Originally Posted by David Susilo
1. The remote is very good, but irrelevant because anybody with home theatre setup will use a universal remote
I guess I didn't get the memo.
2. The inside does look impressive with thick motherboards... but the end sound quality is no better than other pre-pro regardless of price (that I've tested)
Are they thicker than normal? Who uses thinner ones?
3. The headphone jack, alas is only 3.5mm which my oldie but goodie studio-use Beyerdynamic that uses 1/4" jack. Most serious headphones use 1/4" jack anyway.
Serious headphones like my Sennheiser HD600s?
Nevermind the inconsequential stuff, how did it sound? Did you hear and then plot the same crazy frequency response I posted? That would be strike 4 for me.
4. I'm not saying the Emo-Q to be useless, but how come three consecutive readings with absolutely nothing changed (I wasn't even in the dedicated room) comes up with three different readings?
Depends how different they are. Did you show response plots, either of the room with your RTA or an overlay of electrical plots of the UMC-200 showing the differences?
The Pioneer MCACC is about as inaccurate as the Emo-Q but at at least all 3 readings are consistent. I'm not saying that the MCACC is more or less accurate than Emo-Q. They are both close but not too accurate where Emo-Q failed to read consistently.
You failed to describe the nature and magnitude of the failure, so we do not know what you are talking about.
5. As I only use 5.1 channel, I can't test the 7.1 channel capability
Can't? You can't tell it you have rear speakers to see if it allows access to the PEQ menu? It's a 7.1 processor, after all. People might like to know if it works for that.
Wow. No response plots. No mention of headphone performance. No basic check of 7.1. No details on how EmoQ fails. Just a lot of whining about lack of video connections, and shipping costs, all of which were known before you bought it. Have to say, not the most helpful review for folks considering a purchase, if that was the intent of the review. I may be wrong there. But if I were a manufacturer looking to generate reviews, it would be with that in mind.