|
|
Post by AudioHTIT on Jun 26, 2019 15:23:14 GMT -5
... Look on the bright side... The day 8k models become commonplace... ... and there we have it! KeithL confirms the HDMI 2.1 video board and 8K support is right around the corner!!! When can we preorder?  |
|
|
|
Post by AudioHTIT on Jun 30, 2019 12:09:46 GMT -5
Well, closing in on 100 votes! Slightly more than half going with the XMC-2 which makes sense; the lowest base price, the very attractive XMC-1 trade up price, and having the same basic features as the bigger brothers make it a natural for most.
I think the XMC-1 keepers are probably under represented. Those who are happy with their processor, and/or not considering Atmos/DTS:X, may not be visiting the lounge and will just keep using their processors until they need or want something else. This could actually be a huge number we’ll never even hear from.
Then I expect there are many sitting on the fence regarding the RMC’s. If there were fewer complaints six months in, I might have an RMC-1 in my system now, as it is some owners seem to be waiting on each FW release for relief. I still envision one on my processor shelf, but it will likely hold an XMC-2 first. The RMC-2 could gain popularity if the expansion modules are delayed, or they aren’t a compelling reason for the higher price; but there’ll be some wanting to max out the channels, or go crazy with subs, and some wanting to be ready for what might be needed in the future. The RMC aesthetics and build features, like the rotary encoder and Tiffany connectors will also draw the higher end crowd.
Overall to me the poll seems about right given the enthusiasts in the lounge, and the prices to upgrade or buy in; news about a Dirac release would probably nudge some to make a choice too.
|
|
LCSeminole
Global Moderator 
Res firma mitescere nescit.
Posts: 20,850
|
Post by LCSeminole on Jun 30, 2019 13:38:58 GMT -5
Well, closing in on 100 votes! Slightly more than half going with the XMC-2 which makes sense; the lowest base price, the very attractive XMC-1 trade up price, and having the same basic features as the bigger brothers make it a natural for most. I think the XMC-1 keepers are probably under represented. Those who are happy with their processor, and/or not considering Atmos/DTS:X, may not be visiting the lounge and will just keep using their processors until they need or want something else. This could actually be a huge number we’ll never even hear from. Then I expect there are many sitting on the fence regarding the RMC’s. If there were fewer complaints six months in, I might have an RMC-1 in my system now, as it is some owners seem to be waiting on each FW release for relief. I still envision one on my processor shelf, but it will likely hold an XMC-2 first. The RMC-2 could gain popularity if the expansion modules are delayed, or they aren’t a compelling reason for the higher price; but there’ll be some wanting to max out the channels, or go crazy with subs, and some wanting to be ready for what might be needed in the future. The RMC aesthetics and build features, like the rotary encoder and Tiffany connectors will also draw the higher end crowd. Overall to me the poll seems about right given the enthusiasts in the lounge, and the prices to upgrade or buy in; news about a Dirac release would probably nudge some to make a choice too. Bruce, Good synopsis I think. I personally have been giving the RMC-1 more thought these days, while I'm still leaning in the direction of the RMC-1L. Right now I'm in a good situation being completely satisfied with my XMC-1 so waiting out another firmware for the RMC-1 is easy, not to mention my on-going home DIY projects that kinda/sorta puts a new processor on the back-burner to simmer. I do however don't want to make any moves until DIRAC is implemented into the RMC-1/RMC-1L/XMC-2 platform as in my home theater it makes that much of a difference to me, especially when listening to music. Ceiling speakers are also a bit down the list, if I even decide to go that route when my current projects are completed, so who knows. I will be getting a new RMC-1/RMC-1L processor whether I go immersive audio or not. One thing I've been wondering is if any of these firmware bugs would affect an RMC-1 setup with a 7.2 setup with the immersive channels disabled as I've not heard any of the current owners make any comments to this. |
|
|
|
Post by novisnick on Jun 30, 2019 14:52:18 GMT -5
If Emotiva comes up with some intriguing ideas for the three Expansion Modules perhaps more RMC-1’s would be selected as an upgrade path.
|
|
|
|
Post by adaboy on Jun 30, 2019 15:19:34 GMT -5
If Emotiva comes up with some intriguing ideas for the three Expansion Modules perhaps more RMC-1’s would be selected as an upgrade path. Yup, the new volume control expansion and the 4 port ethernet switch modules aren't gonna cut it. |
|
|
|
Post by Casey Leedom on Jun 30, 2019 23:55:07 GMT -5
Personally, a Roon Endpoint would be a big draw for an expansion model. Take Ethernet in directly and handle all of the various audio formats with doing silly things like DSD over PCM for USB ...
