Official RMC-1 OWNERS Thread

[deewan]

May 29, 2019 1:34:16 GMT -5 goozoo said:

Darren, is this from disc or streamed?  Are you getting this on ALL discs with ATMOS content or on some?  Finally, keep in mind that DTS:X is limited to 7.1.4. Any other configuration can lead to unpredictable behavior.

The recent DTS:X and this Dolby example are both from UHD discs and being played through my Oppo 203. I also reported a similar crackle with the Mad Max Fury Road Atmos disc several months ago. I'd have to search for the post since I'm not sure if I made it here or on another thread/forum. With the Mad Max Fury road example I didn't unhook all other channels, but I do recall hearing the majority of the crackle out of the middle overhead since those are most near my MLP.

Good point on the DTS:X being limited to 7.1.4, however I have experimented with the DTS:X while turning off two pair of the overhead speakers and I had the same crackle in the front wide speakers. With my RMC configured to a 9.1.2 (with speakers connected to the front wide XLR output) I also experienced the crackle. For me and my equipment and the discs I'm using, it appears channels (front wides and middle overhead) that are upmixed experience a crackle.

[goozoo]

May 29, 2019 7:47:07 GMT -5 deewan said:

May 29, 2019 1:34:16 GMT -5 goozoo said:

Darren, is this from disc or streamed?  Are you getting this on ALL discs with ATMOS content or on some?  Finally, keep in mind that DTS:X is limited to 7.1.4. Any other configuration can lead to unpredictable behavior.

The recent DTS:X and this Dolby example are both from UHD discs and being played through my Oppo 203. I also reported a similar crackle with the Mad Max Fury Road Atmos disc several months ago. I'd have to search for the post since I'm not sure if I made it here or on another thread/forum. With the Mad Max Fury road example I didn't unhook all other channels, but I do recall hearing the majority of the crackle out of the middle overhead since those are most near my MLP.

Good point on the DTS:X being limited to 7.1.4, however I have experimented with the DTS:X while turning off two pair of the overhead speakers and I had the same crackle in the front wide speakers. With my RMC configured to a 9.1.2 (with speakers connected to the front wide XLR output) I also experienced the crackle. For me and my equipment and the discs I'm using, it appears channels (front wides and middle overhead) that are upmixed experience a crackle.

Are you running 9.1.2 or 9.1.6? I’m asking because I’m trying to determine if the extra height channels are being up mixed from the original score. Put another way, if the original track was mixed as 7.1.4 and you run 9.1.6 you may get some clipping in the extra channels as the sound pans. In your example, this also would then follow to whatever output/speaker you change the connection to. To be clear, this should not be happening and what you should hear is dead silence. That said, I would test out several other discs and see how repeatable the problem is. If present, then they need to provide you with yet another RMC1.

[deewan]

May 29, 2019 9:52:50 GMT -5 goozoo said:

Are you running 9.1.2 or 9.1.6? I’m asking because I’m trying to determine if the extra height channels are being up mixed from the original score. Put another way, if the original track was mixed as 7.1.4 and you run 9.1.6 you may get some clipping in the extra channels as the sound pans. In your example, this also would then follow to whatever output/speaker you change the connection to. To be clear, this should not be happening and what you should hear is dead silence. That said, I would test out several other discs and see how repeatable the problem is. If present, then they need to provide you with yet another RMC1.

I am currently running a RMC 7.1.6 output configuration into a 9.1.6 speaker layout with dual side surrounds since tests proved the front wide couldn't be used with much luck. With the speaker layout below I have experienced the crackle in the middle overhead speakers using two Dolby Atmos soundtracks.

