richb
Sensei
Oppo Beta Group - Audioholics Reviewer
Posts: 890
|
Post by richb on Sept 11, 2021 8:11:40 GMT -5
Here is a review of the Storm Audio: youtu.be/PYXSOoimfoE?t=295All measurements are 0 dBFS input. Take always: - Audioholics is now also using SINAD (a direct nod to ASR) - All measurements are stated to be at 0 0 dBFS - AH waited to get a firmware update to boost analog mode from 100 dB to 110 dB SINAD, Gene expresses that this is expected of a SOTA processor. - SINAD measurements 91 to 97 dB SINAD from 1 volt to 9 volt output. Storm is far more expensive than the XMC/RMC processors. Please do not shoot the messenger but I think it is is important to understand that SINAD is gaining use as a method of expressing THD+N. And 0 dBFS input signals are used by ASR and Audioholics for measurements. For a business/marketing prospective, more in-depth measurements are not happening on 16+ channel processors and, fair or not, it SINAD/THD+N across a range of output voltages is measured with 0 dBFS signals. I believe the RMC-1 was originally measured with a 0 dBFS input signal, expect the RMC-1 and XMC-2 measure the same across the front channels. Note that the original RMC-1 measurements with in Reference Stereo mode and the XMC-2 measurements are now take in Direct mode so I would not rule out a firmware change affecting the XMC-2 results. - Rich |
|
|
|
Post by cwt on Sept 11, 2021 8:18:33 GMT -5
Understood, but if the Oppo offers multi channel analog out, how does it differ from the g3 processors? With an oppo say 205/105 - because it doesnt have any dolby/dts decoders you avoid any 0 dbfs signal level noise . Just feed the dacs to power amps directly and if you want room eq for your sub frequencies there are subs with built in auto PEQ or PEQ you can set with REW say[ SVS].. Or get a gotham with DARO  If its a simple system with limited hdmi inputs that is  Thank you, that is what I was looking for. I thought the Oppo provided multi channel analog out also, in which case it would seem it would need to decode the Dolby?[/quote] Yes ; I should have separated decoding for the purposes of movie playback and music playback [being a universal player] . ie decoding dsd from a sacd with the sabre dacs and feeding it straight to the dacs to output analogue or indeed ordinary lpcm from cd;dvd-a etc straight to the dacs as well.. Leaving aside the asynchronous usb dac as well on the upgraded analogue versions The oppo;s measurements have never exhibited any extraneous noise leaking from the movie codec decoders as they have been tested to the nth degree over the many iterations as you would know . In any case the decoders can just send the bitstream to be decoded elsewhere rather than decode to lpcm in the player .. |
|
|
|
Post by cwt on Sept 11, 2021 8:44:11 GMT -5
|
|
|
|
Post by rbk123 on Sept 11, 2021 8:46:45 GMT -5
I read through the whole Amir thread and realized that all the processors, and all those site members, determine the best processor/AVR based solely on the singular Sinad value. Seems far too simplistic to me, but each to their own.
However what hasn't been realized yet is if the RMC does measure exactly the same as the XMC, per Lonnie, that now the RMC's Sinad has dropped to 85 and not the original 100+. There are those that wish they'd have bought the RMC now, thinking it's at 100 but they wouldn't be getting that. And all the current RMC owners are in the same boat now as the unhappy XMC owners.
Conversely, if they are the same and if one once measured at 100+, then they both could measure again at 100+ (assuming no parts changes or design changes, that solely leaves firmware) - i.e. the reduction came from later firmwares so a fix can come from there
This assumes the unit wasn't defective, which I doubt it was. Buggy, yes, but hardware defective, no.