Casey
|
|
|
|
Post by AudioHTIT on Jul 1, 2019 1:13:37 GMT -5
Bruce, Good synopsis I think. I personally have been giving the RMC-1 more thought these days, while I'm still leaning in the direction of the RMC-1L. Right now I'm in a good situation being completely satisfied with my XMC-1 so waiting out another firmware for the RMC-1 is easy, not to mention my on-going home DIY projects that kinda/sorta puts a new processor on the back-burner to simmer. I do however don't want to make any moves until DIRAC is implemented into the RMC-1/RMC-1L/XMC-2 platform as in my home theater it makes that much of a difference to me, especially when listening to music. Ceiling speakers are also a bit down the list, if I even decide to go that route when my current projects are completed, so who knows. I will be getting a new RMC-1/RMC-1L processor whether I go immersive audio or not. One thing I've been wondering is if any of these firmware bugs would affect an RMC-1 setup with a 7.2 setup with the immersive channels disabled as I've not heard any of the current owners make any comments to this. I’m a little more anxious, speakers sitting in the loft ready to become my 7.2.2 test bed; they’ve been there a while and I have quite a few Atmos and DTS:X discs ready to get them moving. I also don’t mind running it for a while without Dirac, though like many, I’d like to hear what we’ll be getting, and what options will be available. I’m planning where to cut holes for a more permanent immersive installation if the tests go well, but not looking forward to crawling in the attic, fortunately most of the wiring is already there ... somewhere. I also still hope we’ll get to have our new unit delivered, before returning the XMC-1 for credit. I’d really like to be able to disconnect one, and hookup the other at the same time. Interesting thought on 7.2 with the RMC-1, maybe not using any of the immersive codecs would make for a less buggy system. With as much testing as some have done, it may have been tried, but you’d think someone would have mentioned it. |
|
|
|
Post by AudioHTIT on Jul 1, 2019 1:19:43 GMT -5
If Emotiva comes up with some intriguing ideas for the three Expansion Modules perhaps more RMC-1’s would be selected as an upgrade path. For me it would just take one useful module doing something I couldn’t do otherwise (or which might be more complex). I don’t need to fill all three slots, but I get your point, I want something other than more channels or subs. |
|
|
|
Post by bolle on Jul 1, 2019 1:40:46 GMT -5
I still would like to see a DSP expansion module which allows you to drive a fully active system without the need for external DSPs. Would close the gap featurewise to e.g. a Trinnov Altitude a little bit more and would save me 2 additional devices and a lot of cables. I would even happily pay up to $2000 for such a module with FIR capability.
Btw. AT THE MOMENT my vote goes to "keep the XMC-1". I had enough "fun" with the UMC-200 and the XMC-1 4K-board that I won´t get any new Emotiva processor anymore without all the major bugs ironed out.
