|
|
Post by hsamwel on Sept 26, 2021 17:15:00 GMT -5
Watch the XMC-2 vs Anthem AVM70 comparison by Spec Of Tech on Youtube. Not as positive for Emotiva, even though sound quality is great. I agree fully regarding UI comments by him. Even though I haven’t had the issues he had I have others with 2.3. youtu.be/Fd3dQjBFC4gWhen reading comments below it’s not good PR for Emotiva. IMO I think the UI designers at Emotiva underestimate the importance of a good and smooth UI. Major bugs stopping actual usage are of course even worse. Here Emotiva aren’t alone though. But the difference being time to get these bugs fixed. Actually anything regarding coding the processors take like forever. After three (almost) years it feels like they are still working on the basics… Here in Sweden we will have a review of the RMC-1 for the first time in the next issue of ”Hemmabiotidningen” (Home Theater Paper). Will be a truly interesting read when they compare it to Marantz, Yamaha and the likes.. Not having tried the Anthem, but for the XMC-2 coverage the review seems pretty accurate. Once you have gone through all the setup and it’s working with a given set of components, it works pretty well. The reviewers perspectives seem accurate on UI, bugs, cumbersome setup and state of product after being in production for a few years. Any differences in sound between the two brands are likely to be inaudible with the exception of the current elevated base management issue in the XMC-2. I don’t care that there is not auto firmware update over internet. After some months I have found a config at my home that is finally working reliably, and I’m enjoying my system and I’m not inclined to make any changes including firmware upgrades until others have blazed the path and the dust has settled. The things is.. We are ”home blind” as we say in Sweden.. We are simply used to how it works.. When I got my RMC-1 I was pretty chocked how slow everything was. Also how simple it looked with no graphics at all. Coming from a faster, good looking and well layed out UI to Emotivas blast from the ’90s is.. Well, a little daunting at first. Especially for the less technical persons, I would think. IMO adding a web based setup to complement the OSD setup would be great for Emotiva. |
|
|
|
Post by The Praetorian on Sept 27, 2021 0:43:37 GMT -5
Does anyone know how to make adjusting the volume using the Apple TV remote work?
|
|
|
|
Post by ElectricKoolAid on Sept 27, 2021 8:25:08 GMT -5
Watch the XMC-2 vs Anthem AVM70 comparison by Spec Of Tech on Youtube. Not as positive for Emotiva, even though sound quality is great. I agree fully regarding UI comments by him. Even though I haven’t had the issues he had I have others with 2.3. youtu.be/Fd3dQjBFC4gWhen reading comments below it’s not good PR for Emotiva. IMO I think the UI designers at Emotiva underestimate the importance of a good and smooth UI. Major bugs stopping actual usage are of course even worse. Here Emotiva aren’t alone though. But the difference being time to get these bugs fixed. Actually anything regarding coding the processors take like forever. After three (almost) years it feels like they are still working on the basics… Here in Sweden we will have a review of the RMC-1 for the first time in the next issue of ”Hemmabiotidningen” (Home Theater Paper). Will be a truly interesting read when they compare it to Marantz, Yamaha and the likes.. I saw that video the other day and commented on it letting him know the reason why the bass sounded louder on the XMC-2 than the Anthem was most likely due to the bass management bug and he liked the comment so I think he is now aware of that. Totally agree with his review of the unit and have faced some of the same issues. I also agree with the posts here about the UI and having a web interface. It seems to me since the phone app works with the processor that there is an API in place already that could be used for the web UI, or at least I assume it would work. While I would still love to have the on screen volume display I'd happily use the web UI for any other changes, especially if it would be faster and more responsive than the OSD. |
|
richb
Sensei
Oppo Beta Group - Audioholics Reviewer
Posts: 890
|
Post by richb on Sept 27, 2021 9:06:22 GMT -5
Does anyone know how to make adjusting the volume using the Apple TV remote work? I have done it for my RMC-1. Settings | Remotes and Devices | Learn Remote Then, follow instructions. - Rich |
|
|
|
Post by benjam on Sept 28, 2021 8:36:36 GMT -5
Are there any news about the DTS-X Pro Update or Web UI?