• Front Left
• Front Center
• Front Right
• Front row side surround left/right
• Second row side surround left/right (duplicate signal from front side surround)
• Rear left/right surround
• Front overhead left/right
• Middle overhead left/right
• Rear overhead left/right
• Subwoofer

My recent DTS:X example with strange behavior from the front wide channels was a 9.1.6 and 9.1.2 configuration from the RMC:
9.1.6 Speakers

• Front Left
• Front Center
• Front Right
• Front wide left/right
• Second row side surround left/right
• Rear left/right surround
• Front overhead left/right
• Middle overhead left/right
• Rear overhead left/right
• Subwoofer

9.1.2 Speakers

• Front Left
• Front Center
• Front Right
• Front wide left/right
• Second row side surround left/right
• Rear left/right surround
• Front overhead left/right
• Subwoofer

I agree that it appears the upmixed channels seem to be the trouble makers. I haven't noticed any crackle sound when the RMC is setup for a certain layout and isn't forced to upmix into extra channels.

[hsamwel]

This thread and it’s content makes me certain I will not upgrade my Pioneer SC-LX801 to Emotiva anytime soon.
I was very interested in RMC-1. But all these troubles with HDMI makes RMC-1 a nobuy.

I have a Sony KD-65ZD9, AppleTV 4K, Pioneer UDP-LX800 and a TV box (no name) which all coexists fine
most of the time. I can sometimes get no sound if some units are started in the wrong order.
I have had PS4, PS3, another TV box, and Oppo UDP-203 in my system which all made no difference to the connection stability.

Mostly the sound issues for me has been HDCP 2.2 connection issues with older HDCP devices. Both the old and the newer
TV boxes can connect without sound sometimes. The difference being the newer telling me there’s a problem with HDCP.
When I had my older Panasonic 1080P plasma there were almost never any problems at all.

Maybe an upgrade to a 4K TV box (dish receiver) will help me..

Hopefully Emotiva can stabelize the software by the end of the year. I will have another look at upgrading then.
The new XMC-2 and RMC-2L both look interesting also.

[Deleted]

Maybe we should we start a new thread for people to make their "I'm not gonna buy an RMC-1..." statements to help keep this thread focused on being helpful??? .

[tom9933]

May 30, 2019 12:29:30 GMT -5 hsamwel said:

This thread and it’s content makes me certain I will not upgrade my Pioneer SC-LX801 to Emotiva anytime soon.
I was very interested in RMC-1. But all these troubles with HDMI makes RMC-1 a nobuy.

I have a Sony KD-65ZD9, AppleTV 4K, Pioneer UDP-LX800 and a TV box (no name) which all coexists fine
most of the time. I can sometimes get no sound if some units are started in the wrong order.
I have had PS4, PS3, another TV box, and Oppo UDP-203 in my system which all made no difference to the connection stability.

Mostly the sound issues for me has been HDCP 2.2 connection issues with older HDCP devices. Both the old and the newer
TV boxes can connect without sound sometimes. The difference being the newer telling me there’s a problem with HDCP.
When I had my older Panasonic 1080P plasma there were almost never any problems at all.

Maybe an upgrade to a 4K TV box (dish receiver) will help me..

Hopefully Emotiva can stabelize the software by the end of the year. I will have another look at upgrading then.
The new XMC-2 and RMC-2L both look interesting also.

So prior to the RMC I had a Denon 8500 (soon to be sold) and prior to that I had many Pioneer Elite units (SC-07 was the last).  From a sound quality perspective the Denon was a step up from the Pioneers and the RMC is another step up from the Denon even without calibration.  With 1.3 I do have the occasional drop out with the Shield and an occasion issue when FFW or RWD with the DTV DVR, I am hopeful that 1.4 will be released shortly and improve that situation further.  I am still happy with the purchase although it is not as simple and painless as the Dennon.  Had I started earlier I might have a different opinion...  My purchase was significant as it not only included the RMC but also included two additional XP-4 units and the rack setup.

[richb]

Will Emotiva once again be providing product measurements for the RMC-1(L) and XMC-2?

There were very good measurements provided for the XMC-1 that included XLR-IN Reference Stereo and digital processing S/N and THD + N.

