or Connect
AVS › AVS Forum › Audio › Receivers, Amps, and Processors › EMOTIVA Thread Q&A [TECHNICAL TALK ONLY]
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

EMOTIVA Thread Q&A [TECHNICAL TALK ONLY] - Page 485

post #14521 of 17192
Quote:
Originally Posted by Bill Mac View Post

I work nights and I'm a little foggy but that link just makes me more confused.

Bill

It's a gaming thing, Bill. Some years ago a game (I am not a gamer so can’t recall which one) had that Chinglish type of translation in it where the enemy claimed victory over having captured all the opponent's bases. Unfortunately, the phrase they used was "all your base are belong to us". It became famous - there are even songs based around it. If you google the phrase you will find loads of entries. Or, you could forget it, put on one of your great SACDs and enjoy the music

EDIT: this one is amusing:

http://www.albinoblacksheep.com/flash/base

The phrase has passed into relatively common usage when claiming victory
post #14522 of 17192
^ROTFL. And there was an adlink to the Audyssey Airdock on the page.
post #14523 of 17192
Quote:
Originally Posted by SoundofMind View Post

^ROTFL. And there was an adlink to the Audyssey Airdock on the page.

I suspect that's the nice Mr Google tracking your surfing and directing ads to you that he thinks you may be interested in. Mr Google, he say " SoundofMind, all your base are belong to us...."
post #14524 of 17192
Quote:
Originally Posted by niualaals94 View Post

I have an XPA-3 and am looking to get a Middle Atlantic rack. Does anyone know if the XPA-3 will fit in a Middle Atlantic Slim 5 rack that is 20" deep? I would like to avoid getting the 26" Slim 5 if possible.

IDK. But I bet these guys do:

Show Me Your Rack
post #14525 of 17192
Reading through the last few pages I'm never less than amazed that some people actually think a cheapo(not in price) avr sounds as good as a quality prepro.I'd rather pay double for a Rotel with no room correction than these crappy sounding avrs.
post #14526 of 17192
What is a cheapo (not in price) AVR?
post #14527 of 17192
Quote:
Originally Posted by Elmo C View Post

Reading through the last few pages I'm never less than amazed that some people actually think a cheapo(not in price) avr sounds as good as a quality prepro.I'd rather pay double for a Rotel with no room correction than these crappy sounding avrs.

That is, of course, your prerogative. As I am sure you are aware, the single most important component in any system is the room. Far, far more important, and much more influential on the sound quality, than the very small differences in sound quality between modern preamps and power amps. If you are able to spend the money on extensive room treatments and bass traps, and have the knowledge of how to install them for proper effectiveness, then I would agree with you that room correction systems become much less important. But for those of us who cannot, for various reasons, extensively treat their room, some form of electronic EQ is essential. Not desirable, but essential. You can put a million dollar amp or prepro in a poor room and it will sound like the cheapest unit you could find in a discount store. I am sure you realise this based on the absolute conviction of your assertion above.

So what room treatments are you using? Did you install them yourself, or were they professionally done?
post #14528 of 17192
I've just got to ask, what did we ever do before the invention of these automated room correction systems?
post #14529 of 17192
Quote:
Originally Posted by suffolk112000 View Post

I've just got to ask, what did we ever do before the invention of these automated room correction systems?

We used treatments and bass traps. Or we learned to live with multiple reflections and the consequent negative effect on imaging and clarity, and muddy, boomy, bass. What else could we do? You can't eliminate the room you're sitting in.
post #14530 of 17192
Quote:
Originally Posted by kbarnes701 View Post

That is, of course, your prerogative. As I am sure you are aware, the single most important component in any system is the room. Far, far more important, and much more influential on the sound quality, than the very small differences in sound quality between modern preamps and power amps. If you are able to spend the money on extensive room treatments and bass traps, and have the knowledge of how to install them for proper effectiveness, then I would agree with you that room correction systems become much less important. But for those of us who cannot, for various reasons, extensively treat their room, some form of electronic EQ is essential. Not desirable, but essential. You can put a million dollar amp or prepro in a poor room and it will sound like the cheapest unit you could find in a discount store. I am sure you realise this based on the absolute conviction of your assertion above.

So what room treatments are you using? Did you install them yourself, or were they professionally done?

