Emotiva MC-1 Review (Home Theater Processor)

[raindance]

Honestly for $999 the Emotiva isn't overpriced in this market and it'll sound fine for most users.

 

[amirm]

Indeed! Why is there low frequency distortion in one FFT (dashboard) and not in the other (90 kHz bw measurement). Also the THD+N vs frequency shows a higher SINAD than the dashboard. Something is wrong here. @amirm, any idea why there is the difference?

I did make a mid-span change to turn off the "20 Hz" subsonic filter or whatever it was called. It didn't make a change in that test so I kept going. In hindsight I should have gone back and re-ran the previous tests.

Also, in some devices that have done this, it has been due to internal noise which changes depending on what the device is doing. So maybe that is a factor as well.

Question is, whatever the cause, why would it do that at all? The test was with a brand new unit shipped from the factory. Why would the default settings cause that low frequency boost?

 

[amirm]

I suspect the bass management uses analog filters.

Now that could explain the increased noise. Do we know for sure?

 

[Steve Dallas]

They have Audyssey disabled but bass management REMAINS active. At least every Marantz and Denon I've ever owned does.

I just tested this today using the front HDMI input. You are correct. Bass management is on in both Direct and Pure Direct modes in my Denon X4700H.

 

[amirm]

and do you test at max level (0db) only ? I am just curious what would happen if you'd test at slightly lower than 0db say -1db and lower sampling rate for devices that do terrible at multitone.

The moment you touch this signal, it loses its original characteristics as designed. This is the same as J-test signal where you run it in "bit exact" mode. In this day and age, I expect products to handle this signal properly and not need me to make content specific changes which you can't do in real life anyway (a lot of music comes at or near 0 dBFS).

 

[voodooless]

Question is, whatever the cause, why would it do that at all? The test was with a brand new unit shipped from the factory. Why would the default settings cause that low frequency boost?

And why would disabling the subsonic filter make a difference? The filter is on the AP, nor on the Emotiva, right? You did not change any settings on the unit while doing these tests?

 

[amirm]

And why would disabling the subsonic filter make a difference? The filter is on the AP, nor on the Emotiva, right? You did not change any settings on the unit while doing these tests?

No, no the filter is in MC-1.

 

[voodooless]

No, no the filter is in MC-1.

And the dashboard was with the subsonic filter enabled? You disabled after that?

According to the manual the subsonic filter works only on the sub outputs.. what evil wizardry is going on here…

 

[mercury79]

You get what you pay for, in my case i had an 9.2 Onkyo receiver TX-RZ830 with two extra channels so my config was 7.2.4, i get the Emotiva because i wish to experiment with 2 extra height channels or 2 wide fronts; The emotiva push me to use external amps and this for me was the big change because unleash the power of my rear and high speakers so the sound for me was a lot better than the onkyo even when my 5 main bed channels used an external amp with the onkyo.
For me is a good equipment for the money since there is no much options for an atmos cheap processor with many channels as the mc1, but my question is:

I use an A88 from minidsp to correct my main 7 channels and use bass management also with the minidsp,

how this could affect the performance? this could correct the deficiency of the emotiva showed here?

and other question, any suggestion to reproduce sacd and dvda? with the mc1 as preamp?, i tried with an oppo bdp95 using PCM via HDMI but doesn't seems to work, i prefer use an external player than use a pc. thanks

 

[High End Refugee]

The test unit is mine. I own a UMC-200 and my satisfaction with that unit prompted me to look into the MC-1 for a planned move to Atmos. The rest of the Atmos equipment upgrade is installed and ready.

My biggest worry is how there is no way to process digital inputs beyond 48kHz. I have a NAS full of 24/96 and 24/88.2 multichannel files that I play regularly. But then I thought I am very happy with the UMC-200 that I now use. I also use the room EQ function, set up using REW. The UMC-200 is limited to 48kHz because of the EQ processing. Atmos itself tops out at 48kHz. I've probably been listening to this down sampled processing right along.

What change will I actually notice? I'm looking forward to finding out.

