|
|
Post by Nemesis.ie on Nov 15, 2009 12:55:11 GMT -5
I hope I have put the right questions in this time.  Trying to keep it simple. |
|
|
|
Post by Nemesis.ie on Nov 15, 2009 12:56:10 GMT -5
Results hidden until you vote as in the past (not just on my polls) I've seen huge amounts of "lurker views". |
|
|
|
Post by dotvibe on Nov 15, 2009 14:14:03 GMT -5
somewhere along the line you guys are a going to have to choose whether you want to have balanced outs or all those speaker outs. Can't have both on a 3RU chassis, and 4RU jacks the price up and just doesn't look that cool.
|
|
|
|
Post by Nemesis.ie on Nov 15, 2009 15:16:57 GMT -5
I don't mind a larger chassis (As far as A/V gear is concerned that is!).
As mentioned my preference is for a pre-pro and no speaker level outs/amps. But that is looking unlikely or $7k+ which is totally out of budget.
|
|
|
|
Post by kumayama on Nov 15, 2009 15:59:02 GMT -5
While I wouldn't mind a 4 RU chassis, I don't think one is absolutely necessary to input and output an extra two channels.
I have an RPA and an MPS which, like almost all of Emotiva amps allow for either RCA or Balanced inputs. Thus I'd have no problem if they implemented the height channels with only RCA outputs (which would take up very little space). I'd also gladly give up some legacy inputs (e.g., S-video) to gain the space.
I'd also not mind if they eliminated all internal radio related circuitry. I'm from the audio era where the ideal set up had separate amps, preamp, and individual source components. I'd actually prefer the radio related sources be housed in a separate chassis, just as DVD/BluRay and CD players are handled. As always, this increases choices, and makes technological upgrades easier and cheaper. For that matter, I could easily except the phono circuitry being housed externally--particularly since a great many of the XMC purchasers won't ever use it.
What you can't do is go back and externally add two height channels to a 7.1 prepro--thus the need to have them built in from the start, even if they may not be immediately implemented by the user. This is no different logic and marketing than offering 7.1 channels ever though most HTs (and source material) only have 5.1 at this time.
I'll say it here for lack of a better thread to state this: I'm not real enamored of the idea of a processor one step above the XMC-1. We already have what is supposed to be a very credible no frills prepro in the form of the UMC. To me the XMC is then to be the processor that provides us with the expanded features and SOTA sound and video performance. Frankly, with the almost non-existent information we have to work with, the next step "up" really sounds more like what the XMC was supposed to be, but isn't because the basic design has fallen behind the curve due to the multi-year delays.
|
|
|
|
Post by Nemesis.ie on Nov 15, 2009 19:07:19 GMT -5
Agreed - I was hoping the XMC would "have it all", if people want less frill, UMC fits the bill.
|
|
|
|
Post by Nemesis.ie on Nov 16, 2009 9:45:03 GMT -5
Doh! I just noticed I typoed Audyssey!  Maybe an admin can fix it? |
|
ntrain42
Emo VIPs 
Smoke me a kipper, I'll be home before breakfast!
Posts: 2,969
|
Post by ntrain42 on Nov 16, 2009 9:52:21 GMT -5
There is no such thing as true 11.x sound decoding right now. In fact there is no such thing as true 9.x sound decoding either.
|
|
|
|
Post by Nemesis.ie on Nov 16, 2009 9:56:48 GMT -5
And? The same could have been said about 7.1 for a long time too.
If it sounds better (and to me it does) that does not make it useless.
|
|
|
|
Post by jmilton on Nov 16, 2009 10:02:48 GMT -5
Doh! I just noticed I typoed Audyssey! Maybe an admin can fix it? Too late, it's out there on the World Wide Web for all to see.  |
|
ntrain42
Emo VIPs
Smoke me a kipper, I'll be home before breakfast!