Thanks in advance 😊
|
|
|
|
Post by doc1963 on Sept 28, 2021 10:51:39 GMT -5
Are there any news about the DTS-X Pro Update or Web UI? Thanks in advance 😊 Nothing new on the DTS:X Pro update and there never was a Web UI in the works (just a discussion). |
|
|
|
Post by jbrunwa on Sept 28, 2021 11:46:51 GMT -5
So DTS:X handles up to 12 channels. Can someone explain is there any benefit at all to DTS:X:Pro to the vast majority of users with 5.1, 7.1, 5.1.4 and 7.1.4 systems, what content uses it, why XMC-2 and RMC-1 owners should care, and why Emotiva should invest in it?
|
|
|
|
Post by doc1963 on Sept 28, 2021 12:33:59 GMT -5
So DTS:X handles up to 12 channels. Can someone explain is there any benefit at all to DTS:X:Pro to the vast majority of users with 5.1, 7.1, 5.1.4 and 7.1.4 systems, what content uses it, why XMC-2 and RMC-1 owners should care, and why Emotiva should invest in it? It's not so much about the channels one has, but rather the increased amount of objects handled and how they're rendered into your available channels. Even if you're not surpassing the current 11.1 channel limit of the current DTS:X/Neural X software, Pro still does a better job. Trinnov explains it pretty well HERE |
|
|
|
Post by jbrunwa on Sept 28, 2021 13:29:44 GMT -5
So DTS:X handles up to 12 channels. Can someone explain is there any benefit at all to DTS:X:Pro to the vast majority of users with 5.1, 7.1, 5.1.4 and 7.1.4 systems, what content uses it, why XMC-2 and RMC-1 owners should care, and why Emotiva should invest in it? It's not so much about the channels one has, but rather the increased amount of objects handled and how they're rendered into your available channels. Even if you're not surpassing the current 11.1 channel limit of the current DTS:X/Neural X software, Pro still does a better job. Trinnov explains it pretty well HEREIf it’s anything like Atmos, the available content doesn’t seem to me to hardly ever use even 12 objects, so I don’t care if Emotiva ever supports it. Let’s wait until there is adequate content available that uses it. I’d rather have flawless rendering of existing codecs with no snaps, input switching that worked without fiddling. Before supporting more sound objects, I’d rather have the ability to tell the AVR where my speakers are and have it adjust for actual speaker location like Trinnov. Then and only then worry about more objects and only when there’s enough content that will actually use it. Until then it’s a complete waste of engineering dollars IMO. And all of that can wait until a manufacturer can implement development process and QA to deliver a predictable periodic release schedule. |
|
|
|
Post by The Praetorian on Sept 28, 2021 13:40:05 GMT -5
Does anyone know how to make adjusting the volume using the Apple TV remote work? I have done it for my RMC-1. Settings | Remotes and Devices | Learn Remote Then, follow instructions. - Rich For some reason it seems that I can only get it to work with infrared, which unfortunately is not an option for me as the RMC-1 is behind a windowless door. That’s why the Apple TV remote is so great as it works through bluetooth. I use a projector (JVC N5) and my only sources are ATV4K and PS5. With my old Onkyo AVR after the initial setup I never needed any other remote than the Apple TV when both volume control and input switching worked flawlessly through CEC. In the RMC-1 CEC settings there is an option for volume control (which I have enabled) but that doesn’t seem to make any difference. I realize that using CEC can be an adventure with certain device combinations but can it really be so that it doesn’t work with one of the moat common streaming devices on the planet? |
|
|
|
Post by jbrunwa on Sept 28, 2021 14:51:08 GMT -5
