The OFFICIAL RMC-1 Feature Request Thread

[Geronimo]

I have decided to make this thread so existing, and potential customers could better discuss their requests for features via software, and or hardware. I believe this can be much more organized, and beneficial for us, and EMOTIVA.

[lrobertson]

RMC-1:
Atmos/Pro 13.1.10, 15.3.10, 17.1.10 with layout info asap so I can pre-install speakers.
Proprietary upmixer if found necessary for optimal playback.
Repurpose zone 2 out as optional stereo sub output if possible. Maybe zone 2 volume mirroring the main room is all that is necessary to extract low frequency info with external mini dsp?
Easy online firmware updates.

RMC-2 (looking further forward):
Auromax 20.1-26.1
RMC-2 (or RMC-3D) Atmos/Pro board should allow personalized layouts with xyz speaker entry.
8k hdmi board w/ 48 gbps HDbaseT output built in and a separate receiving unit as standard instead of hdmi outputs as well as a DisplayPort 2.0 input and output.

[cwt]

Mentioned this before but Emo could possibly make the RMC1 unique at its price point with its expansion ports [if the circuitry allows] .The Lyngdorf MP60 will be optionable with AES digital outputs for class D amps when its released with a db25 port [ 16 channel digital AES/EBU speaker output channels (Fix 97,565kHz/24bit / DB25]. This potentially puts the dacs into some active speakers instead - like Meridians $$ system or the Lyngdorf P200 reference. Not to mention class D's size and efficiency advantages for object decoding many channels . This would be a nice tie in with the pascal class d amps going into the XMR1 -with a separate chassis- or some modified PA1's with AES inputs

Of course this method could be scaled back to say just the main L/C/R channels for a hybrid system if theres still a 4 output restriction on the expansion modules.. Something like this would make a choice between the RMC1 and 1l a lot easier

[richb]

I use energy efficient power on so it is difficult to automate the power on delay with an IR remote.

Two features could make startup more reliable to automate:

1) Accept the input selection during the startup processor or even as a power on command.
2) Allow triggers to be configured to fire at or shortly after initial power on to allow other components to initialize in parallel.

- Rich

[petew]

I think this thread should be expanded to all current generation processors, since they're all based on the same architecture.

[tagmanz]

I would like to see:

DTS-X Pro support
Auto 3D support
Web server based GUI

This last one is a long shot but support for dual theatres a la Stormaudio. It would be fantastic to be able to run 9.1.6 in the theatre room and 5.1 in the lounge room all from the same box.

[Bonzo]

This thread is utterly useless. There is already an old thread on this exact topic, and much of it is way to late.

Don't get it.

[tagmanz]

Sept 15, 2019 22:31:48 GMT -5 Bonzo said:

This thread is utterly useless. There is already an old thread on this exact topic, and much of it is way to late.

Don't get it.

Well the OP started this new thread and directed us all here from over in the owners thread.

If nothing else it gives us all a place to dream. Most of what's been mentioned so far would be achievable through firmware so I wouldn't say it's too late.

[richb]

Sept 15, 2019 22:31:48 GMT -5 Bonzo said:

This thread is utterly useless. There is already an old thread on this exact topic, and much of it is way to late.

Don't get it.

Perhaps a freshening, I think it is OK.
It's another opportunity to reiterate a certain feature to the list of expansion boards;)

- Rich

[Bonzo]

richb and tagmanz, I will retract my statement that this thread is utterly useless. It’s not useless, but it is redundant.

On that note, I will also say that it’s highly likely that since the other thread is so old, that Geronimo didn’t even know it existed, or at least forgot about it. So a new thread is completely fine.

The original thread was also called the “Expansion Module Thread”, not “Features Request Thread,” although in my mind that’s basically the same thing since both lend themselves to future upgrades and added features (for example adding more processing for more channels would be pointless if the expansion module for it didn’t come first).