Each time someone post that they do not see improvements with room correction they are told it is user error. It must require as much knowledge to use RC as to properly treat a room.
post #14531 of 17192
My Pioneer SC-37 sounds damn good in my room...
post #14532 of 17192
Quote:
Originally Posted by MUDCAT45 View Post

Each time someone post that they do not see improvements with room correction they are told it is user error. It must require as much knowledge to use RC as to properly treat a room.

It is often user error, but not always of course. As there is no such thing as a perfect room - even purpose-built rooms in no-expense-spared commercial mixing rooms use extensive treatments - then if someone installs treatments and there is no improvement, it *has* to be user error - what else could it be?

If someone is using electronic EQ and hears no benefit (assuming they have an untreated room) then it seems to me there are two obvious possibilities: 1) the electronic EQ doesn't work and 2) the user is not using it correctly. I think 1) can be ruled out - there are hundreds, even thousands, of users on AVS who will testify to the substantial improvements in their SQ when they use something like Audyssey XT32. On my own system if I switch Audyssey off, the sound just instantly collapses into a mess. Bass becomes muddy and boomy, imaging and clarity become confused and voice reproduction sounds just awful - the effect is easy to hear for anyone. So that leaves 2). Your comment about the ease of use, or otherwise, of electronic EQ like Audyssey is a good one. I don't think it requires as much knowledge or effort as installing treatments, but it does require care in setting up. The very fact that my own FAQ in the Audyssey thread runs to about 40 screen pages bears witness to the fact that it ain't all that easy! But, if the FAQ is followed closely, and experienced users are listened to when they offer advice and suggestions, the results are almost always very good. I say 'almost' because Audyssey is just a tool - it is not a magic solution. So there will always be the occasional room that it cannot handle really well. But in my experience, this is very rare. Bottom line, for me anyway, is that I would never use a system without XT32 (or something as good, or better), unless I could get my room professionally treated - and even then Audyssey would still be the icing on the cake. YMMV of course.
post #14533 of 17192
Quote:
Originally Posted by grouper8 View Post

My Pioneer SC-37 sounds damn good in my room...

Is the room treated? Do you have independent measuring facilities like REW or OmniMic so you can see exactly what is going on with the frequency response etc? Standing waves, modes etc etc are a fact of physics and they are in every room, so there has to be some way to deal with them. It's why somewhere like the Todd-AO mixing rooms in LA have thousands of dollars of room treatments and bass traps, despite being specifically designed rooms for sound reproduction.
post #14534 of 17192
The room is treated but not thousands of dollars worth. I don't care about measuring stuff... I care what sounds good to my ears. MCACC does a good enough job.. and I use the anitmode 8033S for my 2 PB-12 PLUS. I agree, it probably comes nowhere close to other rooms but I enjoy my movies and isn't that what matters?
post #14535 of 17192
Quote:
Originally Posted by kbarnes701 View Post

It is often user error, but not always of course. As there is no such thing as a perfect room - even purpose-built rooms in no-expense-spared commercial mixing rooms use extensive treatments - then if someone installs treatments and there is no improvement, it *has* to be user error - what else could it be?

If someone is using electronic EQ and hears no benefit (assuming they have an untreated room) then it seems to me there are two obvious possibilities: 1) the electronic EQ doesn't work and 2) the user is not using it correctly. I think 1) can be ruled out - there are hundreds, even thousands, of users on AVS who will testify to the substantial improvements in their SQ when they use something like Audyssey XT32. On my own system if I switch Audyssey off, the sound just instantly collapses into a mess. Bass becomes muddy and boomy, imaging and clarity become confused and voice reproduction sounds just awful - the effect is easy to hear for anyone. So that leaves 2). Your comment about the ease of use, or otherwise, of electronic EQ like Audyssey is a good one. I don't think it requires as much knowledge or effort as installing treatments, but it does require care in setting up. The very fact that my own FAQ in the Audyssey thread runs to about 40 screen pages bears witness to the fact that it ain't all that easy! But, if the FAQ is followed closely, and experienced users are listened to when they offer advice and suggestions, the results are almost always very good. I say 'almost' because Audyssey is just a tool - it is not a magic solution. So there will always be the occasional room that it cannot handle really well. But in my experience, this is very rare. Bottom line, for me anyway, is that I would never use a system without XT32 (or something as good, or better), unless I could get my room professionally treated - and even then Audyssey would still be the icing on the cake. YMMV of course.