|
|
|
|
Post by geebo on Sept 11, 2021 9:29:08 GMT -5
I read through the whole Amir thread and realized that all the processors, and all those site members, determine the best processor/AVR based solely on the singular Sinad value. Seems far too simplistic to me, but each to their own. However what hasn't been realized yet is if the RMC does measure exactly the same as the XMC, per Lonnie, that now the RMC's Sinad has dropped to 85 and not the original 100+. There are those that wish they'd have bought the RMC now, thinking it's at 100 but they wouldn't be getting that. And all the current RMC owners are in the same boat now as the unhappy XMC owners. Conversely, if they are the same and if one once measured at 100+, then they both could measure again at 100+ (assuming no parts changes or design changes, that solely leaves firmware) - i.e. the reduction came from later firmwares so a fix can come from there This assumes the unit wasn't defective, which I doubt it was. Buggy, yes, but hardware defective, no. 85 or 100+ notwithstanding my RMC-1L sounds fantastic. Every bit as good as it did a week ago. |
|
|
|
Post by monkumonku on Sept 11, 2021 10:08:20 GMT -5
 I read through the whole Amir thread and realized that all the processors, and all those site members, determine the best processor/AVR based solely on the singular Sinad value. Seems far too simplistic to me, but each to their own. However what hasn't been realized yet is if the RMC does measure exactly the same as the XMC, per Lonnie, that now the RMC's Sinad has dropped to 85 and not the original 100+. There are those that wish they'd have bought the RMC now, thinking it's at 100 but they wouldn't be getting that. And all the current RMC owners are in the same boat now as the unhappy XMC owners. Conversely, if they are the same and if one once measured at 100+, then they both could measure again at 100+ (assuming no parts changes or design changes, that solely leaves firmware) - i.e. the reduction came from later firmwares so a fix can come from there This assumes the unit wasn't defective, which I doubt it was. Buggy, yes, but hardware defective, no. So then, if it turns out that both processors score 100+, they will sound really good. But if they score 85 then they really do not sound very good and there will be a mass exodus and people dumping their RMC's and XMC's. I am anxious for a resolution as to what the true score is so that I can know if I like the way my XMC-2 sounds or hate it. 
|
|
|
|
Post by rbk123 on Sept 11, 2021 11:17:33 GMT -5
85 or 100+ notwithstanding my RMC-1L sounds fantastic. Every bit as good as it did a week ago. #thumbsup Which is how it should be. The prior Amir-generated fix proved to be inaudible; I highly doubt a sinad difference between 100 and 85 is; nor will be when it goes back from 85 to 100. |
|
|
|
Post by donh50 on Sept 11, 2021 12:28:08 GMT -5
I read through the whole Amir thread and realized that all the processors, and all those site members, determine the best processor/AVR based solely on the singular Sinad value. Seems far too simplistic to me, but each to their own. However what hasn't been realized yet is if the RMC does measure exactly the same as the XMC, per Lonnie, that now the RMC's Sinad has dropped to 85 and not the original 100+. There are those that wish they'd have bought the RMC now, thinking it's at 100 but they wouldn't be getting that. And all the current RMC owners are in the same boat now as the unhappy XMC owners. Conversely, if they are the same and if one once measured at 100+, then they both could measure again at 100+ (assuming no parts changes or design changes, that solely leaves firmware) - i.e. the reduction came from later firmwares so a fix can come from there This assumes the unit wasn't defective, which I doubt it was. Buggy, yes, but hardware defective, no. I did not choose my XMC-1 or replacement SDP-75 based solely on SINAD. It is a useful starting point but only that; it can weed out some very poorly-performing units, and highlight some really stellar units, but I do not believe "all those site members" choose solely on SINAD. At worst, it would be "all less one" (me), but I think you are reading too much into it -- and them. I could as easily counter that nobody here cares about SINAD or any other specs and all that matters is the sound, but that is clearly not true either. There is a continuum, and I know folk at each extreme, but think most of us fall in the middle. The overall technical level at ASR is likely much higher than your average audio forum, but here we get Lonnie and folk chiming in to provide details straight from the design team and that's hard to beat. But choosing a product, especially one like an AVR/AVP, is much more than just SINAD, or output power, or aesthetics -- you have to look at the whole package and I seriously doubt anybody is buying based upon just one parameter. I think the jury is still out on relative performance since we do not know test conditions were identical, and the comment about Dolby upmixing and the bass management bug may be impacting the measurements. lonnie said measurements without additional processing were in the -130 dB range so there's that to consider (I do not recall seeing that in the test results but skimmed them very quickly). At this point, to me, there is a puzzling discrepancy it would be nice to resolve, but shooting either (any) messenger is pointless and unless Amir and Emotiva coordinate again as they did on the RMC-1 data, I doubt it is going to be resolved here. |
|
|
|
Post by AudioHTIT on Sept 11, 2021 15:20:13 GMT -5
I read through the whole Amir thread and realized that all the processors, and all those site members, determine the best processor/AVR based solely on the singular Sinad value. Seems far too simplistic to me, but each to their own. However what hasn't been realized yet is if the RMC does measure exactly the same as the XMC, per Lonnie, that now the RMC's Sinad has dropped to 85 and not the original 100+. There are those that wish they'd have bought the RMC now, thinking it's at 100 but they wouldn't be getting that. And all the current RMC owners are in the same boat now as the unhappy XMC owners.
