it smaller and lighter saves Emotiva some money in warehousing and shipping costs. If the MC-700 has Dirac I might have jumped on that already, I could probably live without ATMOS, but I would like to give it a try. I could buy an outboard Dirac processor to run the MC-700 through, but at that point you’re right back to the upper price range of where the EMP-1 is supposed to be. I could see the differentiation in the lines like this: MC-700 - High quality for basic 5.1/7.1 systems with no advanced room correction or immersive audio. EMP-1 - Adds immersive audio and advanced room correction to the MC-700 template, nice advanced processor for smaller systems and smaller rooms. XMC-1 G3 - Adds a lot of legacy inputs/outputs, supports 13 channels, adds balanced analog ins for some channels and balanced audio out for all channels. RMC-1 - Adds 16 channel support. I suppose there could be some other differences, like 192khz sampling supported on the XMC and RMC, with 96khz on the MC-700 and EMP-1, and the RMC-1 could get a Dirac Unison upgrade when that comes out (since it would be useful with all of those extra speaker outputs since most users aren’t going to probably be running that many channels), etc. The real differences would just be legacy I/O and number of channels supported. People with big rooms or who will be installing in-ceiling ATMOS speakers could opt for the XMC or RMC, those of us who have smaller spaces and aren’t willing to cut holes in the ceiling could go for the MC-700 or EMP-1 depending on how important Dirac and adding some reflecting speakers are to the owner.
|
|
|
Post by mraub1 on Jan 13, 2018 14:57:09 GMT -5
As I understand it, Emotiva had pretty much completed development on the 7.1 EMP-1, but pulled it to add Atmos and since then seems to have lost interest in it. For my use, the 7.1 Dirac equipped EMP-1 would have been perfect. Though Atmos might add a lot to a large commercial movie theater, I haven't been very impressed with it in the small home theater setting. It seems very far up the diminishing returns curve. The profit margin on a $5K flagship processor is no doubt greater than a $1.2K EMP-1, but not all that many people are willing to fork out $5K for a processor, no matter how good it is. I'm guessing Emotiva would have sold loads of a EMP-1 with Dirac, even if it lacked Atmos.. I ended up with a MC-700 and a miniDSP Dirac box. It works fine and Dirac is as good as promised, but the setup is a bit of a kludge and sometimes I battle HDMI handshake issues with the miniDSP.
|
|
|
Post by overtheair on Jan 13, 2018 21:57:34 GMT -5
I don't see anything Bose-y about the proposed Emersa line. If it supports all of the standards and ends up being able to decode Atmos in 7 channels (which it should, as from what I understand that was the reason for the delay) and can be upgraded to the full version of Dirac, it'll perform just as well as the XMC-1 G3 or RMC-1 for anyone who doesn't need/want more than 5.1.2. Balanced outputs don't matter much if you don't have extremely long cable runs (and the back end that was shown at CES last year showed an XLR sub lead, which is typically the longest cable run in a system), tons of inputs are great if you need/use them, but if you just have a few devices and they're all HDMI, it's a waste. The big 'must haves' for me are HDMI 2.0a/HDCP 2.2 on all HDMI inputs and on both HDMI outputs, upgradeability to the full version of Dirac, and support for at least 2 height channels so I can stick some ceiling reflecting speakers on top of my towers. If it does all of that, I'll be a happy camper. There's nothing else on the market that does that right now. Well said ; It was mentioned by Lonnie that the EMP1 was a XMC1 equivalent ;but some don't need a balanced 2ch input . The NAD has compromises starting with it being a receiver rather than a pre pro . the EMP1 also has the option of a single power amp that is 125w class d rather than relying on the NAD's 60w internals . Will the NAD be getting anymore upgrade cards after the v3 it has now ? the EMP1 is also modular.. and it has those 2 hdmi outs and probably hdmi2.0b rather than .a if it takes longer. If the RMC1 wasn't imminent the EMP1 would certainly suffice On the question of what board is going in the xmc1 gen 2 overtheair ; its worth digging up the relevant podcast as it was mentioned which board well before the new xmc1 gen3 surfaced .. Ime too lazy The NAD product wasn't introduced for direct comparison purposes, only as an example of what is achievable at a price point, i.e. a receiver with Dirac and Atmos 7.1.4 at ~$1,300, however cludgey and limited it might be as a V3 version of the platform. Remove the amplification suggests a ~$1,000 pre-pro with otherwise similar specs. It was meant as a sanity check on whether a pre-pro from Emotiva with similar specs is realistically achievable at the price points I've outlined. I think it is. I took your advice and went back and re-listened to multiple podcasts again, now sensitized to XMC-1 upgrade comments and it helped refine the options as follows - thanks. - May 2016 was first reference to replacing XMC-1 Gen 2 processing with something that has "more DSP horsepower" So only my options 3 through 5 in the original post meet this.