But I will link the old thread here just in case someone would like to peruse that thread before posting here.

emotivalounge.proboards.com/thread/50935/rmc-1-expansion-module-thread

But, I will stand by my statement that, IMO, many of things people seem to want are too late. If you really wanted those features people should have been voicing those ideas a long time ago, BEFORE the RMC-1 was finalized, not AFTER. (As I did a lot of voicing about wanting more analog inputs AND OUTPUTS, which fell on deaf ears). But, history has shown that sometimes they listen and sometimes they don’t, so late or not may not even matter. It’s my opinion that for the main product itself, sans expansion modules, that Emotiva made the product they wanted to make taking no customer suggestions into account. BUT, If you’ll recall, the original RMC-1 was the RMC-1L, and most likely would have been just that if it weren’t for a lot of us clamoring for more. The expansion modules were added to appease us. So they did listen. But where the expansion modules actually go is another matter. Hence, why I think requesting features for expansion modules is well warranted and totally still a “live” discussion. That doesn’t change my opinion that I think many of the things people are asking for now are day late and a dollar short.

Everyone knows what I want for expansion modules, but I’m not getting what I want to see, what I would buy. So I really don’t have much more to say or contribute to what I think the modules should represent.

[richb]

It seems to me that Sub-woofer channels are just further band-limited channels.
Is there a reason for different modules for channel expansion and subwoofer expansion?

- Rich

[davidl81]

Sept 16, 2019 8:53:51 GMT -5 Bonzo said:

richb and tagmanz , I will retract my statement that this thread is utterly useless. It’s not useless, but it is redundant.

On that note, I will also say that it’s highly likely that since the other thread is so old, that Geronimo didn’t even know it existed, or at least forgot about it. So a new thread is completely fine.

The original thread was also called the “Expansion Module Thread”, not “Features Request Thread,” although in my mind that’s basically the same thing since both lend themselves to future upgrades and added features (for example adding more processing for more channels would be pointless if the expansion module for it didn’t come first).

But I will link the old thread here just in case someone would like to peruse that thread before posting here.

emotivalounge.proboards.com/thread/50935/rmc-1-expansion-module-thread

But, I will stand by my statement that, IMO, many of things people seem to want are too late. If you really wanted those features people should have been voicing those ideas a long time ago, BEFORE the RMC-1 was finalized, not AFTER. (As I did a lot of voicing about wanting more analog inputs AND OUTPUTS, which fell on deaf ears). But, history has shown that sometimes they listen and sometimes they don’t, so late or not may not even matter. It’s my opinion that for the main product itself, sans expansion modules, that Emotiva made the product they wanted to make taking no customer suggestions into account. BUT, If you’ll recall, the original RMC-1 was the RMC-1L, and most likely would have been just that if it weren’t for a lot of us clamoring for more. The expansion modules were added to appease us. So they did listen. But where the expansion modules actually go is another matter. Hence, why I think requesting features for expansion modules is well warranted and totally still a “live” discussion. That doesn’t change my opinion that I think many of the things people are asking for now are day late and a dollar short.

Everyone knows what I want for expansion modules, but I’m not getting what I want to see, what I would buy. So I really don’t have much more to say or contribute to what I think the modules should represent.

Emotiva is going to put whatever devices in the RMC-1 that make sense from a cost/sales perspective.  The first goal was to make a 16 channel processor that is the best sounding by far in it's price class.  I think they did that, but they still have work to do to make it stable.  I am sure they looked at analog inputs, Auro 3d, etc and saw that there was little demand for it.  The good thing about post like these are Emotiva can see what demand there is for certain items and they may be able to judge if they are losing sales due to lack of options/features.  

At the end of the day the biggest thing by far they can do to drive sales is to have a stable product that just sounds great in Dolby Atmos, DTS:X, and the various Dolby/DTS upmixers.  That is going to cover 95% of the HT market.  The Auro 3d, multiple amount of analog inputs/outputs while nice are only going to matter on the fringes.

