Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Mar 18, 2021 15:34:38 GMT -5
Audio Science Review while testing the XMC-1: "Conclusions: I had high hopes for Emotiva XMC-1 seeing how it is one of few home theater products with specifications. Alas, I was not able to meet those specs even though the measurements it did produce, put it high in the home theater department. The worst failing was the linearity test showing that there is some serious signal processing error inside this unit, muting the output below -90 dB. Was this put in there to improve specs? Or downright bug and lack of testing to find the same? Even without that problem, we still can't match performance of a $99 desktop DAC even though we paid $2,500. Yes, we got more channels than 2 and have room EQ but still, I want my good performance damn it! The XMC-2 has no specifications but I have read that they plan to release Audio Precision test results. Let's keep our fingers crossed that they deliver there." - www.audiosciencereview.com/forum/index.php?threads/review-and-measurements-of-emotiva-xmc-1-gen-2-pre-pro.9225/Hope the Emotiva XMC-2 is better. There's a whole chart done by ASR in which the XMC-1 couldn't even compete w/ 99 dollar DACs. The yellow is where Emotiva's XMC-1 ranks at the date of testing:  As far as accurate - in the article by ASR it was suggested that Emotiva was supposed to release certain specs. Did that ever come through into fruition? I'm not in the market for another DAC at the moment but if I should go to multi channel surround of course I'd look at whatever Emotiva has out there on the shelves. In the meanwhile the SMSL M400 DAC ties w/ first on latest chart:  Again with ASR....here we go......face palm! Be nice if manufacturers released measurements and specs. I mean ya'd think that in some point of R&D such were done and only need be made published. I remember buying amps long ago where measurements and actual specifications for each unit were included. A publication then tries to test and replicate the claims of a manufacturer only verifies the results rather than having to prove what snake oil salesman claim. Just my opinion. |
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Mar 18, 2021 15:38:44 GMT -5
Per @keithl : "To be quite honest I have never heard another DAC or preamp at any price that I would say sounds more accurate than the DACs in the XMC-2." Maybe a hearing test is in order?.........Or simply that measurements aren't everything? Hmmmmm. I say just listen.... Makes me want to ask what or who is the "reference" for most "neutral and accurate" gear? If Emotiva products are made the reference - that is, the standard for neutral and accurate, then everything must compare to Emotiva's standard as the reference. Perhaps that why Emotiva placed right around the middle of the chart  Though I do not think that's what ASR had in mind w/ its chart. |
|
|
|
Post by jasonf on Mar 18, 2021 15:55:43 GMT -5
Makes me want to ask what or who is the "reference" for most "neutral and accurate" gear? If Emotiva products are made the reference - that is, the standard for neutral and accurate, then everything must compare to Emotiva's standard as the reference. Perhaps that why Emotiva placed right around the middle of the chart Though I do not think that's what ASR had in mind w/ its chart. ASR already did a review -- two of them actually -- of the RMC-1, as of the second test it scores in the "green" band there. I believe Amir said that it set a benchmark for the most accurate HT processor he has tested to date. He also said that with Dirac it would likely beat any DAC in your room. It's also been stated that these high SINAD values only matter if you're listening to very high bitrate material on equipment with a very low noise floor. Still, his general advice to audiophiles is to spend their money on a dedicated 2-channel DAC and go with a less expensive processor. However, I've done the DAC juggle and have actually listened to the Topping D90, RDM ADI-2, (ERC-4) in my setup... I just actually like the RMC-1 better, plus it works better in my home theater setup (Emotiva... fix CEC please), and I can run it with Dirac when I want (spoiler, I still prefer Reference Stereo). I think Amir is doing a good job publishing these specs, and I think the data and science behind this matters. However, I don't think it tells the whole story, and it certainly doesn't take into account the realities of Home Theater vs dedicated 2-channel setups. ==== As an aside, I think there are a lot of people like me that listen to music the most, but also enjoy 5.1 home theater, and want the best of all worlds in a convenient package for their home/apartment. I'd be all in on a processor that had way fewer channels and less functionality if I could get top-tier DACs and audio components and just enough to do basic home theater. It would be fine two if this was two half-height units with HT passthrough. All digital "XSP-2" + "MC-700 v2" anyone? I'd just assume get rid of the analog volume stage and move to pure digital volume control on a 32-bit DAC at this point. |
|
richb
Sensei
Oppo Beta Group - Audioholics Reviewer
Posts: 890
|
Post by richb on Mar 18, 2021 16:39:15 GMT -5
Per @keithl : "To be quite honest I have never heard another DAC or preamp at any price that I would say sounds more accurate than the DACs in the XMC-2." Maybe a hearing test is in order?.........Or simply that measurements aren't everything? Hmmmmm. I say just listen.... Makes me want to ask what or who is the "reference" for most "neutral and accurate" gear? If Emotiva products are made the reference - that is, the standard for neutral and accurate, then everything must compare to Emotiva's standard as the reference. Perhaps that why Emotiva placed right around the middle of the chart Though I do not think that's what ASR had in mind w/ its chart. I have compared the RMC-1 XLR in (Reference Stereo) to the Benchmark LA4 both driven by the Oppo UDP-205 DAC (USB IN). When level matched, I may here a slight difference at some levels with fast switching. The LA4 is SOA and the difference might just be slightly different levels at .5 dB increments. I do use the LA4 for the cleanest possible path, clearly an emotional decision. - Rich |
|
timg
Minor Hero
Posts: 71
|
Post by timg on Mar 18, 2021 17:04:29 GMT -5
I'd love to see an XMC-2 go through ASR testing. If it performed well, it could be the value-leader and performance leader for 16 channel processors and might reset the benchmark. I think the real key will be stability. This is one of the major reasons the RMC-1 got dinged so hard.