I have done it for my RMC-1. Settings | Remotes and Devices | Learn Remote Then, follow instructions. - Rich For some reason it seems that I can only get it to work with infrared, which unfortunately is not an option for me as the RMC-1 is behind a windowless door. That’s why the Apple TV remote is so great as it works through bluetooth. I use a projector (JVC N5) and my only sources are ATV4K and PS5. With my old Onkyo AVR after the initial setup I never needed any other remote than the Apple TV when both volume control and input switching worked flawlessly through CEC. In the RMC-1 CEC settings there is an option for volume control (which I have enabled) but that doesn’t seem to make any difference. I realize that using CEC can be an adventure with certain device combinations but can it really be so that it doesn’t work with one of the moat common streaming devices on the planet? What about running an IR cable to RMC-1 IR input |
|
|
|
Post by AudioHTIT on Sept 28, 2021 15:18:12 GMT -5
It's not so much about the channels one has, but rather the increased amount of objects handled and how they're rendered into your available channels. Even if you're not surpassing the current 11.1 channel limit of the current DTS:X/Neural X software, Pro still does a better job. Trinnov explains it pretty well HEREIf it’s anything like Atmos, the available content doesn’t seem to me to hardly ever use even 12 objects, so I don’t care if Emotiva ever supports it. Let’s wait until there is adequate content available that uses it. I’d rather have flawless rendering of existing codecs with no snaps, input switching that worked without fiddling. Before supporting more sound objects, I’d rather have the ability to tell the AVR where my speakers are and have it adjust for actual speaker location like Trinnov. Then and only then worry about more objects and only when there’s enough content that will actually use it. Until then it’s a complete waste of engineering dollars IMO. And all of that can wait until a manufacturer can implement development process and QA to deliver a predictable periodic release schedule. My alternate take would be that DTS:X Pro should be considered the current standard and the one to support moving forward. As Emotiva is also working on the Dolby code that supports more channels, which also allows them to deliver addition channels via the expansion modules for the RMC-1, they should also work on the DTS code. I agree they need to fix existing problems, and probably prioritize them, but to stop developing current codecs is not what I’d like to see. |
|
|
|
Post by JKCashin on Sept 28, 2021 16:01:21 GMT -5
I also agree with the posts here about the UI and having a web interface. It seems to me since the phone app works with the processor that there is an API in place already that could be used for the web UI, or at least I assume it would work. While I would still love to have the on screen volume display I'd happily use the web UI for any other changes, especially if it would be faster and more responsive than the OSD. I have said it before, and I will say it again. It would be reasonably easy for someone to use the backup/restore settings feature to write a settings editor. In fact, someone with Qt experience and Python experience could pull it off pretty quickly. It would NOT be real-time but it would be a UI and FAST.. And it would work for XMC-1 as well as the new generation. Here's how it would work: Gather settings - Insert a USB drive into processor.
- Back up settings to USB drive
- Remove USB drive and insert into PC/Mac
- Start "the app"
- Use the "Import settings" tool of the app to import the settings
- Let the user save the settings to a named file on their local storage. We would call these files "profiles". This would be the "Save profile" tool. Profiles would include metadata such as comments, date extracted, etc.
Modifying settings
- Start "the app"
- User uses the "load profile" tool to select a previously saved profile.
- User can then see and modify the settings from the loaded profile. This would be a graphical interface, allowing sliders, toggles, drop-down controls, and any other control as appropriate.
- User would then use the "Save profile" tool again to save their changes.
- User would be able to insert a USB drive and use the "Export settings" tool to write the settings to the USB drive.
Apply settings
- Use would take the USB stick they exported the settings to and insert it into the processor.
- The user would use the "restore backup" menu to write the settings.