Conversely, if they are the same and if one once measured at 100+, then they both could measure again at 100+ (assuming no parts changes or design changes, that solely leaves firmware) - i.e. the reduction came from later firmwares so a fix can come from there This assumes the unit wasn't defective, which I doubt it was. Buggy, yes, but hardware defective, no. It has been realized, some pages back … Should the newer firmware had these fixes? We would think so, but we also know that the RMC-1 tested very different between two FWs (pre/post 1.9), and we know that fixing one thing can break (or change) another. So to really put this to rest, I think we need to see current measurements of the XMC-2 and RMC-1 on 2.3. That could tell us the RMC & XMC are the same, but it might also tell us the RMC-1 isn’t the same as it used to be. I’m not expecting this, it’s just possible. I think one of the takeaways from these measurements and this discussion, is that the G3P — and it’s contemporaries / competitors / peers (whatever you want to call them) — are living, breathing, works in progress. I don’t think any processor that claims to be modern or current (I’d rather avoid SOTA), can say it’s ‘done’, and has implemented all that Dolby, DTS, Dirac, Auro, HDMI, et al. have brought to the table. What’s now more apparent is that as these processors develop, one feature may come at the expense of another, and that attention must be paid to make sure the expense is not too dear. At the same time, we’re talking about judging a product we might use every day by a number, instead of how it performs the tasks we need it to perform, and how our systems look and sound. I know we all want them to do everything perfectly, but we know that’s not easy. Still, I see this experience positively, our devices have not changed and they have the same strengths and weaknesses they had before — but we know more about what those are, and how we might use them better — also what we might watch for in the future. If you like knowledge and being informed about your system, you might like this, if you want to think everything is perfect, maybe not. |
|
|
|
Post by JKCashin on Sept 11, 2021 15:22:14 GMT -5
What’s being quoted here? What the heck! 😂 Somewhere around page 12 or so people started using bold, then italics, bold underline italics, then some combination of that with larger and larger font size. I think this is the natural progression for any contentious online discussion |
|
|
|
Post by louron on Sept 11, 2021 18:52:55 GMT -5
I'm happy to send him units to test but I can tell you his results will be vastly different from ours if he follows his current way of testing. Heck, I would be happy to send him our QA test to run on his system and at that point I would expect him to get the exact same results. Lonnie Amir's results would be different from yours most definitely, but I believe the intent of the request is for Amir to have all 3 at hand and see if he gets the same results between them, of his own tests. This is reasonable since so much time has elapsed between his testing of the RMC-1 and now the -2. Who knows how many things have changed. Totally agree. |
|
|
|
Post by louron on Sept 11, 2021 18:55:43 GMT -5
I read through the whole Amir thread and realized that all the processors, and all those site members, determine the best processor/AVR based solely on the singular Sinad value. Seems far too simplistic to me, but each to their own. However what hasn't been realized yet is if the RMC does measure exactly the same as the XMC, per Lonnie, that now the RMC's Sinad has dropped to 85 and not the original 100+. There are those that wish they'd have bought the RMC now, thinking it's at 100 but they wouldn't be getting that. And all the current RMC owners are in the same boat now as the unhappy XMC owners. Conversely, if they are the same and if one once measured at 100+, then they both could measure again at 100+ (assuming no parts changes or design changes, that solely leaves firmware) - i.e. the reduction came from later firmwares so a fix can come from there This assumes the unit wasn't defective, which I doubt it was. Buggy, yes, but hardware defective, no. Right on…i guess I do t want any of these now. Anyway people here say inaudible. Just a huge buggy deception that no one really knows how it measures. |
|
|
|
Post by AudioHTIT on Sept 11, 2021 19:49:34 GMT -5