Really, how many have posted measurements of before and after? Have you?
Maybe it is a placebo effect. Remember that probably thousands have claimed big improvements with power cables, speaker cables, amps, etc. Of course they are always called liars if no measurements are shown.
post #14536 of 17192
Quote:
Originally Posted by MUDCAT45 View Post

Really, how many have posted measurements of before and after? Have you?
Maybe it is a placebo effect. Remember that probably thousands have claimed big improvements with power cables, speaker cables, amps, etc. Of course they are always called liars if no measurements are shown.

Quite a few folks have posted measurements of their setups before and after Audyssey calibration and in most rooms, the difference is significant.

In my own system, XT32 has smoothed the in-room response significantly.

The problem is many folks who've never used room correction or measured their system's in-room response don't know how bad their in-room response really is, and even more have gotten used to the peaks in their rooms and find any smoothing of these peaks dissatisfactory.

Keith has mentioned that professional purpose built audio mixing rooms designed specifically for audio still need extensive room treatment, but what I didn't see him mention was that FilmMixer has clarified that even with rooms designed from the ground up with ideal dimensions AND room treatment, ALL these mixing rooms STILL need (and use) room correction to reproduce ideal audio.

With my previous music setup, I measured both the unEQ'd setup and the EQ'ed system and while I can see why some folks might prefer the unEQ'd sound in my previous setup (it follows the Harman preferred response, i.e a downward slope as frequency increases), I prefer the XT32 EQ'ed sound because the FR is smoother (the default Audyssey curve is horizontal as opposed to the downward slope of the Harman curve, but DEQ compensates for that).


Max
post #14537 of 17192
Quote:
Originally Posted by SoundofMind View Post

^ROTFL. And there was an adlink to the Audyssey Airdock on the page.

Quote:
Originally Posted by kbarnes701 View Post

I suspect that's the nice Mr Google tracking your surfing and directing ads to you that he thinks you may be interested in. Mr Google, he say " SoundofMind, all your base are belong to us...."

ROTFL again. Probably so.
post #14538 of 17192
Quote:
Originally Posted by grouper8 View Post

The room is treated but not thousands of dollars worth. I don't care about measuring stuff... I care what sounds good to my ears. MCACC does a good enough job.. and I use the anitmode 8033S for my 2 PB-12 PLUS. I agree, it probably comes nowhere close to other rooms but I enjoy my movies and isn't that what matters?

Using Antimode with MCACC is a valid approach, considering MCACC inexplicably does not correct the sub channel, which contains a great deal of the problematic below-Schroeder freqs.

BTW, over recent months quite a few Pio guys who were also using MCACC plus some bass correction (including SVS AS-EQ1 which is powerful Audyssey RC for the sub ch) have obtained the XT32-equipped Denon 4311 and are pleased with the SQ improvements, all attributable to Audyssey's sophisticated DSP RC.
post #14539 of 17192
I have a question hopefully someone here can assist me with. I've been looking at possibly integrating the new UPA-500 with my Onkyo TX-NR809. Specs on the Emotiva website indicate:

Input sensitivity (for rated power; 8 Ohm load): 850 mV
Gain: 29 dB

Specs for the Onkyo 809 website indicate (not sure which one of these is the one I'm supposed to look at):

Input Sensitivity and Impedance 200 mV/47 k-ohms (Line)
2.5mV/47 k-ohms (Phono MM)

Rated RCA Output Level and Impedance 200 mV/2.2 k-ohms (Pre out)

Maximum RCA Output Level and Impedance 4.6 V/470 ohms (Pre out)

Phono Overload 70 mV (MM, 1 kHz, 0.5%)


So my question is, is 200 mV or 4.6 V the right spec to look at for the 809 pre-outs?

Would the UPA-500 match well with the 809? If 200 mV is what the 809 sends outs but the UPA-500 has an input sensitivity of 850 mV, will my volume be low even if I'm listening at high levels (about -10dB is pretty loud currently on my setup using the internal 809 amp).

Thanks.
post #14540 of 17192
You may want to ask this question in the Onkyo 809 thread as well because Onkyos used to have a 1 volt max for the pre outs, but I'm not sure if they still do these days. But I doubt it would be any less than that as many amps need at least 1.6 volts to reach unity gain.

My Outlaw 7125 also needs 1 volt to reach unity and the Onkyo 876 drives it just fine.
post #14541 of 17192
Since Emotiva design their amps with AVRs in mind you should have no problem with it playing at full volume. The UPA-500 gets to full power at 850mv (.850 volts) according to the specs. IIRC most Onkyo AVRs will output 1 volt at full volume into the preamp outs.
post #14542 of 17192
Thanks for your help on this.
post #14543 of 17192
Quote:
Originally Posted by Elmo C View Post

Reading through the last few pages I'm never less than amazed that some people actually think a cheapo(not in price) avr sounds as good as a quality prepro.I'd rather pay double for a Rotel with no room correction than these crappy sounding avrs.

