Dedicated Audio Processor

[jamesflames]

I am on the waiting list for the UMC-1. Although overall reviews have been good (except for a few bugs) I am wondering if I would be better served going with a dedicated video processor (like an iscan duo) and an audio-only processor. Would anyone else be interested in an audio only processor from Emotiva?

[jamesflames]

115 reads and no reply. I guess I am the only one that would be interested.

[cgolf]

Personally, I think they have more than enough on their plate for now and the immediate future. ;D

[Mister L'fe]

I'd love to see a processor sans all of the legacy analog video inputs/outputs, I'm only using HDMI. I don't need upscaling, just have HDMI switching and decoding of audio codecs. Minimal analog audio inputs, 7.1 and at least 1 dedicated 2 channel input (analog straight through with bass management). A couple of digital inputs, optical and coax. USB and ethernet connectivity are a must for firmware upgrades. USB and ethernet connectivity for external media (hard drive or computer access). I don't need an AM/FM tuner or phono input either.

Edit: Thinking about it, it bothers me that I am paying for all this extra legacy stuff that I'll never use. I'd rather pay less and leave out the legacy stuff or have the money spent on better quality DACs, DSP or analog components.

[bootman]

Didn't you just describe the Marantz Av8003?
Of course that is much more than the UMC.

[ammosenior]

I think there are a lot of alternatives on the market for an audio only processor but I think the people that support this company want more (everything if you read the threads). If Emotiva make a audio only processor, I'm sure someone would be upset about not spending a little more to put video processing into it. Don't get me wrong. I appreciate all the input on this forum and have learned a considerable amount about HT, two channel setup, speakers, and amps. I hope Emotiva keeps coming out with innovatinve equipment at a fair price but there's always a price for being on the edge of audio/video.

[Mister L'fe]

Mar 2, 2010 20:34:00 GMT -5 bootman said:

Didn't you just describe the Marantz Av8003?
Of course that is much more than the UMC.

Don't think so. The Marantz still has all the legacy stuff, S-video, component and composite plus upscaling.

[bootman]

Mar 3, 2010 9:25:50 GMT -5 Mister L'fe said:

Mar 2, 2010 20:34:00 GMT -5 bootman said:

Didn't you just describe the Marantz Av8003?
Of course that is much more than the UMC.

Don't think so. The Marantz still has all the legacy stuff, S-video, component and composite plus upscaling.

True, but it does very little to the HDMI signals.

[robfive]

Mar 2, 2010 10:29:03 GMT -5 jamesflames said:

I am on the waiting list for the UMC-1. Although overall reviews have been good (except for a few bugs) I am wondering if I would be better served going with a dedicated video processor (like an iscan duo) and an audio-only processor. Would anyone else be interested in an audio only processor from Emotiva?

I have thought about going with a video processor in addition to my UMC-1. Not because I am not satisfied with the video quality of the UMC-1 but just for the the flexibility an external vp can offer. If I did add an external video processor I would be happy to use the UMC-1 as an "audio only" processor due to the quality of the UMC-1's audio and the price I paid for the unit. If the UMC-1 cost $2k then I might have a different opinion, but at $699 having the UMC-1's video processing is a bonus. Besides, how much money would you expect to save with just an audio processor instead of the UMC-1?

I do not see Emotiva offering a standalone audio processor before they offer a standalone video processor...but that's just my guess.

[jamesflames]

When I think of Emotiva I think of them for their audio equipment, namely their amps. So I think if they were to offer a standalone processor, it would be audio, not video. And it's not so much that I would save much more off the $699 price of the UMC-1, it more of a less is more thing. Less to screw up, less to worry about playing nice, just pure, dedicated audio, if more features and less shortcuts, at a more affordable price than what's currently out there.

[petes]

Mar 2, 2010 21:04:24 GMT -5 ammosenior said:

I think there are a lot of alternatives on the market for an audio only processor .......

Actually, if only that were true. In fact, if you want a "modern" device (e.g. HDMI 1.3 at least, with ability to decode HD audio formats) with no video processing in the box, there is precisely one at present that I've been able to find. That's the Cary Cinema 11A. Now, not only is that $4K, but it's also makes the release cycle of the UMC look like a bed of roses with the number of bugs and problems they've had. I had high hopes of the upcoming Audiolab 8200AP, but they've just announced that it won't have HD decoding or any kind of room correction), so that's off the list.

I'm on the UMC list and plan to use it only in passthru mode for video - sources which can output 1080p and are not so critical (e.g. HTPC and streamer) will be going to the UMC and all the rest will go to my scaler. TBH, I think the combination of an Edge for something like $500 and a UMC will be a superb setup for the money.

However, I'm with you on the - wouldn't it be great if there was a pure audio device. Emotiva have a great audio reputation and they could really clean up in the video scaler world.

[ammosenior]

You're probably right. I haven't done much research in the audio only catagory but I would expect that any componet that had pass through capability could be used as a audio only device. IMHO. Again take this as coming from a novice in AV.