It is becoming a concern because processors like the Marantz 8805, while advertising their performance, are somewhat lackluster in reality:

www.audiosciencereview.com/forum/index.php?threads/review-and-measurements-of-marantz-av8805-av-processor.6926/

If Emotiva has something to crow about in the new processor line, it is time to crank up the bird.

- Rich

[mgbpuff]

Jun 1, 2019 9:30:39 GMT -5 richb said:

Will Emotiva once again be providing product measurements for the RMC-1(L) and XMC-2?

There were very good measurements provided for the XMC-1 that included XLR-IN Reference Stereo and digital processing S/N and THD + N.

It is becoming a concern because processors like the Marantz 8805, while advertising their performance, are somewhat lackluster in reality:

www.audiosciencereview.com/forum/index.php?threads/review-and-measurements-of-marantz-av8805-av-processor.6926/

If Emotiva has something to crow about in the new processor line, it is time to crank up the bird.

- Rich

That was a poor review for a complex device - only 2 channel? Give me a break!

[goozoo]

I suspect that many of the mainstream processors likely will show the same results as in the review. What that means in real world listening is purely subjective. I think Emotiva has a lot on their plate trying to get the RMC1 to a stable point where people will stop calling it a beta before even thinking about the next two processors. That said given its’ design, you should probably expect a marked improvement if ever tested with the same parameters.

[Geronimo]

Anyone try importing filters with REW, or have done so with the XMC-1?

I plan on doing at least my front L C R tonight, but what frequency ranges/settings do you guys suggest?

They are KEF LS50. They will be set to small, at 80Hz.

[richb]

Jun 1, 2019 9:43:49 GMT -5 mgbpuff said:

Jun 1, 2019 9:30:39 GMT -5 richb said:

Will Emotiva once again be providing product measurements for the RMC-1(L) and XMC-2?

There were very good measurements provided for the XMC-1 that included XLR-IN Reference Stereo and digital processing S/N and THD + N.

It is becoming a concern because processors like the Marantz 8805, while advertising their performance, are somewhat lackluster in reality:

www.audiosciencereview.com/forum/index.php?threads/review-and-measurements-of-marantz-av8805-av-processor.6926/

If Emotiva has something to crow about in the new processor line, it is time to crank up the bird.

- Rich

That was a poor review for a complex device - only 2 channel? Give me a break!

I think it is fair to analyze the backend of a process for its base/maximum performance.
Especially, one that costs $4500 (list) and boasts about its HDAM modules:

High-Grade Audio Components

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

The AV8805 features the latest Marantz proprietary HDAM (Hyper Dynamic Amplifier Module) components, which consist of matched-precision discrete selected circuit elements on a compact sub-board along with ultra-wide-band response (100 kHz, -3 dB) for an open soundstage with refined detail reproduction.

Here are Marantz AV8805 THD/SN specs:

Analog Input sen­si­tiv­ity:

Un­bal­anced RCA input : 200 mV
Bal­anced XLR input : 400 mV

Fre­quency re­sponse:

10 Hz – 100 kHz — +1, –3 dB (Di­rect mode)

S/N:
105 dB (IHF–A weighted, Di­rect mode)

Dis­tor­tion:
0.005 % (20 Hz – 20 kHz) (Di­rect mode)

Rated out­put:

Un­bal­anced RCA pre-out­put: 1.2 V
Bal­anced XLR pre-out­put: 2.4 V

Marantz appears to be playing games here. Unbalanced should be rated at 2V and balanced 4V.

