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 515

post #15421 of 17194
Quote:
Originally Posted by Theresa View Post

I agree with Keith. I only need to have been burned once and if someone learns from others experiences and there by avoids getting burned more power to them.
LOL, I don't know if It's possible.... but I agree with both Keith and Al. But than again, I am the "confused one".wink.gif
post #15422 of 17194
Quote:
Originally Posted by Theresa View Post

I agree with Keith. I only need to have been burned once and if someone learns from others experiences and there by avoids getting burned more power to them.

So no more Onkyos for you, ever?
post #15423 of 17194
Quote:
Originally Posted by ZOOM ZOOM View Post

LOL, I don't know if It's possible.... but I agree with both Keith and Al. But than again, I am the "confused one".wink.gif

I agree with Keith on many of his views also.
No worries.smile.gif
post #15424 of 17194
Quote:
Originally Posted by Knucklehead90 View Post

The track record of the UMC-1 can be traced by its original MSRP of $699 - last selling price of $499 - and current used prices which are all over the place. I've seen used prices (without upgrade card) from $265 shipped on the Emo Emporium about a week ago to $400-425 on ebay without upgrade card. There are probably 6-7 on ebay at any one time. I bought two of them - and sold them both. I also sold the upgrade cards that came with them. The NR818 I have now works.

Thats the 'editorial' of the UMC-1...

Okay, all true.

Very good then that the new Marantz AV8801, at MSRP $3,600 has no bugs at all.wink.gif

And there has never been an Onkyo AVR with issues to date also...
post #15425 of 17194
Quote:
Originally Posted by Roger Dressler View Post

For me, let's start with one.
There are plenty of people who have issues with their 200. Pop noises, motorboating, loss of surround preferences, etc., that you have seen for yourself at their forum. These may all be normal teething issues we see with new prepros. If these sorts of issues are all buttoned up in, say, 6 months, that would be then be a solid product IMHO. I'm willing to give them time to see how it plays out.

I tend to agree with this. I'll start with saying I do have a UMC-200, so far without issues, but reading of the issues on the Emo forums makes me think the beta-testing just wasnt really thorough. The Para EQ thread where trims were set to +30dB (give or take), causing that one guy to blow a speaker. Sheesh. Did no one check these? Oh, and the current front page advertising splash saying the the UMC-200 is $4500 worth of processor is very cheeky IMO.
post #15426 of 17194
Quote:
Originally Posted by ausdavep View Post

I tend to agree with this. I'll start with saying I do have a UMC-200, so far without issues, but reading of the issues on the Emo forums makes me think the beta-testing just wasnt really thorough. The Para EQ thread where trims were set to +30dB (give or take), causing that one guy to blow a speaker. Sheesh. Did no one check these? Oh, and the current front page advertising splash saying the the UMC-200 is $4500 worth of processor is very cheeky IMO.

Personally I haven't been following the problems with the UMC-200. I'm sad to hear there are issues. Perhaps they will be ironed out as you say but Emotiva doesn't have a good track record with pre-pros and eliminating bugs. As for that advertising, it's typical of Emotiva's hyperbole.
post #15427 of 17194
Quote:
Originally Posted by bootman_head_fi View Post

So no more Onkyos for you, ever?

Add Denon to that list.
post #15428 of 17194
Certainly the one with the ps3 and colour space should have been picked up, especially being such a common product.

I'll be curious to see what they value the umc-500 and xmc-1 at smile.gif if they're saying the 200 is $4500 worth of processor, where's the comparisons between this and, say a marantz 8801 (which is still less than that, but I know which one I'd take at $600)
post #15429 of 17194
The UMC200 actually has very good room EQ if you roll up your sleeves and use the built-in parametric EQs and do it manually.

It has the big advantage that you are not forced to do full range EQ as you are with Audyssey.

If you have basic REW skills, you can set the EQs with as much or more precision as Audyssey or ARC. I'm certainly able to get the response comparable to the ARC in my Anthem prepro.

The automatic EQ is a bit less precise, but does improve things. It also has the advantage of being able to tweak the response later so you can remove any correction above a certain frequency if you desire.
post #15430 of 17194
Quote:
Originally Posted by ausdavep View Post

I tend to agree with this. I'll start with saying I do have a UMC-200, so far without issues, but reading of the issues on the Emo forums makes me think the beta-testing just wasnt really thorough. The Para EQ thread where trims were set to +30dB (give or take), causing that one guy to blow a speaker. Sheesh. Did no one check these? Oh, and the current front page advertising splash saying the the UMC-200 is $4500 worth of processor is very cheeky IMO.