[Bonzo]

Sept 16, 2019 10:00:47 GMT -5 davidl81 said:

Emotiva is going to put whatever devices in the RMC-1 that make sense from a cost/sales perspective.  The first goal was to make a 16 channel processor that is the best sounding by far in it's price class.  I think they did that, but they still have work to do to make it stable.  I am sure they looked at analog inputs, Auro 3d, etc and saw that there was little demand for it.  The good thing about post like these are Emotiva can see what demand there is for certain items and they may be able to judge if they are losing sales due to lack of options/features.  

At the end of the day the biggest thing by far they can do to drive sales is to have a stable product that just sounds great in Dolby Atmos, DTS:X, and the various Dolby/DTS upmixers.  That is going to cover 95% of the HT market.  The Auro 3d, multiple amount of analog inputs/outputs while nice are only going to matter on the fringes.

I agree. Let's hope they can make it as stable as everyone wants. 1.5 appears to be a huge improvement. Here's to hoping 1.6 rocks it out.

More than 7.2.6 or 9.2.4 is just as much "on the fringes" as the other things. It may seem like there are tons of people wanting that on a little forum like this, but the reality is there aren't. Add to that the many other things people are asking for here and they become even more niche.

If Emotiva creates a market for the very niche people who want more than 7.2.6, a market that has a lower price point than the competition, then I predict the key competition will simply make new products with a lower price. It's exactly what Anthem did.

But this is all discussion for a different thread if you ask me. Viability and profit can only really be known to Emotiva. These threads are more about us pointing out what we as individuals want. It's up to Emotiva to sift through those requests (or not) if they so chose.

[lrobertson]

Sept 16, 2019 9:44:38 GMT -5 richb said:

It seems to me that Sub-woofer channels are just further band-limited channels.
Is there a reason for different modules for channel expansion and subwoofer expansion?

- Rich

Probably less demanding due to just eq the single LFE channel rather than having to compute more layout speaker channels.

[lrobertson]

Sept 16, 2019 10:00:47 GMT -5 davidl81 said:

Sept 16, 2019 8:53:51 GMT -5 Bonzo said:

richb and tagmanz , I will retract my statement that this thread is utterly useless. It’s not useless, but it is redundant.

On that note, I will also say that it’s highly likely that since the other thread is so old, that Geronimo didn’t even know it existed, or at least forgot about it. So a new thread is completely fine.

The original thread was also called the “Expansion Module Thread”, not “Features Request Thread,” although in my mind that’s basically the same thing since both lend themselves to future upgrades and added features (for example adding more processing for more channels would be pointless if the expansion module for it didn’t come first).

But I will link the old thread here just in case someone would like to peruse that thread before posting here.

emotivalounge.proboards.com/thread/50935/rmc-1-expansion-module-thread

But, I will stand by my statement that, IMO, many of things people seem to want are too late. If you really wanted those features people should have been voicing those ideas a long time ago, BEFORE the RMC-1 was finalized, not AFTER. (As I did a lot of voicing about wanting more analog inputs AND OUTPUTS, which fell on deaf ears). But, history has shown that sometimes they listen and sometimes they don’t, so late or not may not even matter. It’s my opinion that for the main product itself, sans expansion modules, that Emotiva made the product they wanted to make taking no customer suggestions into account. BUT, If you’ll recall, the original RMC-1 was the RMC-1L, and most likely would have been just that if it weren’t for a lot of us clamoring for more. The expansion modules were added to appease us. So they did listen. But where the expansion modules actually go is another matter. Hence, why I think requesting features for expansion modules is well warranted and totally still a “live” discussion. That doesn’t change my opinion that I think many of the things people are asking for now are day late and a dollar short.

Everyone knows what I want for expansion modules, but I’m not getting what I want to see, what I would buy. So I really don’t have much more to say or contribute to what I think the modules should represent.

Emotiva is going to put whatever devices in the RMC-1 that make sense from a cost/sales perspective.  The first goal was to make a 16 channel processor that is the best sounding by far in it's price class.  I think they did that, but they still have work to do to make it stable.  I am sure they looked at analog inputs, Auro 3d, etc and saw that there was little demand for it.  The good thing about post like these are Emotiva can see what demand there is for certain items and they may be able to judge if they are losing sales due to lack of options/features.  