Since the settings files are XML, handling the data would be easy using any of the freely available XML parsers. Python would be able to handle this easily. The Profile files would basically be nothing more than a file containing the settings XML file, plus a bunch of metadata for stuff we would like to add. It could use JSON or XML. This could become very very powerful if we extended the meta-data to allow for storing of more than just two sets of speaker settings in a profile. Imagine if you had a master profile that has an unlimited set of speaker settings, where you could copy a speaker setting group, give it a new name, and even drag-drop values or groups between speaker profiles. Then when you decide you want to use your speaker profiles for your Maggies, you select the two named profiles when you do your export and the resulting file would contain just the two speaker settings groups you had selected. Changes to the way things are expressed in the XML could easily be managed using a profile schema, which would allow for converting profiles to support not only different firmware versions, but also different processors... so you could take your friends RMC-1L profile and use it on your XMC-1. Yes, really. I wouild do this myself, but right now I don't have access to my XMC-2 to generate a file to start prototyping this and I won't have access to it for some time (it's in storage due to renovation.) I think Emotiva should take this on themselves, as I think even though it would be an offline-tool, it would still be useful to many. Emotiva could even add the ability to transfer the backup file over the network, and you wouldn't even need the USB drive. This capability might already exist, though even if it did not one could use the remote API to auto-generate a settings file (menu "scraping") though I would need to double check to see if the XML file contains any data that is not available through the menu. Eventually it could be hybridized to allow importing of the XML file as a starting point, and then use the remote API to do live updating, mirroring the changes to the XML file in the background, so you could easily save your progress. If Emotiva allowed writing of groups of data by just extending the restore API, it could even allow for near real-time updating of portions of the settings without having to suffer the lag of the remote API, while at the same time removing the need for a restart of the processor to apply (some) changes. Everything needed to do this, at least for the non-real time design mentioned above, is already available! The ability to save settings to a well understood file format (XML) already exists. in the form of "backup settings to USB". The ability to update settings by using one of these files already exists in the form of "restore settings from USB". This could be written as a platform agnostic PWA (progressive web application) and would therefore work on Windows, Mac, Linux, ChromeOs, and even some tablets! This is something a third year computer science student could prototype in a few months.... someone needs to take this on. It could be done collaboratively by forum members using a gitlab repository. Someone please, for the love of all that is holy, steal my idea. Productize it if you want (but mention me in your memoirs, and remember there's more than just Windows 10 out there.) But please... someone do this!!!! Update: riverbankcomputing.com/software/pyqt/intro would be fun! I might be willing to do the UI side using it if someone else wants to take on the Python side. |
|
|
|
Post by jbrunwa on Sept 28, 2021 16:53:55 GMT -5
If it’s anything like Atmos, the available content doesn’t seem to me to hardly ever use even 12 objects, so I don’t care if Emotiva ever supports it. Let’s wait until there is adequate content available that uses it. I’d rather have flawless rendering of existing codecs with no snaps, input switching that worked without fiddling. Before supporting more sound objects, I’d rather have the ability to tell the AVR where my speakers are and have it adjust for actual speaker location like Trinnov. Then and only then worry about more objects and only when there’s enough content that will actually use it. Until then it’s a complete waste of engineering dollars IMO. And all of that can wait until a manufacturer can implement development process and QA to deliver a predictable periodic release schedule. My alternate take would be that DTS:X Pro should be considered the current standard and the one to support moving forward. As Emotiva is also working on the Dolby code that supports more channels, and allows them to deliver addition channels via the expansion modules for the RMC-1, they should also work on the DTS code. I agree they need to fix existing problems, and probably prioritize them, but to stop developing current codecs is not what I’d like to see. Where can we find a list of home movie content that is available in DTS:X:Pro? |
|
|
|
Post by bitzerjdb on Sept 28, 2021 17:30:29 GMT -5
