novisnick
EmoPhile
CEO Secret Monoblock Society
Posts: 27,223
|
Post by novisnick on Jan 8, 2019 14:54:25 GMT -5
Hair Nick has announced that they will be showing off the XMC-2, what exactly do we know about this NEW unit?
|
|
|
Post by Casey Leedom on Jan 8, 2019 17:08:39 GMT -5
I think that the RMC-1, RMC-2 (better named RMC-1L), and XMC-2 will all have a common platform with many interchangeable sub-assemblies, and common parts (like SoCs, DACs, etc.). As far as I remember, the XMC-2 will have the front three channels as fully balanced and thus, probably using the AK4490EN DACs found in the RMC-1. I'm not sure what the story will be for the remaining channels. It will not have Expansion Bays.
Casey
|
|
|
Post by Bonzo on Jan 8, 2019 20:26:18 GMT -5
As we've talked about many times already Nick, it will be more and less than an XMC-1.
More: Newer processing Atmos and DTS-X capable, up to 7.2.4 L-C-R channels fully balanced (center added so only 1 more than before)
Less: No 7.1 analog input Less analog inputs No RCA amp outputs No analog record out Expected to sell for $3000.
Once Hair Nick provides a picture of the back this will be confirmed. I'm sure I'm missing things so will update this once I see the picture.
|
|
|
|
Post by Bonzo on Jan 10, 2019 13:10:43 GMT -5
Confirmed what I said above by the picture. More & less than an XMC-1.
|
|
|
Post by krobar on Jan 10, 2019 13:39:16 GMT -5
Confirmed what I said above by the picture. More & less than an XMC-1. I would call it a modern interpretation of the XMC-1. It has removed a lot of the legacy connections and added what the majority want in the modern market. Personally I will give it some time to see if the RMC-1 platform stabilises as I suspect this will use the same DSP board and core OS.
|
|
|
Post by Bonzo on Jan 10, 2019 13:58:24 GMT -5
Confirmed what I said above by the picture. More & less than an XMC-1. I would call it a modern interpretation of the XMC-1. It has removed a lot of the legacy connections and added what the majority want in the modern market. Personally I will give it some time to see if the RMC-1 platform stabilises as I suspect this will use the same DSP board and core OS. I don't consider 7.1 analog inputs legacy. The newest Panny Blu-ray players have the outputs. So do every Oppo, and many others. By not having them it's taking my options away. I'm just not sure why anyone would want their options taken away. I don't consider 1 set of analog outputs legacy. I consider it the industry trying to remove control from consumers (much like HDMI and trying to record video). Legacy is composite video, because the shear quality of the newer formats blows it away. Component should not be legacy, because it has the ability to provide nearly as good a picture as HDMI, but it's been banned so consumers can't have any control, hence, it's legacy.
|
|
|
Post by rbk123 on Jan 10, 2019 14:16:13 GMT -5
Confirmed what I said above by the picture. More & less than an XMC-1. It has removed a lot of the legacy connections and added what the majority want in the modern market. Now you went and did it.
|
|
|
Post by mountain on Jan 10, 2019 14:33:36 GMT -5
I would call it a modern interpretation of the XMC-1. It has removed a lot of the legacy connections and added what the majority want in the modern market. Personally I will give it some time to see if the RMC-1 platform stabilises as I suspect this will use the same DSP board and core OS. I don't consider 7.1 analog inputs legacy. The newest Panny Blu-ray players have the outputs. So do every Oppo, and many others. By not having them it's taking my options away. I'm just not sure why anyone would want their options taken away. I don't consider 1 set of analog outputs legacy. I consider it the industry trying to remove control from consumers (much like HDMI and trying to record video). Legacy is composite video, because the shear quality of the newer formats blows it away. Component should not be legacy, because it has the ability to provide nearly as good a picture as HDMI, but it's been banned so consumers can't have any control, hence, it's legacy. I like having 7.1 analog inputs. That is why, at the time of purchase, I chose the Emotiva umc-200 over the comparable outlaw model 975. Now, the 976 has 7.1 inputs and the umc-700 does not. Go figure.
|
|
|
Post by enricoclaudio on Jan 10, 2019 16:18:13 GMT -5
Also, like on the RMC-1, Dolby Prologic IIx (PLIIx) Music and Movie sound modes will be missed. I really like to listen to 2.0 music on my XMC-1 with Dolby PLIIx Music up mixer.
|
|
KeithL
Administrator
Posts: 9,938
|
Post by KeithL on Jan 10, 2019 16:43:17 GMT -5
There's something worth noting here.....
