|
|
Post by repeetavx on Feb 8, 2020 11:22:13 GMT -5
SO... Let's do some "sonic ranking" among AVR brands. BOTTOM OF THE BARREL: HT in a box by ANYONE MIDRANGE: ANY Japanese brand (including Marantz) Cambridge Lexicon McIntosh NAD Outlaw Sherwood ASPIRING TO HIGH END (but still not sonically comparable to high end stereo gear): Anthem Arcam Rotel So wait! You left out where you consider Emotiva to fit into this list. I would put them in the last group, as aspiring. Though at times and in certain ways, Emotiva does achieve High End preformance |
|
|
|
Post by repeetavx on Feb 8, 2020 11:38:35 GMT -5
And, yes, we went out of the way to make sure that the XMC-1 sounds exceptionally good (and that includes things like offering a true analog bypass if you don't want any processing).
This is exactly why I bought, and still own an XMC-1. It is a "high end" balanced stereo preamp, with built in balanced "high end" DACs. With a completely analog signal path. That can also decode surround sound information and has several modes of EQ available if you wish to add such. 7.2 is all the surround effects that I care to implement in my home theater. Though commercially obsolete, it still performs admirably the function and specs that it was built for. It produces superior two channel reproduction with the ability to present superior 7.2 surround sound. Maybe someday I'll want more than 7.2 surround, but I doubt it. The refurbished units come with 4k video boards. The XMC-1 is still an excellent choice for someone who puts 2 channel performance before surround sound. And the fact that a $2,000 processor is now available for under half its original selling price, and way under its maximum SRP. Just means that it is now one of the great bargains of the decade. |
|
|
|
Post by Boomzilla on Feb 8, 2020 12:48:08 GMT -5
Emotiva is definitely a special case. They defy classification, IMHO.
Sonically, they're definitely in the "Aspiring to High End" category.
But the fact that they're a relatively small-volume producer forces attention to itself again and again (and again...) with small glitches. In the price range that the Emotiva HT gear sells, the big-volume Japanese makers don't have the continuing series of "oops - we'll fix that" situations that Emotiva does.
Now one might argue (maybe successfully, but maybe not) that the Emotiva's sound superiority justifies the irritations. But in a side-by-side, I suspect that the processors from the Japanese manufacturers would sound so close to Emotiva as to be undetectable in the mythical "double-blind test." Which begs the question, why put up with the glitches?
Now the above paragraph is pure speculation on my part, since I haven't heard any Emotiva processor in my own home other than the BASX model, that I thought was not only the bargain of the century, but sounded amazing. So if youse guys tell me that the Emotiva higher-end processors sound head and shoulders better than the available Japanese ones, then I'd certainly believe you. And that sonic superiority would be worth putting up with some glitches for.
But otherwise...