- June 2017 stated RMC-1 and XMC-1 would "share decoder boards" So only ADI chips used not TI. So only my options 4 and 5 in the original post meet this. I am assuming this reference was to what everyone understood XMC-1 to be at that time which was Gen 2.
- August 2017 stated XMC-1 would have the "same basic board set" with "essentially the same" decoder as RMC-1. It most likely means an identical board is used in XMC-1 Gen 2 and XMC-1 Gen 3 as well as RMC-1; it doesn't mean all features/capabilities would necessarily be offered at the lower price point RMC-1's though for product differentiation reasons, even if the hardware is capable. It is possible that with potentially lighter processing loads for XMC-1 solutions (fewer channels, lower sample rate Dirac) that the board might only be populated with one DSP chip, or with lower performing-lower price parts from same ADI chip family. The potential savings would have to make sense though versus just having one sku of the board.
|
|
|
Post by overtheair on Jan 13, 2018 22:03:53 GMT -5
As for the amp, I'd rather spend $1,000-$1,200 on a good mid-tier prepro and splurge a on amplification, i.e.: one of the Emotiva in-house designed X-series. Prepros come and go, good amps stay. As much as I would like it, I do not see myself spending $2,500 to $5,000 every other year or so on a pre pro to keep up with HDMI 5.0 or HDCP 4.2 or Dolby UltraMegaOloSmellTheMovie or whatever other standards and format will be released. So much agree with this. I have a circa 2009 XPA-5 I use daily and could either use some spare amps I have or buy one of the BASX amps for overhead duties.
|
|
|
Post by overtheair on Jan 13, 2018 22:38:28 GMT -5
I’d consider the EMP-1 with 5.1.2 ATMOS and Dirac to be a better value than the XMC-1 or RMC-1, at least for my use case if it lands in the $1,000-$1,500 range as predicted. I don’t care about the small form factor, and would be just as interested if it came in a 4U chassis for some reason, but I imagine making it smaller and lighter saves Emotiva some money in warehousing and shipping costs. If the MC-700 has Dirac I might have jumped on that already, I could probably live without ATMOS, but I would like to give it a try. I could buy an outboard Dirac processor to run the MC-700 through, but at that point you’re right back to the upper price range of where the EMP-1 is supposed to be. I could see the differentiation in the lines like this: MC-700 - High quality for basic 5.1/7.1 systems with no advanced room correction or immersive audio. EMP-1 - Adds immersive audio and advanced room correction to the MC-700 template, nice advanced processor for smaller systems and smaller rooms. XMC-1 G3 - Adds a lot of legacy inputs/outputs, supports 13 channels, adds balanced analog ins for some channels and balanced audio out for all channels. RMC-1 - Adds 16 channel support. I suppose there could be some other differences, like 192khz sampling supported on the XMC and RMC, with 96khz on the MC-700 and EMP-1, and the RMC-1 could get a Dirac Unison upgrade when that comes out (since it would be useful with all of those extra speaker outputs since most users aren’t going to probably be running that many channels), etc. The real differences would just be legacy I/O and number of channels supported. People with big rooms or who will be installing in-ceiling ATMOS speakers could opt for the XMC or RMC, those of us who have smaller spaces and aren’t willing to cut holes in the ceiling could go for the MC-700 or EMP-1 depending on how important Dirac and adding some reflecting speakers are to the owner. Good post. I think there might be additional options that Emotiva could exploit. I am basing this on them now having one ADI based decoding platform that could be used across many products, starting at entry level Atmos with escalating capabilities and features increasingly enabled up the product hierarchy. BASX branding (all single ended unbalanced except possibly for sub)- MC-700 - High quality for basic 5.1/7.1 systems with no advanced room correction or immersive audio.