|
|
|
|
Post by cwt on Jul 1, 2019 5:53:11 GMT -5
If Emotiva comes up with some intriguing ideas for the three Expansion Modules perhaps more RMC-1’s would be selected as an upgrade path. For me it would just take one useful module doing something I couldn’t do otherwise (or which might be more complex). I don’t need to fill all three slots, but I get your point, I want something other than more channels or subs. If I had to guess I think they are concentrating on what most of the requests have been for [and modules like balanced xlr's that are easy to integrate into the balanced circuitry] . Later on [like some rivals ie storm audio] hp/lp filters for bi/tri amping are inevitable I think [ all those channels would meld well with a 7.1 system too] |
|
|
|
Post by AudioHTIT on Jul 1, 2019 7:09:30 GMT -5
I still would like to see a DSP expansion module which allows you to drive a fully active system without the need for external DSPs. Would close the gap featurewise to e.g. a Trinnov Altitude a little bit more and would save me 2 additional devices and a lot of cables. I would even happily pay up to $2000 for such a module with FIR capability. ... Interesting, so when you say ‘fully active’ do you mean all channels, or just the mains? I assume that also means no pure analog path, but I guess with subs you’ve already lost that? |
|
richb
Sensei
Oppo Beta Group - Audioholics Reviewer
Posts: 890
|
Post by richb on Jul 1, 2019 9:40:02 GMT -5
Personally, a Roon Endpoint would be a big draw for an expansion model. Take Ethernet in directly and handle all of the various audio formats with doing silly things like DSD over PCM for USB ... Casey +1 for Roon endpoint. Preferably without an expansion module, but I suspect that bird has flown. However, there is no need to exclude DSD (DOP) since the product supports it. Recent experiments with a direct path (no processing), I can easily hear the difference in the Oppo UDP-205 DAC filter settings. I suspect that most of the difference in "DACS" are the implementation, digital filters, and volume control linearity. In other words, the entire chain. Unfortunately, the performance specifications are hard to find for even over $10K processors so it appears to be a crap-shoot, regardless of price. This is why I encourage Emotiva to publish it's spec's. This assumes that the fully-balanced design, voltage output, and volume control all lead to superior performance. If you have it, flaunt it. - Rich |
|
richb
Sensei
Oppo Beta Group - Audioholics Reviewer
Posts: 890
|
Post by richb on Jul 1, 2019 9:47:25 GMT -5
I still would like to see a DSP expansion module which allows you to drive a fully active system without the need for external DSPs. Would close the gap featurewise to e.g. a Trinnov Altitude a little bit more and would save me 2 additional devices and a lot of cables. I would even happily pay up to $2000 for such a module with FIR capability. ... Interesting, so when you say ‘fully active’ do you mean all channels, or just the mains? I assume that also means no pure analog path, but I guess with subs you’ve already lost that? Great point. There would be a serious risk of speaker damage if switched to the Reference Stereo path. A processor reset could also blow away all settings. Other processors do not have an all analog path, analog inputs are digitized so this cannot occur. Still, since I bi-amp, I'd use LPF/HPF along with passive bi-amping. - Rich |
|
|
|
Post by AudioHTIT on Jul 1, 2019 10:43:13 GMT -5
Interesting, so when you say ‘fully active’ do you mean all channels, or just the mains? I assume that also means no pure analog path, but I guess with subs you’ve already lost that? Great point. There would be a serious risk of speaker damage if switched to the Reference Stereo path. A processor reset could also blow away all settings. Other processors do not have an all analog path, analog inputs are digitized so this cannot occur. Still, since I bi-amp, I'd use LPF/HPF along with passive bi-amping. - Rich Yes, all the talk of errant sounds does make one worry about the output of a “bi-amp” module going directly to power amps and drivers, sans crossover. I suppose they could mute the output anytime the Mode is changing, but the random or periodic odd chirps and the like have to be fixed for everyone’s sake or the product won’t succeed. I suppose the ‘analog path’ comment is more of a red herring as it’s just not realistic in this environment, I just came to that realization when bolle mentioned FIR. |
|
richb
Sensei
Oppo Beta Group - Audioholics Reviewer
Posts: 890
|
Post by richb on Jul 1, 2019 10:58:35 GMT -5
Great point. There would be a serious risk of speaker damage if switched to the Reference Stereo path. A processor reset could also blow away all settings. Other processors do not have an all analog path, analog inputs are digitized so this cannot occur. Still, since I bi-amp, I'd use LPF/HPF along with passive bi-amping. - Rich Yes, all the talk of errant sounds does make one worry about the output of a “bi-amp” module going directly to power amps and drivers, sans crossover. I suppose they could mute the output anytime the Mode is changing, but the random or periodic odd chirps and the like have to be fixed for everyone’s sake or the product won’t succeed. I suppose the ‘analog path’ comment is more of a red herring as it’s just not realistic in this environment, I just came to that realization when bolle mentioned FIR. The 'analog path' is valid as is Reference Stereo. These paths that bypass DSP crossovers would have to be disabled if anyone was considering using the RMC to implement active crossovers. Select the wrong mode, and boom. - Rich |
|
|
|
Post by bolle on Jul 1, 2019 13:34:38 GMT -5
Whow, some action going on here! :-)
Basically what I do at the moment is I go from the XMC-1 outputs into 2 DSPs with 2 in, 6 out each. I use 9 of that output channels for FL, FR and Center and 2 others for front and back array of my DBA. Of course you do DA conversion in the XMC, then AD conversion and again DA in the DSP...