The new Dolby Surround Upmixer (DSU) has officially replaced PLIIx on all Dolby Atmos enabled products. This means that ANY licensed Dolby Atmos processor from now on will include DSU and will NOT include PLIIx. (And that also will include the XMC-1 with the Atmos Upgrade board when it becomes available.) We haven't extensively compared them but we have no reason to believe this isn't an improvement.
Also, like on the RMC-1, Dolby Prologic IIx (PLIIx) Music and Movie sound modes will be missed. I really like to listen to 2.0 music on my XMC-1 with Dolby PLIIx Music up mixer.
|
|
|
Post by Gary Cook on Jan 10, 2019 17:09:17 GMT -5
There's something worth noting here.....
The new Dolby Surround Upmixer (DSU) has officially replaced PLIIx on all Dolby Atmos enabled products. This means that ANY licensed Dolby Atmos processor from now on will include DSU and will NOT include PLIIx. (And that also will include the XMC-1 with the Atmos Upgrade board when it becomes available.) We haven't extensively compared them but we have no reason to believe this isn't an improvement. I have back to backed DSU and PLIIX and there's not a lot of difference, not sure that there's much of an improvement though. Both are pretty average, especially when compared to Neural X, which puts daylight on any Dolby upmixer. Cheers Gary
|
|
|
Post by cwt on Jan 10, 2019 23:38:16 GMT -5
Hair Nick has announced that they will be showing off the XMC-2, what exactly do we know about this NEW unit? Dan has expanded on the pre pro pecking order at CES Nick if you've seen it ?. To paraphrase " the processor after the RMC2 will have L/R dual differential circuitry" . So you can discount any L/C/R dual differential which will satisfy any XMC1 owners with L/R dual diff to an extent.. This gives a clear hierarchy between the RMC1 and 2 now as well as before the RMC2 looked a bit too good ; now if you want all channels dual diff theres only 1 solution.. It also potentially saves money with the o'seas tariff situation as more single ended circuitry is incorporated ; Ime guessing.
|
|
|
Post by Casey Leedom on Jan 11, 2019 0:19:53 GMT -5
Hhrrrmmm, well, if that's true, it also only provides one answer for wanting Left, Center, and Right fully balanced. And that truly would make the "RMC-2" truly an RMC-1L. However, KeithL was quite explicit just two days ago in the 'RMC-2 What do we know' thread when he said: So I'm going to chalk up Dan Laufman 's comments as misspeaking under the pressure of the interview. Casey
|
|
|
Post by cwt on Jan 11, 2019 4:07:11 GMT -5
Hhrrrmmm, well, if that's true, it also only provides one answer for wanting Left, Center, and Right fully balanced. And that truly would make the "RMC-2" truly an RMC-1L. However, KeithL was quite explicit just two days ago in the 'RMC-2 What do we know' thread when he said: So I'm going to chalk up Dan Laufman 's comments as misspeaking under the pressure of the interview. Casey Yes Casey ; took that in and certainly plausible . I think Dan's comments were quite wide ranging as to the pecking order going forward even to the point of outlining further pre pro's at a lower price point which you would envisage as not being dual differential . That and he is at CES hence giving a comprehensive viewpoint to suit the gravitas of the situation [ its not just cedia] and it just seemed too specific ? . The lower price point pre pro's which may or may not surface would equate to the many comments on the lounge requesting lower price point ones ; and there is always that Emersa boggy ; when was the last time any comment was made on that .. I dont think Keiths responsibilities go specifically to product development ; but I hope Ime wrong and the RMC2 is as Keith described ; if it is it would cannibalise sales from the RMC1 I feel
|
|
|
Post by aswiss on Jan 11, 2019 8:27:23 GMT -5
I think that the RMC-1, RMC-2 (better named RMC-1L), and XMC-2 will all have a common platform with many interchangeable sub-assemblies, and common parts (like SoCs, DACs, etc.). As far as I remember, the XMC-2 will have the front three channels as fully balanced and thus, probably using the AK4490EN DACs found in the RMC-1. I'm not sure what the story will be for the remaining channels. It will not have Expansion Bays. Casey On the upcoming XMC-2 I don't like the asymmetrix Design (Knob & Cross Buttons) - this was different, when the XMC1-Gen3 was announced right? Probably have to go with RMC-2 instead - once the firmware is fine. Curious if its really the same plattform.