Oppo specs are at 2V/4V:

Audio Characteristics**
(Stereo Audio Output) Frequency Response: 20Hz – 160kHz (-3dB ˜ +0.05dB)
Signal-to-Noise Ratio: > 120dBr
THD+N: < 0.00018%
Output Level: (RCA) 2.1±0.2Vrms. (XLR) 4.2±0.4Vrms
Dynamic Range: > 120dB
Crosstalk: > 118dB

Analogue Audio Characteristics**
(Multi-channel Audio Output) Frequency Response: 20Hz – 160kHz (-3dB ˜ +0.05dB)
Signal-to-Noise Ratio: > 120dBr
THD+N: < 0.00031%
Output Level: 2.1±0.2Vrms
Dynamic Range: > 120dB
Crosstalk: > 118dB

The XMC-1 Specifications are quite detailed for analog:

Balanced Input to Balanced Output (Reference Stereo Mode):
◦THD: <0.0005% @ 1 kHz.
◦THD: < 0.002% (20 Hz to 20 kHz).
◦ IMD: < 0.004% @ 1 kHz.
◦S/N ratio: > 123 dB (A weighted).
◦Frequency Response: 5 Hz to 80 kHz (+0 / -0.1 dB).
◦Crosstalk: <100 dB.

Unbalanced Input to Unbalanced Output (Reference Stereo Mode):
◦THD: <0.0007% @ 1 kHz.
◦THD: < 0.003% (20 Hz to 20 kHz).
◦IMD: < 0.005% @­ 1 kHz.
◦S/N ratio: > 114 dB (A weighted).
◦Frequency Response: 5 Hz to 80 kHz (+0 / -0.1 dB).
◦Crosstalk: <100 dB.

IMO, High-end products should include measurements in their specs and the backend should be capable of performance similar to a low-priced stand-along DAC.
The 8805 does not have a USB-DAC input, but the XMC's and RMC's do.


- Rich

[richb]

Jun 1, 2019 13:37:10 GMT -5 Geronimo said:

Anyone try importing filters with REW, or have done so with the XMC-1?

I plan on doing at least my front L C R tonight, but what frequency ranges/settings do you guys suggest?

They are KEF LS50. They will be set to small, at 80Hz.

I did it once when I wrote the review but can't remember much about it other than it worked
It took me about 1/2 hour just using REW, a UMIK-1 mic, and the XMC menus to set a few PEQ filters working the Q's and levels.

- Rich

[Bonzo]

Jun 1, 2019 9:30:39 GMT -5 richb said:

Will Emotiva once again be providing product measurements for the RMC-1(L) and XMC-2?

There were very good measurements provided for the XMC-1 that included XLR-IN Reference Stereo and digital processing S/N and THD + N.

It is becoming a concern because processors like the Marantz 8805, while advertising their performance, are somewhat lackluster in reality:

www.audiosciencereview.com/forum/index.php?threads/review-and-measurements-of-marantz-av8805-av-processor.6926/

If Emotiva has something to crow about in the new processor line, it is time to crank up the bird.

- Rich

I have no clue what all the test data means in reality, but I did notice one thing on one of the reports. They ragged on the 8805 saying it was in the third tier of some measurement for DACs. Okay. Yet they have the Oppo 205 as the very best, and I'm sorry, but I've read nothing but horribly crappy reviews of that unit by true audiophiles. Yet they have the Schiit Yggy in the 4th tier, worse than the 8805, and I've read lots of completely off the charts fantastic reviews for that unit. In other words, tests can lie when it comes to sound.

I can say for a fact in my room, my system, and my ears, my Denon definitely beats my Oppo 105 for SQ. I'll bet the Oppo tests better. And a side note, my Denon is built better.

It seems like almost every company likes to enhance their tests one way or another. The key word here being enhance, which can mean many things.

With Emotiva, their amp watt ratings never seem to lie. But, with other measurements and components, they seem to use or not use measurements when its convenient. When a measurement rocks, they tout it. When it doesn't, they keep silent. When a 3rd party test says it rocks, they shout it from the roof tops. When it doesn't, they make excuses.

[richb]

Jun 2, 2019 18:59:25 GMT -5 Bonzo said:

Jun 1, 2019 9:30:39 GMT -5 richb said:

Will Emotiva once again be providing product measurements for the RMC-1(L) and XMC-2?

There were very good measurements provided for the XMC-1 that included XLR-IN Reference Stereo and digital processing S/N and THD + N.