With a module in the RMC-1 you could:
- save a lot of unnecessary conversions
- save a lot of cables
- Decide if you want to do 9.3.6 or maybe just 7.2 but with 7 active 2-way speakers and a DBA - without the need for external DSPs.
I think there is definitely a market for this. Here in Germany, more and more of the high end home cinema owners are getting a Trinnov Altitude and also active custom built speakers are kind of gaining market.
I also absolutely understand if Emotiva considers this still too small a niche market - but imho that´s a nice where they would be the only players in a price range still hugely below Trinnov or Storm Audio (expansion module included).
And such a DSP in itself actually isn´t that hard to do - you could actually start with something like 2 ADAU1701 evaluation boards and Sigma Studio, use better AD / DA converters or most likely just use the ones already in the RMC-1 and invest most of the development time in integration and interaction with the processor.
P.S.: Yes, the "analog path" isn´t something I have in that system anymore. I have a second soundsystem in the living room with an analog stereo system - ok, the amp is a PWM, but the Pioneer PD-91 goes into the preamp via nice RG142 cables I soldered myself...
|
|
|
|
Post by Gary Cook on Jul 1, 2019 19:46:23 GMT -5
Of course you do DA conversion in the XMC, then AD conversion and again DA in the DSP. Bloody hell, is there any musicality left after that number of conversions? I listen to music all analogue from the source output to my ears, I can't imagine that that many ADC/DAC conversions would do anything for the music. To me the loss of fidelity would easily outweigh any acoustical benefits many times over. Acoustic room treatment would seem much more palpable audibly, not to mention much less expensive. Cheers Gary |
|
|
|
Post by bolle on Jul 2, 2019 1:26:16 GMT -5
You must be a pretty oldschool guy... :-) Yes, the sound is great and the change of the speakers from passive to active was a step up. Today AD / DA conversion isn´t that bad anymore than it was maybe 20 years ago, but still nice if you can avoid it.
Of course the room is also acoustically treated.
|
|
|
|
Post by Gary Cook on Jul 2, 2019 22:00:45 GMT -5
You must be a pretty oldschool guy... :-) Yes, the sound is great and the change of the speakers from passive to active was a step up. Today AD / DA conversion isn´t that bad anymore than it was maybe 20 years ago, but still nice if you can avoid it. Of course the room is also acoustically treated. Just one DAC ADC DAC path annoys the hell out of me, I can hear it, but even if I couldn't just the fact that is was there would still annoy me. Cheers Gary |
|
|
|
Post by AudioHTIT on Jul 24, 2019 16:05:14 GMT -5
For those who still haven't voted or decided which processor to choose, or if they should stand pat, this note from Keith provides some concise clarification on the differences between the units, with regard to balanced digital paths and on through to the balanced analog outputs. Just to be clear, we're talking about the analog signal paths used by the outputs of the DACs. On the RMC-1 and the RMC-1L, everything is balanced, all the way through, on all the channels, and ALL the DAC chips are used in mono mode. On the XMC-2, everything is balanced, all the way through, on all the channels, and but only the DAC chips on the L/C/R channels are used in mono mode. On the XMC-1, all of the DACs themselves are balanced, only the front L/R channels follow a signal path that is balanced all the way through, and none of the DAC chips are used in mono mode (And, yes, the balanced outputs on all of them are all fully balanced outputs.) |
|