|
|
|
Post by davidl81 on Jan 11, 2019 8:27:45 GMT -5
Hhrrrmmm, well, if that's true, it also only provides one answer for wanting Left, Center, and Right fully balanced. And that truly would make the "RMC-2" truly an RMC-1L. However, KeithL was quite explicit just two days ago in the 'RMC-2 What do we know' thread when he said: So I'm going to chalk up Dan Laufman 's comments as misspeaking under the pressure of the interview. Casey Yes Casey ; took that in and certainly plausible . I think Dan's comments were quite wide ranging as to the pecking order going forward even to the point of outlining further pre pro's at a lower price point which you would envisage as not being dual differential . That and he is at CES hence giving a comprehensive viewpoint to suit the gravitas of the situation [ its not just cedia] and it just seemed too specific ? . The lower price point pre pro's which may or may not surface would equate to the many comments on the lounge requesting lower price point ones ; and there is always that Emersa boggy ; when was the last time any comment was made on that .. I dont think Keiths responsibilities go specifically to product development ; but I hope Ime wrong and the RMC2 is as Keith described ; if it is it would cannibalise sales from the RMC1 I feel I don't know if having fully balanced 16 channels versus just LCR balanced would really make a difference on buying a RMC-1 versus the RMC-2 (much less how on earth will anyone really hear the difference in sound). At the end of the day there is only a $1000 price difference, which granted is a lot of money, but only 20% of a price jump. So if you are looking at spending $4k you have to really look hard at spending the extra $1k for the RMC-1 and banking on the expansion modules being something to help you out as new Dolby standards come forward. I am just of the thinking that if you are going to spend $4000 you might as well spend $5000 and get something with flexibility moving forward. Both are expensive any way you look at it (retaliative to a mass market product).
|
|
|
Post by Casey Leedom on Jan 11, 2019 8:51:46 GMT -5
I’m any case, back to the XMC-1: I personally hope the it has the highest quality sound possible on Left, Center, and Right, including DACs, fully balanced, differential, etc. All the other channels aren’t as important ... or, if they are for you, there’s the RMC-1L!
Casey
|
|
|
Post by davidl81 on Jan 11, 2019 8:56:54 GMT -5
Really the only thing I wish the XMC-2 had (or any of the new gen processors for that matter) would be a Zone 3 output. I am a very specific case though where I run my patio/pool speakers off of the Pre/Pro. I like to have the ability to run the patio speakers, pool speakers, or both sets of speakers. I also like the ability to adjust the volumes independent of one another. I can run both sets of speakers off of a zone 2 and split the RCA connections , but i just can't run those speakers independent of one another.
|
|
|
Post by cwt on Jan 11, 2019 12:33:12 GMT -5
I don't know if having fully balanced 16 channels versus just LCR balanced would really make a difference on buying a RMC-1 versus the RMC-2 (much less how on earth will anyone really hear the difference in sound). At the end of the day there is only a $1000 price difference, which granted is a lot of money, but only 20% of a price jump. So if you are looking at spending $4k you have to really look hard at spending the extra $1k for the RMC-1 and banking on the expansion modules being something to help you out as new Dolby standards come forward. I am just of the thinking that if you are going to spend $4000 you might as well spend $5000 and get something with flexibility moving forward. Both are expensive any way you look at it (retaliative to a mass market product). As they say when you get to these performance levels its very small increments of sound improvement and I suspect your right about the perceived value of all channels being dual differential to most . I think its the flexibility with bi amping and sub management that will be a bigger drawcard for the RMC1 when its sorted Hey whats the chances of a expansion card for extra zones being developed for the RMC1 ; the opposition are much more generous ::)Anyway back to the XMC2 .
|
|