- EMP-1A - Low end immersive audio 5.1.2 and Dirac, nice advanced processor for smaller systems and smaller rooms. ~$1k price point
- EMP-1B - Mid range immersive 7.1.2/5.1.4 and Dirac slightly upmarket solution. ~$1.5k price point
EMP-1 refers to old specs of Emersa plus Dirac, not lifestyle chassis design X Series branding (balanced outputs option)- XMC-1 G3 - Uses new XMC-1 Gen 3 chassis but as dedicated 7.1 high end solution for those with no interest in Atmos. $2.5k price point (same as currently on Emotiva website)
- XMC-1 G3 - Adds a lot of legacy inputs/outputs, supports 13 channels, adds balanced analog ins for some channels and balanced audio out for all channels. $3.5k price point (same as has been previously speculated for old XMC-2 concept)
- RMC-1 - Adds 16 channel support and maybe additional capabilities like Auro. $5k price point
Current XMC-1 Gen 2 users still get the upgraded decoding board option but I've eliminated the $3k XMC-1 Gen 2 with Atmos, because I think it makes the product range too crowded to market to new Emotiva customers. I do wonder if the $2.5k and $3.5k price points will hold or if they are maybe $500 high versus other receiver-as-pre-pro and dedicated pre-pro offerings.
|
|
|
Post by overtheair on Jan 13, 2018 22:54:22 GMT -5
As I understand it, Emotiva had pretty much completed development on the 7.1 EMP-1, but pulled it to add Atmos and since then seems to have lost interest in it. For my use, the 7.1 Dirac equipped EMP-1 would have been perfect. Though Atmos might add a lot to a large commercial movie theater, I haven't been very impressed with it in the small home theater setting. It seems very far up the diminishing returns curve. The profit margin on a $5K flagship processor is no doubt greater than a $1.2K EMP-1, but not all that many people are willing to fork out $5K for a processor, no matter how good it is. I'm guessing Emotiva would have sold loads of a EMP-1 with Dirac, even if it lacked Atmos.. I ended up with a MC-700 and a miniDSP Dirac box. It works fine and Dirac is as good as promised, but the setup is a bit of a kludge and sometimes I battle HDMI handshake issues with the miniDSP. I don't think they lost interest in an EMP-1 or similar with Atmos in this price range, they just needed to focus on getting their Atmos platform developed and that had to focus on the high end first because then the solution can be scaled down to lower price points quickly, efficiently and as a proven design. It wouldn't surprise me if at some point in the future Emotiva used the Analog Devices platform from the RMC-1 for an MC-700 replacement with essentially similar specs as today but perhaps also including Dirac. It might not be the same board used all the way up to the RMC-1 but it could be a de-populated board and/or using lower spec ADI parts from the same family. The advantage for Emotiva would be one software code base across their entire product line, making support and manufacturing much more straightforward and efficient. It would probably also drive much higher total spend with ADI helping to reduce costs and/or increase Emotiva margins across the entire product range. Until this happens my $1k Dirac/Atmos entry point product maybe your best hope ... if Emotiva do it
|
|
|
Post by cwt on Jan 13, 2018 23:39:23 GMT -5
I took your advice and went back and re-listened to multiple podcasts again, now sensitized to XMC-1 upgrade comments and it helped refine the options as follows - thanks. - May 2016 was first reference to replacing XMC-1 Gen 2 processing with something that has "more DSP horsepower" So only my options 3 through 5 in the original post meet this.
- June 2017 stated RMC-1 and XMC-1 would "share decoder boards" So only ADI chips used not TI. So only my options 4 and 5 in the original post meet this. I am assuming this reference was to what everyone understood XMC-1 to be at that time which was Gen 2.
- August 2017 stated XMC-1 would have the "same basic board set" with "essentially the same" decoder as RMC-1. It most likely means an identical board is used in XMC-1 Gen 2 and XMC-1 Gen 3 as well as RMC-1; it doesn't mean all features/capabilities would necessarily be offered at the lower price point RMC-1's though for product differentiation reasons, even if the hardware is capable. It is possible that with potentially lighter processing loads for XMC-1 solutions (fewer channels, lower sample rate Dirac) that the board might only be populated with one DSP chip, or with lower performing-lower price parts from same ADI chip family. The potential savings would have to make sense though versus just having one sku of the board.