I read through the whole Amir thread and realized that all the processors, and all those site members, determine the best processor/AVR based solely on the singular Sinad value. Seems far too simplistic to me, but each to their own. However what hasn't been realized yet is if the RMC does measure exactly the same as the XMC, per Lonnie, that now the RMC's Sinad has dropped to 85 and not the original 100+. There are those that wish they'd have bought the RMC now, thinking it's at 100 but they wouldn't be getting that. And all the current RMC owners are in the same boat now as the unhappy XMC owners. Conversely, if they are the same and if one once measured at 100+, then they both could measure again at 100+ (assuming no parts changes or design changes, that solely leaves firmware) - i.e. the reduction came from later firmwares so a fix can come from there This assumes the unit wasn't defective, which I doubt it was. Buggy, yes, but hardware defective, no. Right on…i guess I do t want any of these now. Anyway people here say inaudible. Just a huge buggy deception that no one really knows how it measures. Some just say it ‘sounds good’ which is different than ‘inaudible’. Many consider that part of the allure of tubes is their even order harmonic distortion. Just distinguishing between the two. But I don’t see anyone at ASR saying -85 is audible, just that it doesn’t compare well to other units. Maybe you’ve read differently? |
|
|
|
Post by geebo on Sept 11, 2021 21:34:14 GMT -5
I read through the whole Amir thread and realized that all the processors, and all those site members, determine the best processor/AVR based solely on the singular Sinad value. Seems far too simplistic to me, but each to their own. However what hasn't been realized yet is if the RMC does measure exactly the same as the XMC, per Lonnie, that now the RMC's Sinad has dropped to 85 and not the original 100+. There are those that wish they'd have bought the RMC now, thinking it's at 100 but they wouldn't be getting that. And all the current RMC owners are in the same boat now as the unhappy XMC owners. Conversely, if they are the same and if one once measured at 100+, then they both could measure again at 100+ (assuming no parts changes or design changes, that solely leaves firmware) - i.e. the reduction came from later firmwares so a fix can come from there This assumes the unit wasn't defective, which I doubt it was. Buggy, yes, but hardware defective, no. Right on…i guess I do t want any of these now. Anyway people here say inaudible. Just a huge buggy deception that no one really knows how it measures. Just make sure you steer away from any of the 82% of not recommended AVR's he's measured. The safest bet would be to get one of his recommended choices. Then you know it will keep sounding good. If you get one he hasn't measured you're taking a chance. |
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Sept 11, 2021 22:50:27 GMT -5
Right on…i guess I do t want any of these now. Anyway people here say inaudible. Just a huge buggy deception that no one really knows how it measures. Just make sure you steer away from any of the 82% of not recommended AVR's he's measured. The safest bet would be to get one of his recommended choices. Then you know it will keep sounding good. If you get one he hasn't measured you're taking a chance. I'd prefer if purchasing blind to purchase something with rave reviews. I think it kinda idiotic to purchase blind while knowing "independent" reviewers that tested such gear suggests it's buggy and measures worst when compared to the competition. Amirm never suggests he test for long term reliability etc. Let's say there're Klipsch horn fans here. And then Klipsch changes by modeling their horn design through computer engineering. Just an observation. There's going to be the guys that say they don't like the way the new Klipsch horns sound despite not having horn honk. They want the original signature sound because that's their honkey reference. They don't care how the new horns measure or how accurately they compare to the reference instrument. Point being is that there's actually little room for objective or scientific methods in this Emotiva board beyond the gear itself. People like what they like. I used to think worn out cassette tapes sounded pretty damn good rolling down the highway. Don't give me something to contrast to. By the way love the tube analogy in that some guys prefer the added distortion. I know Keith isn't one and I'm not one, but I dig the fact that despite all the marketing which suggests Emotiva is neutral that a defense is made for Emotiva by this community as if they have such distorted colorized sound signature as tubes. |
|
|
|
Post by AudioHTIT on Sept 11, 2021 23:46:35 GMT -5
… By the way love the tube analogy in that some guys prefer the added distortion. I know Keith isn't one and I'm not one, but I dig the fact that despite all the marketing which suggests Emotiva is neutral that a defense is made for Emotiva by this community as if they have such distorted colorized sound signature. Since I made the tube analogy, I’ll reply to that part. First I wouldn’t say that tubes have ‘added distortion’, they just produce some even order harmonic distortion as a product of their amplification. I actually never considered that Emotiva has a sonic signature, and if they do I’m not sure I know what it is, or think it’s due to their SINAD. The comment was a rebuttal that everyone here says the distortion is ‘inaudible’, some just say they like the way their gear sounds, or it sounds good. I do think -85 or 0.005 (or whatever it is) is probably inaudible and expect most also believe that on either board. Just clarifying my comments, as they apparently we’re easily misconstrued. |