Did your unit have this also?
I thought it was more of a fluke than the norm.
No excuse for it, but I don't think every unit has this.

As far as advertising, meh. I don't pay too much attention to audio ads.
Most fall into this category anyway.
post #15431 of 17194
Quote:
Originally Posted by Steve Dodds View Post

The UMC200 actually has very good room EQ if you roll up your sleeves and use the built-in parametric EQs and do it manually.

It has the big advantage that you are not forced to do full range EQ as you are with Audyssey.

If you have basic REW skills, you can set the EQs with as much or more precision as Audyssey or ARC. I'm certainly able to get the response comparable to the ARC in my Anthem prepro.

The automatic EQ is a bit less precise, but does improve things. It also has the advantage of being able to tweak the response later so you can remove any correction above a certain frequency if you desire.

Now you peaked my interest.
I'm a gear head at heart.

Any chance you can do a write up on the EQ process?
Emotiva isn't known for their manuals on these things.
( I'm being extremely kind here. Lol)
post #15432 of 17194
Quote:
Originally Posted by MUDCAT45 View Post

Add Denon to that list.

???
Theresa, don't you have a 4520CI?
It is on my short list for my next unit.
post #15433 of 17194
Quote:
Originally Posted by Roger Dressler View Post

Quote:
Originally Posted by bootman_head_fi View Post

I thought they are not fully class H but a hybrid? (two power rails)
http://emotivalounge.proboards.com/index.cgi?action=display&board=amps&thread=24997&page=2#417104
Dan's description: >>We have a two rail design in the XPR-5.<< So technically, that's Class G.
Quote:
The general consensus is that Class-G runs from a low voltage rail until the signal goes beyond a certain voltage, and a higher rail (or rails) is switched in. Class-H refines this to use a variable higher voltage rail (or rails), also known as a modulated rail. Article.

This wiki article states the same.

This convention is in conflict with peer-reviewed AES papers such as this one, as well as the standard books on audio amplifier design by both Douglas Self and Robert Cordell, and industry convention as used by e.g. QSC audio. QSC provides the schematics for their amps they call class H, and it's straightforward for those familiar with amp design to verify that the supplies of those amps vary only in discrete steps in response to the input signal. Self's book has an entire chapter on class G. Here's an illustration from his book.

post #15434 of 17194
So this means what with reference to sound quality?
post #15435 of 17194
Probably not much smile.gif. The difference is related mostly to efficiency (class H is better than class G) and cost (class H wins here for very high-power designs).
post #15436 of 17194
Quote:
Originally Posted by bootman_head_fi View Post

Did your unit have this also?
I thought it was more of a fluke than the norm.
No excuse for it, but I don't think every unit has this.

As far as advertising, meh. I don't pay too much attention to audio ads.
Most fall into this category anyway.

No, mine doesnt have any of these issues, or not that i've come across yet. The only one I have found is that with my WDTV Live, I have to turn the UMC to that input, then turn the WDTV on, otherwise the screen goes has a green hue, everything still legible, but its like the red & blue colours arent added :S. And my HD DVD XE-1 takes a while to sync, but gets there in the end.
post #15437 of 17194
No issues with my UMC-200 except two brief audio drops (on the same dvd) and the surround mode eq preference reverting to direct (no eq) on Sat and TV inputs after power down. The latter takes only a few seconds to change on a new start and, oddly, doesn't happen as much with lossless codecs. Otherwise all is well.

I did have the unit emit a loud popping sound on the very first startup but I eliminated it by changing sat channels and it has not recurred.
post #15438 of 17194
Quote:
Originally Posted by bootman_head_fi View Post

Now you peaked my interest.
I'm a gear head at heart.

Any chance you can do a write up on the EQ process?
Emotiva isn't known for their manuals on these things.
( I'm being extremely kind here. Lol)
The manual

Yeah, the manual pretty much ignores what to me was the main selling point of the UMC200. No receiver and no prepro close to its price has the ability to give you full manual paramatric EQ control.

The UMC has 11 bands for each channel and three for the sub. More for the sub would have been better. But you can choose frequency, gain and bandwidth in Q for each band.

The easiest way to use them properly is to use REW. One at a time, do a series of measurements of each speaker in an area around your listening position and get REW to average those results. Then go into the EQ section of REW and select Generic EQ, the range you want EQ to cover, how tight you want the tolerances, maximum boost etc and press a button.

You will get a bunch of suggested filters which you simply program into the UMC. You can even get a house curve suggestion.