It is becoming a concern because processors like the Marantz 8805, while advertising their performance, are somewhat lackluster in reality:

www.audiosciencereview.com/forum/index.php?threads/review-and-measurements-of-marantz-av8805-av-processor.6926/

If Emotiva has something to crow about in the new processor line, it is time to crank up the bird.

- Rich

I have no clue what all the test data means in reality, but I did notice one thing on one of the reports. They ragged on the 8805 saying it was in the third tier of some measurement for DACs. Okay. Yet they have the Oppo 205 as the very best, and I'm sorry, but I've read nothing but horribly crappy reviews of that unit by true audiophiles. Yet they have the Schiit Yggy in the 4th tier, worse than the 8805, and I've read lots of completely off the charts fantastic reviews for that unit. In other words, tests can lie when it comes to sound.

I can say for a fact in my room, my system, and my ears, my Denon definitely beats my Oppo 105 for SQ. I'll bet the Oppo tests better. And a side note, my Denon is built better.

It seems like almost every company likes to enhance their tests one way or another. The key word here being enhance, which can mean many things.

With Emotiva, their amp watt ratings never seem to lie. But, with other measurements and components, they seem to use or not use measurements when its convenient. When a measurement rocks, they tout it. When it doesn't, they keep silent. When a 3rd party test says it rocks, they shout it from the roof tops. When it doesn't, they make excuses.

I am not sure what the take away is from this other than you like your gear, you don't trust measurements (OK), and sometime Emotiva accentuates the positives and not the negative of their products. How is this different from other companies?

I am in favor of well engineered products that publish measurements in their specifications.
The issues exposed by the 8805 measurements are two fold, one they are not measuring using standard voltages, and two, the noise produced, while beyond human hearing, is indicative of a poor implementation. Perhaps, this is a price of including all those "features".

- Rich

[SOWK]

Emotiva I have some questions:

Any update one Dirac Live 2.0?

Future Support for Imax Enhanced?

Future Support for DTS X Pro?

[goozoo]

Jun 3, 2019 12:49:52 GMT -5 SOWK said:

Emotiva I have some questions:

Any update one Dirac Live 2.0?

Future Support for Imax Enhanced?

Future Support for DTS X Pro?

  I can't speak for Emotiva, but it would seem from previous posts that they view IMAX enhanced as a video only upgrade (which it is not) and hence may or may not incorporate it at a later date. As for DTS:x Pro, the RMC1 can do it as it requires 16 channels of discrete audio, and am hoping that we will finally get a true immersive upmixer format for DTS:X beyond 7.1.4 hit the Emotiva brand. 

On another front, we are just doing a theater with the Lyngdorf MP50 processor ($10K) and we are experiencing video issues with their HDMI board.  It is worth noting (and remembering) what Emotiva has been/ will be able to accomplish with the RMC-1 on their $5K price point when compared to others costing 2-3x as much.  Once the processor is in a finished state (99% bug free), the potential to compete against the likes of Storm Audio/ Bryston is there with even greater expandability due to the modular architecture. 

[Bonzo]

Jun 2, 2019 23:13:47 GMT -5 richb said:

I am not sure what the take away is from this other than you like your gear,

I don't really think I said that. What I said is that my big OEM Denon player is built better and sounds better than the legendary Oppo 105. What I meant to imply was that I bet the Oppo does better in that one particular test.

you don't trust measurements (OK),

I think the word "trust" isn't quite right for me. See below.

and sometime Emotiva accentuates the positives and not the negative of their products. How is this different from other companies?

It's not, I'm just saying Emotiva isn't always different in this regard. Amps yes, but other stuff not as much. Many here would have us believing otherwise.

I do really like my speakers, but Def Tech is legendary for over emphasizing how low the bass response goes in their speakers and subs. Just like other companies, I'm not sure why they do this, because their speakers sound pretty awesome on their own if you ask me. My guess is it's them taking the gamble between audiophiles getting put off and regular folks loving the low numbers.