Posts: 2,969
|
Post by ntrain42 on Nov 16, 2009 10:10:44 GMT -5
And? The same could have been said about 7.1 for a long time too. If it sounds better (and to me it does) that does not make it useless. Id rather see the money on products put into more important things like more intricate dedicated selectable slope/frequency xovers per channel, and dedicated channel eq's with octave spacing or less. Im all for eventual extra channels when the studios start recording and mixing for them. Right now that isnt the case. I see people buying all these new 9.x or 11.x receivers thinking their future proofing their system. But they aren't, all these new receivers still only have 8 DAC's maximum(7 for the surrounds,1 for the sub)and are true 7.1 receivers with phantom channel(read Audessy, PLIIz etc)add ons. I mean if you really like adding info to channels that dont exist(and many times that info is "guessed" by phantom processing to the wrong channel or location), then by all means go for it. I just personally would rather get more enveloping/immersive sound via the traditional means, and there are much better ways to do that than things like DSX etc. ;D |
|
|
|
Post by Nemesis.ie on Nov 16, 2009 10:15:48 GMT -5
Doh! I just noticed I typoed Audyssey! Maybe an admin can fix it? Too late, it's out there on the World Wide Web for all to see. Oh the embarassment! I am undone!  |
|
Animo
Emo VIPs
Gotta Love Me!!
Posts: 2,662
|
Post by Animo on Nov 16, 2009 10:42:14 GMT -5
Why do you keep pushing a platform that will cost more in implementation and licensing fees, when Emotiva already has their own proprietary equalization platform, called Emo-Q???
|
|
|
|
Post by Nemesis.ie on Nov 16, 2009 10:59:00 GMT -5
I'm not trying to - if EMO-Q will do the same or better with the extra channels etc. I am more in favour of that, believe me. I would rather pay $1,500 to Emotiva than $2000 - 3000 to Integra/Denon. It says "e.g." as in for example - it does not say only Audyssey. I am also not 100% convinced that "now is the time" for extra channels etc. but they would be nice to have (even if currently limited) and something that we should consider. The Integra 80.1 seems to be very similar to the XMC (1v output notwithstanding) and given it's 2x (or less) price difference, seems good value (given the extra features) when most gear is a 3x or 4x+ premium over Emotiva IYSWIM. |
|
Erwin.BE
Emo VIPs
It's the room, stupid!
Posts: 2,269
|
Post by Erwin.BE on Nov 16, 2009 19:35:36 GMT -5
Hope you don't mind putting my post with my HT here too since it's on topic: ///////////////// Work in progress: after sending the floor plan with Audyssey 10.2 to, well, Audyssey, CTO and founder Chris Kyriakakis was kind enough to reply with some welcome suggestions! I hope he does not mind me quoting him: "Hello Erwin, The basic configuration looks good considering the real-world limitations of the space. I have the following suggestions: 1) The single back center surround speaker is a little odd. Although in our own university lab we have been experimenting with that format, the industry didn't really go with a single back surround channel. It's not a problem to have just one, but the upmixing algorithms available today from Dolby and DTS propose two. The biggest issue is that it is probably too far back. You should move it forward to the other side of the dining table. When you run MultEQ calibration it will put in the right delays to time align all the speakers. With the speaker closer, you will be able to have the tweeter pointing more to the listener. 2) The left and right Wide speakers would work better if they could be rotated to point to the main listening position 3) The left and right Height speakers should be closer to the front wall. They are too close to the Wides. I know that you probably tried to get them at 45° elevation, but given the ceiling height that puts them too close. I would move them to be on the ceiling above the L and R fronts Best regards, Chris CTO and Founder Audyssey" Wow, this is great service from someone who isn't even going to benefit directly from my business. I will be getting a super processor with DSX of course, hopefully from Emotiva. I changed the layout, making it a "standard" 11.2 and moving the L/R Back and the L/R Height forward. I used the in ceiling CCM7.5 - with the 45° baffle - vertically for the L/R Wides. You can download the floor plan from Sendspace here: www.sendspace.com/file/ewupyt/////////////////// We want more! More channels! More Watts too! |
|
|
|
Post by jvgillow on Nov 16, 2009 21:37:24 GMT -5
Why do you keep pushing a platform that will cost more in implementation and licensing fees, when Emotiva already has their own proprietary equalization platform, called Emo-Q??? Audyssey DSX isn't the equalization piece, it's the surround expansion processing. 2EQ/MultEQ/MultEQ-XT is the equalization technology. I attended the DSX webinar that Audyssey hosted recently, and they've done a lot of R&D on the optimal positioning for speakers. They found that front width speakers made the most dramatic difference, followed by front height speakers, followed by surround-back speakers. I think a lot of people will still be very reluctant to give up surround-back, especially since the industry has been pushing 7.1 for the last few years. Also the 60 degree positioning for front-wide is not something that every room can accommodate. |
|
Animo
Emo VIPs
Gotta Love Me!!