Of course you can still do it the old fashioned way, which is run the measurements and then adjust the EQs and remeasure, or you can use the RTA and pink noise to do things on the fly.

It's like having a Behringer DCX built-in for each channel, without the extra box and without the extra A/D step.

If you are a real tweaker you can even use it as a poor man's DEQX and do nearfield measurements to adjust the speakers native response, then listening position ones for room eq.

I'd love it if it had shelving filters and if you could also tweak phase, but it is pretty cool as is.

I have a DCX I could use to EQ my fronts, but having it on all channels is very nice.
post #15439 of 17194
Quote:
Originally Posted by rock_bottom View Post

This convention is in conflict with peer-reviewed AES papers such as this one, as well as the standard books on audio amplifier design by both Douglas Self and Robert Cordell, and industry convention as used by e.g. QSC audio. QSC provides the schematics for their amps they call class H, and it's straightforward for those familiar with amp design to verify that the supplies of those amps vary only in discrete steps in response to the input signal. Self's book has an entire chapter on class G. Here's an illustration from his book.

Thanks for those references. It serves to underscore the point made in the recent Prosoundweb article I cited, that there are disagreements over the definitions and distinctions between G and H, yet he deduced a general consensus so that is I what I reported. Perhaps things have shifted since the time those papers were written?

There certainly seems to be a general lack of rigor in the use of the terms class G and H. Where's the ITU when you need them? wink.gif
Edited by Roger Dressler - 1/23/13 at 12:46am
post #15440 of 17194
Quote:
Originally Posted by Steve Dodds View Post

The manual

Yeah, the manual pretty much ignores what to me was the main selling point of the UMC200. No receiver and no prepro close to its price has the ability to give you full manual paramatric EQ control.

The UMC has 11 bands for each channel and three for the sub. More for the sub would have been better. But you can choose frequency, gain and bandwidth in Q for each band.

The easiest way to use them properly is to use REW. One at a time, do a series of measurements of each speaker in an area around your listening position and get REW to average those results. Then go into the EQ section of REW and select Generic EQ, the range you want EQ to cover, how tight you want the tolerances, maximum boost etc and press a button.

You will get a bunch of suggested filters which you simply program into the UMC. You can even get a house curve suggestion.

Of course you can still do it the old fashioned way, which is run the measurements and then adjust the EQs and remeasure, or you can use the RTA and pink noise to do things on the fly.

I do the same thing, not with the UMC-200 though, but with miniDSPs and Omnimic. I'm certain the parametric EQs are a step up from the graphic ones in my old UMC-1 (long ago retired).
post #15441 of 17194
Quote:
Originally Posted by Steve Dodds View Post

The manual

Yeah, the manual pretty much ignores what to me was the main selling point of the UMC200. No receiver and no prepro close to its price has the ability to give you full manual paramatric EQ control.

It seems that Emotiva has made great strides with the UMC-200 over the UMC-1. But it seems that Emotiva just can't or will not put together a decent manual. I looked at the UMC-200's manual and in all honesty it is a joke. For those not as experienced as you Steve they would not know the capabilities of the UMC-200 or how to take advantage of those capabilities. I had the UMC-1 and that manual was a joke as well.

Bill
post #15442 of 17194
Quote:
Originally Posted by bootman_head_fi View Post

Quote:
Originally Posted by kbarnes701 View Post

One of the main issues for me with the UMC-200 is Emotiva's very poor track record with processors. It has put me off their processors in a big way. The UMC-200 may have fixed many of the issues that plagued its predecessor, the UMC-1, but I wouldn't be willing to take the risk personally.

So how many good prepros do they have to make until you are comfortable?
(and what was the issue with yours when you had it again?)
But then again, does it really matter since you are not buying one anyway and those that have (200s) apparently are happy with them?

 

 

 

I take your point, but I did make sure it was clear that this was just a personal decision on my part. If the UMC-200 has cleared up the many problems the UMC-1 had, then that has to be a good thing, for the owners of the UMC-200 and for Emotiva too. I hope that the UMC-200 is a great unit, comparable with the great Emo amps.

 

You know I never had a UMC-1 - you are being cheeky there! :)  After reading thousands of posts giving details of their numerous failings (and many of those failings being admitted by Emo themselves), I would have considered myself nuts to have bought one ;) So, personally, I was spared the numerous problems - sadly many weren't. Let's hope the UMC-200 is a totally different beast.