I am in favor of well engineered products that publish measurements in their specifications.

I think it's a great place to start, and I like seeing them, at least the ones I can understand. I do find it fishy when none are mentioned for sure, so I agree with you there. But I don't think they are everything either. In fact, unless you actually listen to the product, then the measurements don't mean a thing. As I pointed out, the Oppo 205 tested the best, and the Yggy tested near the bottom. But my money says when it comes to great sound, based on the sound of my 105 and what I've read what others have said about the 205 being worse, it's really the other way around. From that stand point, the 8805 could certainly sound better than the 205 that bested it in that particular test.

The issues exposed by the 8805 measurements are two fold, one they are not measuring using standard voltages, and two, the noise produced, while beyond human hearing, is indicative of a poor implementation.

I'd would say, just like Emotiva would say in a case where they were being called out, is that they might have made a conscious decision, since it's beyond human hearing, that it's not important to worry about or spend money on. Compromises sometimes have to be made.

Perhaps, this is a price of including all those "features".

Maybe. Definitely possible. That's why it's up to folks to pick their poison. Have 99% perfect sound, but live without features and live with glitches, or have 97% great sound and have all the cool features and be glitch free. Decisions decisions.

[richb]

Jun 3, 2019 16:09:27 GMT -5 Bonzo said:

Jun 2, 2019 23:13:47 GMT -5 richb said:

I am not sure what the take away is from this other than you like your gear,

I don't really think I said that. What I said is that my big OEM Denon player is built better and sounds better than the legendary Oppo 105. What I meant to imply was that I bet the Oppo does better in that one particular test.

you don't trust measurements (OK),

I think the word "trust" isn't quite right for me. See below.

I am in favor of well engineered products that publish measurements in their specifications.

I think it's a great place to start, and I like seeing them, at least the ones I can understand. I do find it fishy when none are mentioned for sure, so I agree with you there. But I don't think they are everything either. In fact, unless you actually listen to the product, then the measurements don't mean a thing. As I pointed out, the Oppo 205 tested the best, and the Yggy tested near the bottom. But my money says when it comes to great sound, based on the sound of my 105 and what I've read what others have said about the 205 being worse, it's really the other way around. From that stand point, the 8805 could certainly sound better than the 205 that bested it in that particular test.

Your in good company. Stereophile is full of products that get fantastic reviews that have terrible measurements.
That's fine, but I don't buy those products.

Jun 3, 2019 16:09:27 GMT -5 Bonzo said:

The issues exposed by the 8805 measurements are two fold, one they are not measuring using standard voltages, and two, the noise produced, while beyond human hearing, is indicative of a poor implementation.

I'd would say, just like Emotiva would say in a case where they were being called out, is that they might have made a conscious decision, since it's beyond human hearing, that it's not important to worry about or spend money on. Compromises sometimes have to be made.

Measurements are also required to properly gain match with amps.
In the specific 8805 case, it may not have clean output to 4 volts which is expected by most amplifiers to achieve full output.
Also, artifacts in high frequencies can cause some speakers to increase distortion in the audible range.
This is why good measurements matter and that really should not be argued away.

I expect "High End" products to have comparable performance.
Although, there are plenty of terribly measuring products that folks rave about.
It's price/performance. Expectations for sub-1K products are different that $5K products that punch up.

- Rich

[juanchibiris]

I want to ask, lately I don't see too many people complaining about problems with this processor, I remember someone saying that had problems with HTPC, what was exactly the problem and it's still happening?

I'm about to buy this unit and would like to know I just purchased the XPA-DR3 and some other amps to upgrade from receiver to this unit.

Thanks.

[htnut1975]

Does anyone know if the upcoming Dirac bass management module will require additional hardware from what is already in the RMC-1 (or XMC-2 or RMC-1L)? I ask because if there were an additional hardware requirement that only the RMC-1 could handle (via expansion ports), that would completely change my priorities.