|
|
richb
Sensei
Oppo Beta Group - Audioholics Reviewer
Posts: 890
|
Post by richb on Mar 18, 2021 17:27:48 GMT -5
|
|
|
|
Post by rbk123 on Mar 18, 2021 17:43:46 GMT -5
Ugh. Just say no to ASR. A whole website of anti-audiobills: they measure, they don't listen.
|
|
|
|
Post by audiobill on Mar 18, 2021 17:50:14 GMT -5
It seems that people sell equipment because it didn’t sound good, not because of measurements. Not at all the same thing in so many cases.
And as for “sounding accurate”, who knows what that means except @keithl ?
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Mar 18, 2021 18:49:37 GMT -5
It seems that people sell equipment because it didn’t sound good, not because of measurements. Not at all the same thing in so many cases. And as for “sounding accurate”, who knows what that means except @keithl ? Well of course less than ideal sounding gear needs a salesman. Perfect gear only needs a demo and not some narrative to alter a person's perception while they're listening. In all seriousness ever demo anything and the whole time the salesman mutes, yapping, mute, yapping, mute, yapping. I mean for the love of Pete just let the gear sell itself. |
|
|
|
Post by jasonf on Mar 18, 2021 18:51:29 GMT -5
Ugh. Just say no to ASR. A whole website of anti-audiobills: they measure, they don't listen. This is way off-topic, but I don't think it's fair at all to generalize an entire website full of people. A lot of people on ASR give subjective impressions of the equipment measured, including Amir. They are also providing very useful measurements. Nobody on ASR has ever said you shouldn't listen to equipment and pick what you like. |
|
|
|
Post by audiobill on Mar 18, 2021 18:51:42 GMT -5
Problem is, mail order houses can only sell measurements, not sonics. Not the same thing to all.
|
|
Lsc
Emo VIPs 
Posts: 3,435
|
Post by Lsc on Mar 18, 2021 20:26:28 GMT -5
I'd love to see an XMC-2 go through ASR testing. If it performed well, it could be the value-leader and performance leader for 16 channel processors and might reset the benchmark. I think the real key will be stability. This is one of the major reasons the RMC-1 got dinged so hard. I offered to send my XMC2 to Amir. This was a few days ago and he said hit him up in a month because he is swamped. Maybe it was because I asked him to test the center and one surround speaker. He gets a 16 channel processor and tests the L/R channel only. What is this? And the reasoning is that it takes too long to measure more than 2 channels. Then Anthem pretty much stiffs him saying that they won’t be offering ASR a review sample of the AVM70 because they have long standing relationships with other reviewers and what happens? He reviewed the AVM60 and gave a scathing review. Coincidence? I think not. |
|
|
|
Post by rbk123 on Mar 18, 2021 20:27:18 GMT -5
Ugh. Just say no to ASR. A whole website of anti-audiobills: they measure, they don't listen. This is way off-topic, but I don't think it's fair at all to generalize an entire website full of people. A lot of people on ASR give subjective impressions of the equipment measured, including Amir. They are also providing very useful measurements. Nobody on ASR has ever said you shouldn't listen to equipment and pick what you like. I think it's a perfectly fair generalization. Especially when it comes to Amir. |
|
|
|
Post by kanichkhun on Mar 18, 2021 20:28:04 GMT -5
hi guys, thanks for getting back! the speakers are wired correctly and I received my rmc1, it wasn't delivered with the pi so dirac was no go.
I set vol manually and back then without dirac, it was amazing, ref. stereo was amazing as well, I got the punchness, dynamics, the highs.
I played Vogue before, it was playing perfectly correct, the phase was correct.
so now that I've it, so far i've set the filters twice and the ref. stereo does sound differently. after applying filters, I would reset the processor and see if it loads up the filters properly and 1st time playing ref. stereo, it sounded like i said, flat lifeless crap.
2nd time I re-adjust the curve, now the high isn't compressed but bass still flat. so yesterday I decided to stay longer and test my first track, Vogue.
I was shocked that the phase wasn't correct this time. I just stopped listen after that.