Understood ; was looking at the NAD T758 to tide me over but needed a 2nd hdmi out and now the RMC1 is close.. Good sleuthing on the decoder board ; one thing is for sure Emo have always had plenty of dsp horsepower for decoding ;bass management etc .Other avrs may cheap out with 1 soc chipset but emo would have 2.The new analog devices sharc chips are dual core so one will still be good especially if 2 can manage 9.1.6 which is more than the denon avc8500h can do iirc
|
|
|
Post by mraub1 on Jan 15, 2018 14:48:16 GMT -5
A $1,000 MC-700 with Dirac would get my money very quickly. It seems like Atmos has caused a lot of developmental headaches for Emotiva and a lot of other HT gear manufacturers as well. Atmos may end up being to audio what 3D was to video--a clever idea which most consumers have little interest in. 4K video is much the same, with little programming available and most people sitting far enough away from their screens that the resolution improvement is imperceptible. HDR video does seem to offer some real improvements the ordinary consumer can appreciate and the large broadcasters see this as well and it seems like this will be largely implemented before other claimed improvements in either audio or video.
|
|
|
Post by Gary Cook on Jan 15, 2018 16:22:36 GMT -5
A $1,000 MC-700 with Dirac would get my money very quickly. It seems like Atmos has caused a lot of developmental headaches for Emotiva and a lot of other HT gear manufacturers as well. Atmos may end up being to audio what 3D was to video--a clever idea which most consumers have little interest in. 4K video is much the same, with little programming available and most people sitting far enough away from their screens that the resolution improvement is imperceptible. HDR video does seem to offer some real improvements the ordinary consumer can appreciate and the large broadcasters see this as well and it seems like this will be largely implemented before other claimed improvements in either audio or video. I don't see any valid comparison between 3D and Atmos/DTSX. For a start we don't have to wear those silly uncomfortable glasses over the top of our normal glasses to benefit from Atmos/DTSX. Secondly, and arguably more importantly, 3D was very expensive for the movie studios to film and then even more expensive to edit. Whereas Atmos/DTSX actually costs them less due to the faster mixing time with object oriented audio. Yes, I know about ceiling speakers, but we don't need them to hear the benefit. It's much the same reason as why 4K will succeed where 3D didn't, we can see the benefit in 4K and HDR in every program we watch whereas 3D was always going to be limited to a small number of movies due to the production costs. An MC-700 at $600 plus $400 of professional REW would be much the same as a $1000 MC-700 with DIRAC. Cheers Gary
|
|
|
Post by overtheair on Jan 16, 2018 19:39:07 GMT -5
A $1,000 MC-700 with Dirac would get my money very quickly. It seems like Atmos has caused a lot of developmental headaches for Emotiva and a lot of other HT gear manufacturers as well. Atmos may end up being to audio what 3D was to video--a clever idea which most consumers have little interest in. 4K video is much the same, with little programming available and most people sitting far enough away from their screens that the resolution improvement is imperceptible. HDR video does seem to offer some real improvements the ordinary consumer can appreciate and the large broadcasters see this as well and it seems like this will be largely implemented before other claimed improvements in either audio or video. I don't see any valid comparison between 3D and Atmos/DTSX. For a start we don't have to wear those silly uncomfortable glasses over the top of our normal glasses to benefit from Atmos/DTSX. Secondly, and arguably more importantly, 3D was very expensive for the movie studios to film and then even more expensive to edit. Whereas Atmos/DTSX actually costs them less due to the faster mixing time with object oriented audio. Yes, I know about ceiling speakers, but we don't need them to hear the benefit. It's much the same reason as why 4K will succeed where 3D didn't, we can see the benefit in 4K and HDR in every program we watch whereas 3D was always going to be limited to a small number of movies due to the production costs. An MC-700 at $600 plus $400 of professional REW would be much the same as a $1000 MC-700 with DIRAC. Cheers Gary There have been Atmos receivers and processors out for a long time now so it doesn't seem accurate to characterize as "Atmos has caused a lot of developmental headaches." So why a development headache for Emotiva? Well Emotiva started down the Atmos/DTS:X path later than many in the AV industry but probably could have had a product out much sooner if they hadn't also aimed for a much more capable flagship product in the RMC-1, namely 9.1.6 discrete channels. I understand that Trinnov is the only company that can do 9.1.6 discrete currently because they use their custom s/w on an Intel PC based platform; everyone else is using DSP chips for decoding and can only achieve 9.1.6 by matrixing. Good feedback from Cedia on this issue in an AVS post here. So the upshot is that Emotiva closes the gap and maybe even takes a leadership position in the high end but this came at the cost of having less capable Atmos out earlier. Painful as it has been I suspect this development path is much more beneficial to Emotiva in the long run and perhaps also to customers based on what Emotiva could do with their road map as I have outlined earlier in the thread. To add to Gary's comment, wrt "4K" there are three main attributes that fall under that moniker, the obvious resolution advertised in the name, the wide color gamut (WCG) and the high dynamic range (HDR). As a projector user I may well benefit from resolution, others may not depending on screen size and distance from screen. However, WCG and HDR will benefit any viewer at any distance on any screen size. ATSC 3.0, the new digital TV standard, will be capable of supporting all three but the greater benefit of WCG and HDR is such that we may see standard 1080 HD broadcasts with WCG and HDR because the benefits are clearly perceivable to all. So while resolution may not benefit all, what comes with the 4K standard will, which is why I believe it will be a success. In addition to UHD discs most if not all major streaming sources seem to be pursuing this with content so its not the same as 3D. I can't speak to the benefits of Atmos/DTSX in 5.1 or 7.1 only as Gary does, but I repeatedly see strong comments in favor of Atmos enabled sound solutions ranging from soundbars and up. While full in-ceiling speaker implementations, particularly x.x.4 and x.x.6, may be relatively rare in the overall consumer world it seems Atmos can clearly demonstrate benefits on very much lower spec systems based on many subjective comments.