[coolhands]

BLAH BLAH BLAH

[odeen]

I would love to have _either_ a stripped-down version of the UMC-1 with only audio processing (Inputs: 1 HDMI, 1 or 2 7.1 analog in, a couple coax and TOSLink inputs and a few RCA stereo) to be paired with a dedicated video processor/input switcher.

Alternately, I'd love to see a supercharged UMC-1 with a BETTER video processor, per-input and per-resolution processing settings, full aspect ratio control, vertical stretch (for constant-image-height projection setups), auto-zoom for 4:3 letterbox material, and 1080i60 to 1080p24 deinterlacing / reverse telecine.

The UMC-1 video section is good enough that you don't want to abandon it for a dedicated VP, but not good enough that you don't want a VP anyway

[markd]

I think the VP in the UMC is completely capable of what you want- with the possible exception of the reverse telecine and auto zoom (not sure there is signaling for that one- could certainly do manual zoom though).

It maybe needs more memory (from what Lonnie mentioned) and a different user interface to provide access to these features. (more development time and testing!!)

[ratmice]

The more I think about this, the more I want one. The problems I have with AVRs are: paying more, for stuff I won't use (amps), and form factor (they're too big). I would pull the trigger on a DVDO Duo today,, if I knew of a kick-ass, reasonably priced, audio processor with a 2RU size and a pure video pass-through.

p.s. it would have to have DSD over DMI and HDCD decoding, obviously.

[bootman]

Wouldn't getting a VP with a UMC be just that if you put the Umc ON pass through and just use the VP for video switching and pass the audio to the UMC?

If you want to see the OSD just run the UMC's HDMI to another input on the TV.
Sure its not visible 100% of the time, but it will get you the best possible video and audio performance.

[jerrin]

Mar 2, 2010 17:20:20 GMT -5 Mister L'fe said:

I'd love to see a processor sans all of the legacy analog video inputs/outputs, I'm only using HDMI. I don't need upscaling, just have HDMI switching and decoding of audio codecs. Minimal analog audio inputs, 7.1 and at least 1 dedicated 2 channel input (analog straight through with bass management). A couple of digital inputs, optical and coax. USB and ethernet connectivity are a must for firmware upgrades. USB and ethernet connectivity for external media (hard drive or computer access). I don't need an AM/FM tuner or phono input either.

Edit: Thinking about it, it bothers me that I am paying for all this extra legacy stuff that I'll never use. I'd rather pay less and leave out the legacy stuff or have the money spent on better quality DACs, DSP or analog components.

Seconded.

I'd love to see Emotiva build a dedicated pre/pro with no analog or video processing. Full digital sources only, pass through for the video. However, focus totally on the sound quality and nothing else.

In short, I want the high level of quality from my digital sources that I currently see in my analog ones. I have a modded transport that uses transformers on the stereo analog outputs and I know from experience that my analog sounds far better than my HDMI does. My HDMI sounds flat and somewhat lifeless (no sparkle or sizzle) in comparison. However, it is a pain to constantly switch from analog to digital inputs for certain kinds of movies. And if I used my upgraded analog multi-channel outputs, then the VP on my transport doesn't work. So, it's currently a compromise for me.

In summation, I'd really like a pre-pro in which there are very few compromises to SQ and will allow the video to just pass through.

P.S. I also totally agree with Ratmice: "t would have to have DSD over [H]DMI and HDCD decoding, obviously."

[ratmice]

Apr 15, 2010 12:42:24 GMT -5 bootman said:

Wouldn't getting a VP with a UMC be just that if you put the Umc ON pass through and just use the VP for video switching and pass the audio to the UMC?

If you want to see the OSD just run the UMC's HDMI to another input on the TV.
Sure its not visible 100% of the time, but it will get you the best possible video and audio performance.

That's what I was hoping for, except the UMC does not pass 480i, and it really doesn't work right, yet. Also, no HDCD or DSD over HDMI. So, No.

[Woodpecker]

Mar 3, 2010 13:44:57 GMT -5 robfive said:

Mar 2, 2010 10:29:03 GMT -5 jamesflames said:

If I did add an external video processor I would be happy to use the UMC-1 as an "audio only" processor due to the quality of the UMC-1's audio and the price I paid for the unit. If the UMC-1 cost $2k then I might have a different opinion, but at $699 having the UMC-1's video processing is a bonus. Besides, how much money would you expect to save with just an audio processor instead of the UMC-1?

EXACTLY! $699.00 for the sound of the UMC, the video is icing on top of the audio cake. They(Emo) are very obviously working hard to make things right and trying to make everyone happy as much as humanly possible by such a small company. If they weren't, then their presence here would be non-existent. Yes a few bugs are annoying, but sounding as good as it does along with the price point and Emo's awareness of what's going on, how can you *bleep*?
The big picture here is how much of a value Emotiva is offering more people(us) the ability to have such great sounding gear at a great price. Our support, understanding, and patience will only benefit the end user(again us)!