|
|
|
|
Post by davidl81 on Feb 8, 2020 12:58:40 GMT -5
Emotiva is definitely a special case. They defy classification, IMHO. Sonically, they're definitely in the "Aspiring to High End" category. But the fact that they're a relatively small-volume producer forces attention to itself again and again (and again...) with small glitches. In the price range that the Emotiva HT gear sells, the big-volume Japanese makers don't have the continuing series of "oops - we'll fix that" situations that Emotiva does. Now one might argue (maybe successfully, but maybe not) that the Emotiva's sound superiority justifies the irritations. But in a side-by-side, I suspect that the processors from the Japanese manufacturers would sound so close to Emotiva as to be undetectable in the mythical "double-blind test." Which begs the question, why put up with the glitches? Now the above paragraph is pure speculation on my part, since I haven't heard any Emotiva processor in my own home other than the BASX model, that I thought was not only the bargain of the century, but sounded amazing. So if youse guys tell me that the Emotiva higher-end processors sound head and shoulders better than the available Japanese ones, then I'd certainly believe you. And that sonic superiority would be worth putting up with some glitches for. But otherwise... I would say that in a pure HT application the RMC-1 is better than my Marantz 8802A was but the difference was not overlay dramatic. In 2 channel operation though the RMC-1 is a far superior unit than my Marantz was. |
|
|
|
Post by SteveH on Feb 8, 2020 13:58:56 GMT -5
Emotiva is definitely a special case. They defy classification, IMHO. Sonically, they're definitely in the "Aspiring to High End" category. But the fact that they're a relatively small-volume producer forces attention to itself again and again (and again...) with small glitches. In the price range that the Emotiva HT gear sells, the big-volume Japanese makers don't have the continuing series of "oops - we'll fix that" situations that Emotiva does. Now one might argue (maybe successfully, but maybe not) that the Emotiva's sound superiority justifies the irritations. But in a side-by-side, I suspect that the processors from the Japanese manufacturers would sound so close to Emotiva as to be undetectable in the mythical "double-blind test." Which begs the question, why put up with the glitches? Now the above paragraph is pure speculation on my part, since I haven't heard any Emotiva processor in my own home other than the BASX model, that I thought was not only the bargain of the century, but sounded amazing. So if youse guys tell me that the Emotiva higher-end processors sound head and shoulders better than the available Japanese ones, then I'd certainly believe you. And that sonic superiority would be worth putting up with some glitches for. But otherwise... I would say that in a pure HT application the RMC-1 is better than my Marantz 8802A was but the difference was not overlay dramatic. In 2 channel operation though the RMC-1 is a far superior unit than my Marantz was. I totally agree that the 2 channel operation of the RMC-1 is quite superior and I use my RMC-1 in 2 channel or All Stereo mode more than anything else, so I do not experience all the glitches and nuances the others see and if they do pop up it is minor and bearable to me. Emotiva is continually fixing things, they are not going to just 'give up'. I cannot begin to imagine what it takes to make everything talk to everything. |
|
rsi77
Minor Hero
Posts: 11
|
Post by rsi77 on Feb 11, 2020 10:31:25 GMT -5
I think that with respect to the HT performance, you might be correct that it would be difficult to tell the difference in a truly blind listening test. But my interest is in a processor that can give me comparable HT sound compared to my Marantz, but gives superior 2-channel performance for my DAC. Based on what others are saying in the posts above I made the right choice when I ordered the refurbished XMC-1 on Sunday. (I lost on my Ebay bidding for a used unit which did not have the updated card).
By the way, my order shows "unfulfilled" without any ETA whatsoever--how long does it take to ship once the order is placed?
|
|
rsi77
Minor Hero
Posts: 11
|
Post by rsi77 on Feb 11, 2020 10:35:38 GMT -5
That kind of assessment seems pretty common for the XMC-1 as well, which is why I ordered one.