I'll put my Yamaha RX-A3010 up against your crappy ass Rotel even without my emotiva amps hooked up. AVRs such as the Aventage, Denon CI series and Integras aren't your typical avr's. Things have changed quite a bit and you may even walk away less enthused about your bomb ass rotel.

And why are you bragging about Rotel anyways? They have always been the poor mans stepping stone to separates.
post #14544 of 17192
Quote:
Originally Posted by Elmo C View Post

Reading through the last few pages I'm never less than amazed that some people actually think a cheapo(not in price) avr sounds as good as a quality prepro.I'd rather pay double for a Rotel with no room correction than these crappy sounding avrs.

Elmo,

I'm surprised by this post. Why would you give up room correction to own the Rotel? You have posted that the R-972 and Trinnov sound excellent so you would take the Rotel over the R-972? Does the Rotel (model?) sound better than the R-972 (which is an AVR) even when Trinnov isn't used?

Bill
post #14545 of 17192
I am considering sending my Pioneer SC35 back to BB and looking to get something else.

The UMC-1 and XPA-5 seem like a good combo for the money. I wonder how they work in real life? what kind of experiences do you have with them?
problems?

I am getting some Songtowers in a couple weeks. I have a Pioneer Elite BR player.

Mostly I listen to music and Movies... about 60/40 music.

I see they have ads here but couldnt really find much info on them so just looking for feedback.

What about the UPA-7?

thanks in advance...

Frank
post #14546 of 17192
Quote:
Originally Posted by Bill Mac View Post

Elmo,

I'm surprised by this post. Why would you give up room correction to own the Rotel? You have posted that the R-972 and Trinnov sound excellent so you would take the Rotel over the R-972? Does the Rotel (model?) sound better than the R-972 (which is an AVR) even when Trinnov isn't used?

Bill

Hey Bill, I would only give up correction on those crappy avrs.The Aventage(which I owned) and those mid grade Denons and the the like just sound bad to me.I use my gear to watch concerts, listen to music and sometimes a movie.The 972 does not fall into the crappy avr catagory, although if there are any Rotel owners with an HDMI prepro wanting to trade pm me.

Trinnov is the only correction I have ever used and liked.The 972 also can almost compete with separates less the weaker amp(or it's limiting).I recently did an audition with the 1572 and was really loving the sound.I can't recommend it to everyone because it won't function like the mass mrkt, but the sound is great to me.I will be waiting however on the XMC.
post #14547 of 17192
Quote:
Originally Posted by Elmo C View Post

Hey Bill, I would only give up correction on those crappy avrs.The Aventage(which I owned) and those mid grade Denons and the the like just sound bad to me.I use my gear to watch concerts, listen to music and sometimes a movie.The 972 does not fall into the crappy avr catagory, although if there are any Rotel owners with an HDMI prepro wanting to trade pm me.

Trinnov is the only correction I have ever used and liked.The 972 also can almost compete with separates less the weaker amp(or it's limiting).I recently did an audition with the 1572 and was really loving the sound.I can't recommend it to everyone because it won't function like the mass mrkt, but the sound is great to me.I will be waiting however on the XMC.

Yeah right, you never owned an aventage. Music playback is among their strongest traits, especially 4ohm loudspeakers.

I have an idea.. Get real set of speakers...
post #14548 of 17192
Quote:
Originally Posted by Venomous View Post

Yeah right, you never owned an aventage. Music playback is among their strongest traits, especially 4ohm loudspeakers.

I have an idea.. Get real set of speakers...

I have an A3000. I much prefer music on my UMC-1. What are your speakers?
post #14549 of 17192
Quote:
Originally Posted by MUDCAT45 View Post

I have an A3000. I much prefer music on my UMC-1. What are your speakers?

Paradigm Studio 100s, 20s and 10s with a CC690 center and two hsu vtf 15s.
post #14550 of 17192
Looking to trade my xp5 for a xp2, if interested pm me, thanks maryland 21220
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:
  Return Home
  Back to Forum: Receivers, Amps, and Processors
AVS › AVS Forum › Audio › Receivers, Amps, and Processors › EMOTIVA Thread Q&A [TECHNICAL TALK ONLY]