If its not terrible and not buggy, it may have to suffice until someone gets their act together and produces a reasonably priced Atmos enabled Pre/Pro. Not a receiver with power amps I dont want. Not something that costs $3k+. Something like an MC-1 with true performance. It cant be that hard.

 

[dadregga]

But despite setting Pure/Direct mode, there is internal resampling of sorts that is equivalent to 44 or 48 kHz sample rate. This kind of thing really needs to be advertised to the user when he asks for "info." It should say, "input 192 kHz, output XX kHz." This is something all AV companies are guilty of. Anyway, this is not right. There has to be a way to play 192 kHz content to this unit without conversion.

And that's were I lost it. Not that I care about reproducing ultrasonic noise that my ears can't pick up persay, but just the raw fact that this thing is still doing some sort of (unadvertised) internal DSP even in Pure/Direct/BypassThatDSP Mode.

Bonkers.

 

[Russ_L]

Typical Emotiva HT processor mediocrity.
Combine this with poor support, continued defects in hardware and software and lack of transparent spec reporting should give prospective buyers all they need to know. Move along, nothing to see here.
Although I am a fan of the look.

Poor support?? I find the support excellent

Russ

 

[High End Refugee]

and other question, any suggestion to reproduce sacd and dvda? with the mc1 as preamp?, i tried with an oppo bdp95 using PCM via HDMI but doesn't seems to work, i prefer use an external player than use a pc. thanks

See if changing the HDMI options in setup solve this for you.

 

[Steve Dallas]

The test unit is mine. I own a UMC-200 and my satisfaction with that unit prompted me to look into the MC-1 for a planned move to Atmos. The rest of the Atmos equipment upgrade is installed and ready.

My biggest worry is how there is no way to process digital inputs beyond 48kHz. I have a NAS full of 24/96 and 24/88.2 multichannel files that I play regularly. But then I thought I am very happy with the UMC-200 that I now use. I also use the room EQ function, set up using REW. The UMC-200 is limited to 48kHz because of the EQ processing. Atmos itself tops out at 48kHz. I've probably been listening to this down sampled processing right along.

What change will I actually notice? I'm looking forward to finding out.

If its not terrible and not buggy, it may have to suffice until someone gets their act together and produces a reasonably priced Atmos enabled Pre/Pro. Not a receiver with power amps I dont want. Not something that costs $3k+. Something like an MC-1 with true performance. It cant be that hard.

None. You will notice no change. Twenty-four bit depth is useful for mixing and mastering, but not for playback, as humans have a dynamic range envelope spanning ~80dB at any given time. Sixteen bit is capable of 97dB. You cannot hear everything a redbook CD is capable of holding. And, the loudness wars have compressed recordings into ever lower dynamic range envelopes.

Similarly, 44.1KHz sampling rate is beyond what humans can hear. Most of the content above 24KHz is actually noise that was pushed out of the range of human hearing.

There are great quantities of research explaining both of the above points, and @amirm has produced some nice videos exploring the contents of these files to demonstrate whether they are worth the cost (they are not).

Also, if you study the test results on this site, you will soon discover a great many consumer products, especially amps, cannot reproduce even 16 bits dynamic range. Why feed it 24 bits, when it can only play 14?

What you may hear, if you have truly golden ears, is aliasing or other artifacts from the resampling algorithm used in the product. This is mostly a solved problem by now, but it does still refuse to die in some instances.

My money is on a Denon AVR with the amps turned off. You get a solid product with better objective performance and a decent warranty that is a known quantity and probably less buggy than any given Emotiva. You also get Audyssey XT32.

 

[elvisizer]

I just tested this today. You are correct. Bass management is on in both Direct and Pure Direct modes in my Denon X4700H.

huh interesting- on my old Onkyo sr-805 direct mode disabled bass management but on my current Denon a110 it does stay active.