My alternate take would be that DTS:X Pro should be considered the current standard and the one to support moving forward. As Emotiva is also working on the Dolby code that supports more channels, and allows them to deliver addition channels via the expansion modules for the RMC-1, they should also work on the DTS code. I agree they need to fix existing problems, and probably prioritize them, but to stop developing current codecs is not what I’d like to see. Where can we find a list of home movie content that is available in DTS:X:Pro? |
|
|
|
Post by doc1963 on Sept 28, 2021 17:32:42 GMT -5
My alternate take would be that DTS:X Pro should be considered the current standard and the one to support moving forward. As Emotiva is also working on the Dolby code that supports more channels, and allows them to deliver addition channels via the expansion modules for the RMC-1, they should also work on the DTS code. I agree they need to fix existing problems, and probably prioritize them, but to stop developing current codecs is not what I’d like to see. Where can we find a list of home movie content that is available in DTS:X:Pro? DTS:X “Pro” isn’t a new format. Any current title that’s encoded in DTS:X can take full advantage of what “Pro” brings to the table. In fact, once Emotiva gets around to lifting the restrictions that Dolby themselves lifted a year ago, you could also use DTS:X Pro on Atmos encodes (using the 7.1 TrueHD core with Neural:X upmixing). Native content aside, Neural:X is an excellent upmixer (even better in “Pro”) and, IMO, is much better than DSU. Those of us here in the States have frowned upon Auro due to the lack of “native” content here while, the whole time, missing out on its best asset… the AuroMatic upmixer. From my own personal experience (and in my own room), AuroMatic bests both DTS Neural:X (marginally) and DSU (easily). I think what you’re missing here is that “Pro” is literally what its name implies… the Professional (theatrical) version of the DTS:X software finally being brought into your home environment. EDIT: Bolded statement above added for clarity. |
|
|
|
Post by jbrunwa on Sept 28, 2021 17:52:16 GMT -5
Where can we find a list of home movie content that is available in DTS:X:Pro? DTS:X “Pro” isn’t a new format. Any current title that’s encoded in DTS:X can take full advantage of what “Pro” brings to the table. In fact, once Emotiva gets around to lifting the restrictions that Dolby themselves lifted a year ago, you could also use DTS:X Pro on Atmos encodes. Native content aside, Neural:X is an excellent upmixer (even better in “Pro”) and, IMO, is much better than DSU. Those of us here in the States frown upon Auro due to the lack of “native” content while the whole time missing out on its best asset… the AuroMatic upmixer. From my own personal experience (and in my room), AuroMatic easily bests both DTS Neural:X (marginally) and DSU (easily). I think what you’re missing here is that “Pro” is literally what its name implies… the Professional (theatrical) version of the DTS:X software finally brought into your home environment. OK, maybe it’s because I don’t use upmixer. We can already play all the movies in the DTS:X format that they were made in. I prefer to hear the content as intended. And there virtually is no native content.DTS:X:Pro. Even with Atmos movies it’s mostly ambiance or music, or an occasional helicopter. I remain unimpressed. I will give Trinnov a nod only because it knows exactly where all your speakers are, even if they are in non-optimal locations, which is for many people the case. Other than that I will keep listening to content in native audio format, and will stop trying to understand why people want this. |
|
|
|
Post by krobar on Sept 29, 2021 3:21:24 GMT -5
My alternate take would be that DTS:X Pro should be considered the current standard and the one to support moving forward. As Emotiva is also working on the Dolby code that supports more channels, and allows them to deliver addition channels via the expansion modules for the RMC-1, they should also work on the DTS code. I agree they need to fix existing problems, and probably prioritize them, but to stop developing current codecs is not what I’d like to see. Where can we find a list of home movie content that is available in DTS:X:Pro? There isn't one as there is no such thing as DTS:X Pro content. Receivers/Prepros with DTS:X are limited to 12 channels (eg. 7.1.4) but DTS:X Pro Receivers/Prepros support between 14 and 32 channels. DTS:X content supports up to 15 Channels/Objects and 2 Subwoofers. DTS:X Pro can upmix channel based content to additional speakers. Objects can move between multiple speakers but if they are mixed in a static position this can be problematic as they cannot be upmixed. Object based DTS:X content is rare. Most DTS:X content (eg. Most Universal releases) is channel based 7.1.4 which DTS:X Pro can upmix further. Some of the WellGo USA releases were a mix of channels and objects. Most Imax Enhanced releases are 7.1.4 plus a single static object a little below the centre height position. |
|
|
|
Post by doc1963 on Sept 29, 2021 9:33:26 GMT -5