|
|
|
Post by cwt on Jan 18, 2018 7:07:26 GMT -5
There have been Atmos receivers and processors out for a long time now so it doesn't seem accurate to characterize as "Atmos has caused a lot of developmental headaches." So why a development headache for Emotiva? Well Emotiva started down the Atmos/DTS:X path later than many in the AV industry but probably could have had a product out much sooner if they hadn't also aimed for a much more capable flagship product in the RMC-1, namely 9.1.6 discrete channels. I understand that Trinnov is the only company that can do 9.1.6 discrete currently because they use their custom s/w on an Intel PC based platform; everyone else is using DSP chips for decoding and can only achieve 9.1.6 by matrixing. Good feedback from Cedia on this issue in an AVS post here. So the upshot is that Emotiva closes the gap and maybe even takes a leadership position in the high end but this came at the cost of having less capable Atmos out earlier. Painful as it has been I suspect this development path is much more beneficial to Emotiva in the long run and perhaps also to customers based on what Emotiva could do with their road map as I have outlined earlier in the thread.T Not to take anything away from the cost and lack of object decoding for so long ; its fair to consider that Emo for a long time thought atmos etc may not have longevity . Combined with the XMC1 release timing just before the big dolby announcement [and it being a 7.1 design] to put a lot of R&D into conversion for what may turn into another 3d scenario may have been seen as risky . Thankfully the writing is now on the wall and options are coming Yes have been reading the very entertaining avs "speculation" thread and unlike the denon/Marantz hdmi 2.1 pre pros the RMC1 does not have to fudge it with matrix surrounds like other dsp units This flyer stating discrete 9.1.6 was handed at CES vv. Was indeed wise to base an entire line on a basic platform and make it upgradeable www.avsforum.com/forum/90-receivers-amps-processors/2581073-emotiva-rmc-1-speculation-thread-13.html#post55487088
|
|
klinemj
Emo VIPs
Honorary Emofest Scribe
Posts: 14,762
|
Post by klinemj on Jan 18, 2018 8:28:25 GMT -5
As I understand it, Emotiva had pretty much completed development on the 7.1 EMP-1, but pulled it to add Atmos and since then seems to have lost interest in it. For my use, the 7.1 Dirac equipped EMP-1 would have been perfect. Though Atmos might add a lot to a large commercial movie theater, I haven't been very impressed with it in the small home theater setting. It seems very far up the diminishing returns curve. The profit margin on a $5K flagship processor is no doubt greater than a $1.2K EMP-1, but not all that many people are willing to fork out $5K for a processor, no matter how good it is. I'm guessing Emotiva would have sold loads of a EMP-1 with Dirac, even if it lacked Atmos.. I ended up with a MC-700 and a miniDSP Dirac box. It works fine and Dirac is as good as promised, but the setup is a bit of a kludge and sometimes I battle HDMI handshake issues with the miniDSP. The official party line, as of Emofest, is that they still plan on it but after they wrap up some other higher priority things. In addition to adding Atmos, my guess is there will be other changes in the lineup vs. the original plan. For example, IIRC the amp portion included Class D ICE modules - but now with the XMR-1 they are saying Pascal amps. That may also apply to the Emersa amp lineup at this point...personally, I would not see them doing their own amp designs and traditional Class A/B for some products, Pascal for others, and ICE modules for others. I might be wrong. And, they are now talking of an inexpensive thin client streamer as a plug in for the RMC-1 and other products. Given the target market for Emersa - I'd bet my bottom dollar that it will have that capability. Net, if they do indeed still have interest (and I could see a good market for it) - my bet is a lot of changes vs. what was first shown. Mark
|
|