 

 

Quote:
I had a UMC-1 and now I don't. But I do not automatically count them out as an option.
(If I did that with every gear I owned that had an issue I think I would run out of manufacturers and just give up on this hobby. tongue.gif)
If someone wants UMC-1 advice, I feel I can honestly give them some.
Sometimes my advice gets them by, sometime I flat out tell them to try something else.
It all depends on the situation because everyone's setups/tastes/situations are so different.

 

 

The UMC-1 is dead and buried now thankfully so there isn't much point in continuing to discuss it, but the main issue I have with it is that there is nobody who used it in a HT system that didn’t have some potential problems with it simply because of its various design faults. Failure to perform due to component malfunction is one thing - failure to perform due to incapable design is another thing entirely. The former can be fixed, the latter can't.

 

 

Quote:
Sorry to single your post out, no personal attack intended, just a point I'm trying to make.

Al

 

No problem at all. I think the points you make are worth making.

post #15443 of 17194
Quote:
Originally Posted by Bill Mac View Post

It seems that Emotiva has made great strides with the UMC-200 over the UMC-1. But it seems that Emotiva just can't or will not put together a decent manual. I looked at the UMC-200's manual and in all honesty it is a joke. For those not as experienced as you Steve they would not know the capabilities of the UMC-200 or how to take advantage of those capabilities. I had the UMC-1 and that manual was a joke as well.

Bill

This is my single biggest gripe against Emotiva.
Their documentation stinks.
(and it is a shame since it does take away a slight layer of overall quality as unfair as that may seem)
They should learn from Outlaw whose manuals are leagues better.
post #15444 of 17194
Quote:
Originally Posted by Theresa View Post

I do the same thing, not with the UMC-200 though, but with miniDSPs and Omnimic. I'm certain the parametric EQs are a step up from the graphic ones in my old UMC-1 (long ago retired).

I wonder if it is possible to just get rid of emo-Q and use that programming space for more PEQ filters?
That would make this one unique unit if Emotiva added say a high quality mic with REW curves, or better yet a kit similar to what parts express offers.

That would set this unit apart from the competition IMHO.
post #15445 of 17194
Quote:
Originally Posted by ausdavep View Post

No, mine doesnt have any of these issues, or not that i've come across yet. The only one I have found is that with my WDTV Live, I have to turn the UMC to that input, then turn the WDTV on, otherwise the screen goes has a green hue, everything still legible, but its like the red & blue colours arent added :S. And my HD DVD XE-1 takes a while to sync, but gets there in the end.

I get something similar with my roku and a pioneer AVR.
It is a hdmi/hdcp timing issue.
God I hate HDMI. Work of the devil I tell you! tongue.gif
post #15446 of 17194
Quote:
Originally Posted by bootman_head_fi View Post

This is my single biggest gripe against Emotiva.
Their documentation stinks.
(and it is a shame since it does take away a slight layer of overall quality as unfair as that may seem)
They should learn from Outlaw whose manuals are leagues better.

I agree that Emotiva's manuals do take away from the overall quality of their processors. But I would disagree that it is unfair. My reasoning is that it is solely Emotiva's choice to cheap out on the manuals. All the money they spend developing and producing processors. But they will not spend a fraction of that cost on well written and informative manuals. I can't wait to see the manual for the XMC-1 when that is released wink.gif.

Bill
post #15447 of 17194
Quote:
Originally Posted by bootman_head_fi View Post

I get something similar with my roku and a pioneer AVR.
It is a hdmi/hdcp timing issue.
God I hate HDMI. Work of the devil I tell you! tongue.gif

HDMI as a physical interface is pretty damn good with what it can do compared to any other alternative. HDCP is the devils work and what gives HDMI itself a black eye. I always like making that distinction or put another way HDMI was designed by engineers while HDCP was designed by lawyers. mad.gif
post #15448 of 17194
Quote:
Originally Posted by Bill Mac View Post

I can't wait to see the manual for the XMC-1 when that is released wink.gif.

Bill

Should be interesting, Bill, esp. if/when TacT RC is incorporated. TacT's own manuals are very far from being models of clarity.
post #15449 of 17194
IF it ever get's TacT.
post #15450 of 17194
Quote:
Originally Posted by RUR View Post

Should be interesting, Bill, esp. if/when TacT RC is incorporated. TacT's own manuals are very far from being models of clarity.

RUR,

Yes it should be very interesting wink.gif. From the limited reading I have done on TacT it seems to be a very complex RC system to use.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Theresa View Post

IF it ever get's TacT.

That is a thought as I firmly believe the latest delay of the XMC-1 is due to issues integrating TacT into a $1499 prepro.

Bill
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]