 

[hyfynut]

The audio that accompanies most video material (cable / streaming /DVD / Bluray / 4k) is compressed / lossy. Yes, there are so-called hi-res lossless formats on some discs, but how much transparency and resolution do you really need to listen to explosions, planes zooming around, actors voices and so on? This thing is good enough for Dolby AC-3, surely, and that is the format used for the vast bulk of video programming / movies.

Now for MUSIC- almost all of which is 2-channel -this thing falls short. So, if you buy this pre-pro, you can also buy yourself a nice Topping 2-channel DAC for $130 and arrange a way to switch between the two. Transparent DAC for music, "Just OK" pre-pro for TV.

If you INSIST on being able to listen to 11-channel audio on a more transparent system, you will need to spend a small fortune. And I wonder - with all those effects zooming around- can you really hear the difference between a system linear to 13 bits like this one and another one that reaches 20 bits of linearity when playing a movie or watching TV?

I agree with the spirit of your argument however the vast majority of Blu-ray is not lossy and what would the Topping feed since this and most pre-amps and receivers convert incoming signals to digital? Would make an external dac redundant no?

 

[MNman]

So:
This is the BasX MC1 Cinema Processor - so yes it is biased towards affordable cinema users and is NOT from their higher-line XMC/RMC offerings. Reading the manual is always advised too - here is why: "Note: The MC1 has a Subsonic Filter that, by default, will block all frequencies below approximately 20 Hz from reaching your subwoofer. If you wish to disable this you will find it under Crossover settings in the Speaker Setup menu."
So - combine this note with the other note from the manual that this unit applies some processing in both Pure and Direct modes, and that would mean there is a very good chance that something may be going on with the bass management in this unit that is causing some of the performance deficit that most folks are getting in a tizzy about.
Amirm - might you be able to retest this unit with the subsonic filter turned off to determine if this makes a difference??

I'm thinking the moral of this story may be to read and understand the manual.....

 

[muslhead]

Poor support?? I find the support excellent

Russ

you are entitled to your opinion but having outstanding problems for more than a year or two and not fixing is considered excellent.
You clearly have a low bar to be pleased

 

[MerlinGS]

The test unit is mine... I also use the room EQ function, set up using REW. The UMC-200 is limited to 48kHz because of the EQ processing.

All indications are that this unit is the same as the TW AT 300. According to various owners at the AVSForum, the room eq in that unit is very poor; however the parametric eq of the unit is very poorly designed. The unit groups the speakers (LCR, S and RS, and Ceiling) and allows the user to eq them as a group. It is highly unlikely the left, centre and right speaker will require the same eq, the same goes for the S and RS, and the same for all ceiling speakers. The aforementioned notwithstanding, there seems to be a solution. Apparenlty once the auto eq is engaged, the user can then adjust each speaker individually and apply the parametric eq as needed. If you rely on REW, then the poor performance of the auto eq is irrelevant, and the auto eq's option of allowing the user to change each speaker after the fact, circumvents the limitations placed on the user when pursuing manual (parametric) eq.

For those complaining about the price, there is nothing anywhere near the price (other than the TW 300, which is a few hundred dollars more but provides XLR outputs) that gives the user the option of 9.3.4 or 7.3.6. My only concern would be FW support. TW seems to provide decent FW support for its users. Is Emotiva allowing TW to provide the FW support, or do they intend to support the product themselves? If the latter, then history would suggest, that for peace of mind, it might be worth paying the extra few hundred for the AT 300, even if one does not intend to use the XLRs.

PS, again, assuming this unit is like the TW AT 300, the sub outputs allow the distance and delay of each sub to be set individually, but eq must be performed as a group. Although it is best to eq subs as a group, sometimes one may need to eq individual subs (e.g. one sub has a peak that needs to be notched, or one sub needs a high pass to protect the driver) before equing as a group.

 

[amirm]

The unit groups the speakers (LCR, S and RS, and Ceiling) and allows the user to eq them as a group. It is highly unlikely the left, centre and right speaker will require the same eq, the same goes for the S and RS, and the same for all ceiling speakers.

That's really bad if it is the case. No way a center speaker creates the same modal response as the left or right. And certainly not the ceiling.