|
|
|
Post by mgbpuff on Sept 12, 2021 2:21:19 GMT -5
… By the way love the tube analogy in that some guys prefer the added distortion. I know Keith isn't one and I'm not one, but I dig the fact that despite all the marketing which suggests Emotiva is neutral that a defense is made for Emotiva by this community as if they have such distorted colorized sound signature. Since I made the tube analogy, I’ll reply to that part. First I wouldn’t say that tubes have ‘added distortion’, they just produce some even order harmonic distortion as a product of their amplification. I actually never considered that Emotiva has a sonic signature, and if they do I’m not sure I know what it is, or think it’s due to their SINAD. The comment was a rebuttal that everyone here says the distortion is ‘inaudible’, some just say they like the way their gear sounds, or it sounds good. I do think -85 or 0.005 (or whatever it is) is probably inaudible and expect most also believe that on either board. Just clarifying my comments, as they apparently we’re easily misconstrued. Tubes are not any more inclined to reproduce even harmonic distortion than solid state devices in iinear amplifiers. It is the topology of the amplifiers circuit that eliminates or does not eliminate even harmonic distortion. Push pull circuits automatically cancel out even harmonic distortions. This is also true with push pull (complementary) solid state amplifiers. It is just that many tube amplifiers are single ended and do not cancel out even harmonic distortion, whereas single ended solid state amplifiers are virtually non existent. Nelson Pass has designed single ended solid state amplifiers and they indeed exhibet even harmonics distortion components. The other reason that tube amps generally have higher distortion than solid state amps is due to the difficulty of utilizing feedback in tube circuits. Feedback is easily acomplished in solid state circuits. |
|
cawgijoe
Emo VIPs 
"When you come to a fork in the road, take it." - Yogi Berra
Posts: 5,033
|
Post by cawgijoe on Sept 12, 2021 9:03:25 GMT -5
Just a quick thought for what it’s worth.
Normally when I buy something I check multiple sources for reviews, opinions, etc including magazine, online sites, consumer sites such as CR and sales reviews from Amazon, Crutchfield, etc. before deciding what to buy.
I know that many follow ASR and swear by the SINAD measurement to make their choice, but I would think you would use this along with other reviews to get a true picture. I think you limit yourself by just relying on one site or review.
Just my .02, take it with a grain of salt.
|
|
|
|
Post by AudioHTIT on Sept 12, 2021 9:49:52 GMT -5
Since I made the tube analogy, I’ll reply to that part. First I wouldn’t say that tubes have ‘added distortion’, they just produce some even order harmonic distortion as a product of their amplification. I actually never considered that Emotiva has a sonic signature, and if they do I’m not sure I know what it is, or think it’s due to their SINAD. The comment was a rebuttal that everyone here says the distortion is ‘inaudible’, some just say they like the way their gear sounds, or it sounds good. I do think -85 or 0.005 (or whatever it is) is probably inaudible and expect most also believe that on either board. Just clarifying my comments, as they apparently we’re easily misconstrued. Tubes are not any more inclined to reproduce even harmonic distortion than solid state devices in iinear amplifiers. It is the topology of the amplifiers circuit that eliminates or does not eliminate even harmonic distortion. Push pull circuits automatically cancel out even harmonic distortions. This is also true with push pull (complementary) solid state amplifiers. It is just that many tube amplifiers are single ended and do not cancel out even harmonic distortion, whereas single ended solid state amplifiers are virtually non existent. Nelson Pass has designed single ended solid state amplifiers and they indeed exhibet even harmonics distortion components. The other reason that tube amps generally have higher distortion than solid state amps is due to the difficulty of utilizing feedback in tube circuits. Feedback is easily acomplished in solid state circuits. I was going to mention Nelson’s intentional use of distortion as an example of ‘added’ distortion, but thank you for adding more detail. It probably was a bad analogy. |
|
|
|
Post by audiosyndrome on Sept 12, 2021 10:17:34 GMT -5
Regardless of any topology tubes typically have much higher (audible) levels of second harmonic distortion with respect to solid state. Easily verified by checking out some of JAs measurements at Stereophile.
Russ
|
|