|
|
|
|
Post by rbk123 on Feb 11, 2020 13:19:48 GMT -5
That kind of assessment seems pretty common for the XMC-1 as well, which is why I ordered one. +1. That and the pricing is so attractive. It's why going the XMC-2 route, with either the trade in or UFL pricing - saving $2-3k over the HTP-1 (and more over others) will buy me a lot of patience with the issues. |
|
|
|
Post by jjkessler on Feb 15, 2020 12:30:20 GMT -5
I have been going back and forth on the question of what trade in to use with my XMC-1 once the software looks more stable. My choices were narrowed between the XMC-2 and RMC-1L for 7.2 home theater and stereo listening. Even though all of my amps are fully balanced XPA-1L’s I think I’ll go with the XMC-2 for the fully balanced fronts and use that cost difference between the XMC-2 and RMC-1L to upgrade my speakers from Axiom M80 V3 to a set of Tekton double impacts SE that I found used (nearly new, upgraded to the max) locally. I think the upgraded speakers outweigh having fully balanced surround channels found in the RMC-1L. Under $3,500 to upgrade the processor and primary speakers (not including selling the M80’s)
|
|
|
|
Post by rbk123 on Feb 15, 2020 20:30:43 GMT -5
I think the upgraded speakers outweigh having fully balanced surround channels found in the RMC-1L. Under $3,500 to upgrade the processor and primary speakers (not including selling the M80’s) Oh hell yeah, and then some. Please post pics of when you get your Double Impacts set up; no doubt they will be incredible. |
|
|
|
Post by donh50 on Feb 15, 2020 20:49:52 GMT -5
Well, I was gonna' suggest the XMC-1 or maybe just a stand-alone preamp, but now I know my XMC-1 is junk for my Revel Salon2's so I'll just keep quiet. All these years I've been using it and never knew, sigh.  |
|
|
|
Post by jjkessler on Feb 15, 2020 21:08:03 GMT -5
I already have an XMC-1 that has worked quite well for me, should I just keep it with the double impact and not upgrade ? I have no plans to expand beyond 7.2
|
|
|
|
Post by rbk123 on Feb 15, 2020 21:14:16 GMT -5
Get the Double Impacts now and decide later on the XMC (change one thing at a time). There is no rush as the XMC-2 will always be there, and Emo promised plenty of advance notice for when the trade-in program would end.
|
|
|
|
Post by jjkessler on Feb 15, 2020 21:26:11 GMT -5
Well, I was gonna' suggest the XMC-1 or maybe just a stand-alone preamp, but now I know my XMC-1 is junk for my Revel Salon2's so I'll just keep quiet. All these years I've been using it and never knew, sigh. Would the XMC-2 have made a dramatic difference with your Revel’s with the improved chip set and fully balanced front channels? |
|
|
|
Post by jjkessler on Feb 15, 2020 21:32:07 GMT -5
Get the Double Impacts now and decide later on the XMC (change one thing at a time). There is no rush as the XMC-2 will always be there, and Emo promised plenty of advance notice for when the trade-in program would end. Great idea and may allow me the time to save to go Full RMC-1 while they get the code stabilized, including Dirac |
|
|
|
Post by foggy1956 on Feb 16, 2020 9:06:59 GMT -5
Get the Double Impacts now and decide later on the XMC (change one thing at a time). There is no rush as the XMC-2 will always be there, and Emo promised plenty of advance notice for when the trade-in program would end. Just ordered my Double Impacts, Eric said they're about a month out. |
|
|
|
Post by donh50 on Feb 16, 2020 11:33:38 GMT -5
Well, I was gonna' suggest the XMC-1 or maybe just a stand-alone preamp, but now I know my XMC-1 is junk for my Revel Salon2's so I'll just keep quiet. All these years I've been using it and never knew, sigh. Would the XMC-2 have made a dramatic difference with your Revel’s with the improved chip set and fully balanced front channels? Not in my opinion. Of course, I do not have an XMC-2 to compare with... I was being snarky with the previous post saying the XMC-1 was not good enough for my speakers (I disagree). And the XMC-1 has balanced outputs, just not the "double balanced super deluxe dual-mono DAC" or whatever they are calling it. I discovered decades ago that most (not all!) of what I thought I heard as differences among electronics evaporated when I tested them blind. Tiny changes in placement (mine or the speakers), mood, time of day, music selection, etc. dominated the differences I was hearing the vast majority of the time. Notable exceptions were changing from tube to SS amplifiers, changing to an amplifier with lower noise floor so the hiss went away, and of course changing speakers can be dramatic. IME/IMO - Don |