At the end of the day the biggest thing by far they can do to drive sales is to have a stable product that just sounds great in Dolby Atmos, DTS:X, and the various Dolby/DTS upmixers.  That is going to cover 95% of the HT market.  The Auro 3d, multiple amount of analog inputs/outputs while nice are only going to matter on the fringes.

I also think this is their halo product so having a 28 channel processor in this price range without competition gets people looking at the brand regardless if they need the RMC-1 and many of those people will revert to the XMC-2. Comparable to nvidia’s 2080ti and how it draws people into their lower tier GPUs even though there are better deals for their lower end cards. Not saying the XMC-2 has competition that should out sell it. I actually think their 3 processors and what differentiates them are solid and should all be serious contenders. Hopefully though the RMC-1 isn’t slated as a 28 channel without the needed support for long.

[cwt]

Sept 16, 2019 9:44:38 GMT -5 richb said:

It seems to me that Sub-woofer channels are just further band-limited channels.
Is there a reason for different modules for channel expansion and subwoofer expansion?

- Rich

2 things come to mind ; the extra dsp [ active crossovers]in the full range modules facilitating bi amping or tri as has been mentioned by Emo ? And if Dirac Unison ever materialises ?? more band limited channels is a prerequisite .. With the new sub management tier system though its probably ages away

[mgbpuff]

Technology moves too fast for any one product to be upgradable for long. The cards in the RMC-1 do not look upgradable to me except for expansion slot add ons (none of which exist yet). I think the addition of new features is iffy at best, nice but not to be counted on. So contend yourselves with buying an affordable product that works with the technology existent with very high SQ. Any future FW improvements would be welcome, but don't expect them to be free. Remember this product is affordable vs $10.000 to $50,000 products which may or may not give you free upgrades. Emotiva, just make this product operationally solid for the features you have promised. The pie in the sky features some are asking for are for the next product, and please do not ever say that this is the last processor you will ever need because we all know that is illogical.

[SOWK]

IMHO:

DTS-X Pro is a must.

[davidl81]

Sept 17, 2019 8:24:02 GMT -5 SOWK said:

IMHO:

DTS-X Pro is a must.

I agree with this, much more so than Auro 3d.  DTS-X can only support 7.1.4 and the RMC-1 in it's base form is 9.1.6.  Supporting DTS-X Pro with is much higher channel count would make perfect sense for the RMC-1.  Also assuming 4K disc are actually sold with DTS-X Pro soundtracks, you would want your halo processor to be able to play those. 

[lrobertson]

Sept 17, 2019 5:53:20 GMT -5 mgbpuff said:

Technology moves too fast for any one product to be upgradable for long. The cards in the RMC-1 do not look upgradable to me except for expansion slot add ons (none of which exist yet). I think the addition of new features is iffy at best, nice but not to be counted on. So contend yourselves with buying an affordable product that works with the technology existent with very high SQ. Any future FW improvements would be welcome, but don't expect them to be free. Remember this product is affordable vs $10.000 to $50,000 products which may or may not give you free upgrades. Emotiva, just make this product operationally solid for the features you have promised. The pie in the sky features some are asking for are for the next product, and please do not ever say that this is the last processor you will ever need because we all know that is illogical.

I thought the whole idea behind modularity was to be able to update connections via hdmi board and update codecs via software or Atmos/Dts decoding board/brain leaving further down the stream such as DAC’s able to be utilized with no end. The trinnov does this but the brain is much more malleable as software that changing that out shouldn’t have to occur I thought. I for one am not against proposing a new processing board if ever necessary to utilize down the chain more appropriately. This after all was Emotiva’s original plan to upgrade the XMC but with the RMC development it was abandoned. I don’t see why there would be a future RMC-2 that demands we abandon upgrading a processing board for 3 sufficient processors. Can a DAC be made obsolete and is there a strong case they will have to make it obsolete due to programming cost constraints?