Posts: 2,662
|
Post by Animo on Nov 16, 2009 21:51:42 GMT -5
Best regards, Chris CTO and Founder Audyssey" Wow, this is great service from someone who isn't even going to benefit directly from my business. I will be getting a super processor with DSX of course, hopefully from Emotiva. He is hoping that you buy an Audessey badged product. Every time one of those badged products sells, hje gets a royalty from the licensing fees. |
|
Animo
Emo VIPs
Gotta Love Me!!
Posts: 2,662
|
Post by Animo on Nov 16, 2009 21:56:26 GMT -5
I'm not trying to - if EMO-Q will do the same or better with the extra channels etc. I am more in favour of that, believe me. I would rather pay $1,500 to Emotiva than $2000 - 3000 to Integra/Denon. It says "e.g." as in for example - it does not say only Audyssey. I am also not 100% convinced that "now is the time" for extra channels etc. but they would be nice to have (even if currently limited) and something that we should consider. The Integra 80.1 seems to be very similar to the XMC (1v output notwithstanding) and given it's 2x (or less) price difference, seems good value (given the extra features) when most gear is a 3x or 4x+ premium over Emotiva IYSWIM. I doubt the XMC-1 will have all the extra channels or Audessey, but it should support 7.1 and have Emo-Q room equalization. I wouldn't mind the extra channel option on a later generation processor, but right now, in the name of expediency, I would prefer to see the XMC come to market as soon and as inexpensive as possible. Every little nuance will create nothing but delays. Once the XMC is available, I say let Emotiva go crazy and build a Flagship Processor we can all drool over. |
|
|
|
Post by flamingeye on Nov 16, 2009 22:00:02 GMT -5
I wouldn`t mind seeing something like this in a future Emotiva pre/pro , but I doubt we will - at lest not in the near future 1-2 anyway
|
|
|
|
Post by flamingeye on Nov 16, 2009 22:02:21 GMT -5
I'm not trying to - if EMO-Q will do the same or better with the extra channels etc. I am more in favour of that, believe me. I would rather pay $1,500 to Emotiva than $2000 - 3000 to Integra/Denon. It says "e.g." as in for example - it does not say only Audyssey. I am also not 100% convinced that "now is the time" for extra channels etc. but they would be nice to have (even if currently limited) and something that we should consider. The Integra 80.1 seems to be very similar to the XMC (1v output notwithstanding) and given it's 2x (or less) price difference, seems good value (given the extra features) when most gear is a 3x or 4x+ premium over Emotiva IYSWIM. I doubt the MXC-1 will have all the extra channels or Audessey, but it should support 7.1 and have Emo-Q room equalization. I wouldn't mind the extra channel option on a later generation processor, but right now, in the name of expediency, I would prefer to see the XMC come to market as soon and as inexpensive as possible. Every little nuance will create nothing but delays. Once the XMC is available, I say let Emotiva go crazy and build a Flagship Processor we can all drool over. Sounds like a plan to me |
|