|
|
|
Post by 405x5 on Feb 16, 2020 11:43:02 GMT -5
Well, I was gonna' suggest the XMC-1 or maybe just a stand-alone preamp, but now I know my XMC-1 is junk for my Revel Salon2's so I'll just keep quiet. All these years I've been using it and never knew, sigh. That XMC has one of the best and most powerful manual and system EQ on the planet....nearly forces you to get it right with any loudspeaker...….how much time did you spend in there? Might open up a whole new world for you? Bill |
|
|
|
Post by donh50 on Feb 16, 2020 16:58:55 GMT -5
Well, I was gonna' suggest the XMC-1 or maybe just a stand-alone preamp, but now I know my XMC-1 is junk for my Revel Salon2's so I'll just keep quiet. All these years I've been using it and never knew, sigh. That XMC has one of the best and most powerful manual and system EQ on the planet....nearly forces you to get it right with any loudspeaker...….how much time did you spend in there? Might open up a whole new world for you? Bill Uh, not sure what you are asking? I am happy with my system, my reply was a sarcastic response to an earlier reply saying the XMC-1 was not good enough for Revel speakers. I'm probably just deaf. The time I spent dialing it in was primarily to get the subs right; I tweaked the Dirac Live curves and phase control on my subs to get everything aligned and playing nicely. That took maybe 8-12 hours over several weeks of tweaking, measuring, and tweaking again. When I first got the XMC-1, before my current set of speakers, I went back and forth among stereo, mono, and dual-mono sub settings, finally settling on dual-mono. Almost nothing I have has stereo bass below the sub crossover (60-80 Hz, it has varied) and trying to dial in a stereo setup was a nightmare. That was mainly to affirm the testing I did decades ago that convinced me stereo subwoofers were not needed even though I ran them that way for years. I did not play with the XMC-1's PEQ except to verify it was working. My room is a bit challenging so I wanted Dirac Live. My previous AVR was a Pioneer and I had manually dialed in MCCAC. Dirac Live was comparable to my ears in most ways but much more flexible. Edit -- the post I was referring to is below; I thought the XMC-1 did OK with my speakers (Revel Salon2/Voice2 and before that Magnepan MG-IIIa/MC-1/CC3). As I said, I have not heard the XMC-2, but if channel count is not an issue I cannot imagine it being significantly better than the XMC-1. I would definitely not buy the XMC1 unless you have average speakers. Either the XMC2 or RMC1L. |
|
|
|
Post by 405x5 on Feb 16, 2020 17:14:04 GMT -5
That XMC has one of the best and most powerful manual and system EQ on the planet....nearly forces you to get it right with any loudspeaker...….how much time did you spend in there? Might open up a whole new world for you? Bill Uh, not sure what you are asking? I am happy with my system, my reply was a sarcastic response to an earlier reply saying the XMC-1 was not good enough for Revel speakers. I'm probably just deaf. The time I spent dialing it in was primarily to get the subs right; I tweaked the Dirac Live curves and phase control on my subs to get everything aligned and playing nicely. That took maybe 8-12 hours over several weeks of tweaking, measuring, and tweaking again. When I first got the XMC-1, before my current set of speakers, I went back and forth among stereo, mono, and dual-mono sub settings, finally settling on dual-mono. Almost nothing I have has stereo bass below the sub crossover (60-80 Hz, it has varied) and trying to dial in a stereo setup was a nightmare. That was mainly to affirm the testing I did decades ago that convinced me stereo subwoofers were not needed even though I ran them that way for years. I did not play with the XMC-1's PEQ except to verify it was working. My room is a bit challenging so I wanted Dirac Live. My previous AVR was a Pioneer and I had manually dialed in MCCAC. Dirac Live was comparable to my ears in most ways but much more flexible. Edit -- the post I was referring to is below; I thought the XMC-1 did OK with my speakers (Revel Salon2/Voice2) and before that Magnepan MG-IIIa/MC-1/CC3). As I said, I have not heard the XMC-2, but if channel count is not an issue I cannot imagine it being significantly better than the XMC-1. I would definitely not buy the XMC1 unless you have average speakers. Either the XMC2 or RMC1L. Understood.....your sarcasm eluded me! (Sorry) I had poked some fun at “average speakers” also, as you may have read! Bill |
|