I know, I know, ref. stereo is supposed as keith said, pure.. but why do I get different result each time from the filter upload and the phase isn't correct with dirac enabled.
my next test is to switch to preset 2. non-dirac and test again, will report again.
|
|
timg
Minor Hero
Posts: 71
|
Post by timg on Mar 18, 2021 20:39:58 GMT -5
That was my RMC-1. I sent it in hoping that it might dominate their ratings. Unfortunately, that's not quite what happened. Fortunately, Amir did find a bug in the code that Emotiva was able to address. Amir almost didn't finish testing with the first firmware because it kept locking up. Then, it got a beta version that was stable enough to allow testing to complete, and then later it got 1.9 which fixed the upmixer bug. I'd hope that with all of the de-bugging that's happened since then, that the XMC-2 would be able to do a bit better than a headless panther given greater stability, Dirac now being functional, 40% lower price than the RMC-1, and nearly identical performance. It would be nice to see a 16 channel processor that kept the head on the panther... I'm not sure I could honestly recommend the RMC-1 to anyone today given the lack of expansion modules, but the XMC-2 seems to be in a very sweet spot for price/performance. |
|
|
|
Post by rbk123 on Mar 18, 2021 20:55:32 GMT -5
Amir did find a bug in the code that Emotiva was able to address. And let's just be clear what happened around that "bug" he found. First off, he made a ginormous stink about it; stated emphatically that it was due to poor hardware design; stated emphatically it could NOT be fixed by a firmware release because it was clearly poor hardware design, and that companies like Emo need to consult him when they're in design mode so he can fix their buffoonery. Then 3 things happened: 1. Emo found the bug and fixed it with firmware 2. Amir confirmed it was fixed with firmware, and never said a single word retracting or admitting his complete error in his prior bold claims. Typical coward - loves to point out other's mistakes but never owns up to his own. However, he's an ex-Exec, and that's the Executive way - never admit to being wrong. 3. No one could hear a difference after the bug was applied. So much for that ginormous stink he made. |
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Mar 18, 2021 21:43:52 GMT -5
I'd love to see an XMC-2 go through ASR testing. If it performed well, it could be the value-leader and performance leader for 16 channel processors and might reset the benchmark. I think the real key will be stability. This is one of the major reasons the RMC-1 got dinged so hard. I offered to send my XMC2 to Amir. This was a few days ago and he said hit him up in a month because he is swamped. Maybe it was because I asked him to test the center and one surround speaker. He gets a 16 channel processor and tests the L/R channel only. What is this? And the reasoning is that it takes too long to measure more than 2 channels. Then Anthem pretty much stiffs him saying that they won’t be offering ASR a review sample of the AVM70 because they have long standing relationships with other reviewers and what happens? He reviewed the AVM60 and gave a scathing review. Coincidence? I think not. Just stating the obvious. The scientific method is observation, testability, and repeatability. If ASR's or a manufacturer spec or measurement can't be tested and repeated then what good is the notion of scientific? I'd think if a manufacturer gives a specification the first questions should be the method in which was used to derive at the spec. I bring this up because it should be easy for those that measure to verify Amir's scathing review of the Anthem AVM60... |
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Mar 18, 2021 21:52:52 GMT -5
Problem is, mail order houses can only sell measurements, not sonics. Not the same thing to all. Long demo/trial periods are rather common now-a-days for online sale merchants. From a sales perspective I like that. I mean how many people waste salesman time by windowing shopping w/ no cash? At least if someone is serious and you're offering a full blown money back guarantee to trial gear there's nothing really to lose. Nothing beats demoing equipment w/ the rest of your gear in your own listening room. |
|
|
|
Post by jasonf on Mar 18, 2021 23:03:48 GMT -5
I think it's a perfectly fair generalization. Especially when it comes to Amir. You're entitled to your opinion, but someone on the internet providing testing data seems like a weird thing to get up in arms about. Anyone else can provide their own data. --- For what it's worth, the only reason I don't own a McIntosh MX100 over an RMC-1L is that McIntosh doesn't provide any data on anything. I'm pretty sure the McIntosh is the better device when it comes to reliability, CEC, etc. Emo gives me more specs, transparency, and data... so I'm in. |
|
richb
Sensei
Oppo Beta Group - Audioholics Reviewer
Posts: 890
|
Post by richb on Mar 19, 2021 7:30:01 GMT -5
That was my RMC-1. I sent it in hoping that it might dominate their ratings. Unfortunately, that's not quite what happened. Fortunately, Amir did find a bug in the code that Emotiva was able to address. Amir almost didn't finish testing with the first firmware because it kept locking up. Then, it got a beta version that was stable enough to allow testing to complete, and then later it got 1.9 which fixed the upmixer bug. I'd hope that with all of the de-bugging that's happened since then, that the XMC-2 would be able to do a bit better than a headless panther given greater stability, Dirac now being functional, 40% lower price than the RMC-1, and nearly identical performance. It would be nice to see a 16 channel processor that kept the head on the panther... I'm not sure I could honestly recommend the RMC-1 to anyone today given the lack of expansion modules, but the XMC-2 seems to be in a very sweet spot for price/performance. I asked Amir about restoring the head and his position is that he could not do that until the unit had Dirac since it was a missing key feature. This requires an update to the review and at this point Emotiva is in the driver's seat. Perhaps, they think the risk is greater than the reward but I don't think so. Rather the berating Amir, I suggest sending ASR another unit and retest with Dirac enabled. From my observations, Dirac has had many releases and there have been issues that don't seem to be related the RMC-1(L)/XMC-2. - Rich |
|