DTS:X “Pro” isn’t a new format. Any current title that’s encoded in DTS:X can take full advantage of what “Pro” brings to the table. In fact, once Emotiva gets around to lifting the restrictions that Dolby themselves lifted a year ago, you could also use DTS:X Pro on Atmos encodes. Native content aside, Neural:X is an excellent upmixer (even better in “Pro”) and, IMO, is much better than DSU. Those of us here in the States frown upon Auro due to the lack of “native” content while the whole time missing out on its best asset… the AuroMatic upmixer. From my own personal experience (and in my room), AuroMatic easily bests both DTS Neural:X (marginally) and DSU (easily). I think what you’re missing here is that “Pro” is literally what its name implies… the Professional (theatrical) version of the DTS:X software finally brought into your home environment. OK, maybe it’s because I don’t use upmixer. We can already play all the movies in the DTS:X format that they were made in. I prefer to hear the content as intended. And there virtually is no native content.DTS:X:Pro. Even with Atmos movies it’s mostly ambiance or music, or an occasional helicopter. I remain unimpressed. I will give Trinnov a nod only because it knows exactly where all your speakers are, even if they are in non-optimal locations, which is for many people the case. Other than that I will keep listening to content in native audio format, and will stop trying to understand why people want this.I agree with you that I would "prefer" to listen to the soundtrack as it was intended, but if by simply using a different (and maybe better) upmixer provides a more convincing in-home experience, that's the route I'm taking. You've said yourself that many of the current Atmos mixes are uninspiring (and I also agree), so why not try a different approach? Until Emotiva fixes the now defunct Dolby restrictions, it will take a minor workaround, but it can be done quite easily. As for the statement that I bolded above, it isn't really that difficult to understand. Emotiva already has a DTS:X license and DTS will be providing "updated" software for them to deploy. In a similar vein, Dolby will also be releasing a new version of DSU this fall which contains improvement updates along with a bug fix for their well known "center channel bleed" issue. Emotiva will get that update too. Neither of these updates should cost Emotiva anything above the time invested into rewriting the code. So, the bigger question should be that if both DTS and Dolby are improving their software and providing a better user experience as a result, why would we not want it...? Like you, I would like to see them prioritize and fix the remaining issues, but there's no reason why we shouldn't expect both. |
|
|
|
Post by jbrunwa on Sept 29, 2021 13:23:10 GMT -5
OK, maybe it’s because I don’t use upmixer. We can already play all the movies in the DTS:X format that they were made in. I prefer to hear the content as intended. And there virtually is no native content.DTS:X:Pro. Even with Atmos movies it’s mostly ambiance or music, or an occasional helicopter. I remain unimpressed. I will give Trinnov a nod only because it knows exactly where all your speakers are, even if they are in non-optimal locations, which is for many people the case. Other than that I will keep listening to content in native audio format, and will stop trying to understand why people want this.I agree with you that I would "prefer" to listen to the soundtrack as it was intended, but if by simply using a different (and maybe better) upmixer provides a more convincing in-home experience, that's the route I'm taking. You've said yourself that many of the current Atmos mixes are uninspiring (and I also agree), so why not try a different approach? Until Emotiva fixes the now defunct Dolby restrictions, it will take a minor workaround, but it can be done quite easily. As for the statement that I bolded above, it isn't really that difficult to understand. Emotiva already has a DTS:X license and DTS will be providing "updated" software for them to deploy. In a similar vein, Dolby will also be releasing a new version of DSU this fall which contains improvement updates along with a bug fix for their well known "center channel bleed" issue. Emotiva will get that update too. Neither of these updates should cost Emotiva anything above the time invested into rewriting the code. So, the bigger question should be that if both DTS and Dolby are improving their software and providing a better user experience as a result, why would we not want it...? Like you, I would like to see them prioritize and fix the remaining issues, but there's no reason why we shouldn't expect both. Thanks for sharing your experience and perspective. I’m hopeful that they can do both. Going from 5 firmware releases in 2020 to 2 to date in 2021 isn’t going in the right direction IMO. From my experience in software product management, the key to successful product development is frequent updates with a predictable cadence and I have rarely seen new features successfully added without first achieving stability. It would certainly be nice to have a published product roadmap like provided by some of the competition in the higher end market where Emotiva plans to compete with 24 channels. |
|
