Emotiva RMC-1 AV Processor Review

[pacdpm]

AUDIOCONTROL X9 or X7...last chance to find a decent surround sound processor..always listen to music in stereo with minimal interference I can muster BUT movies in surround sound add to the fun.....Please Mr. M....X9 or X7 (or OUTLAW 976) purchase coming soon but YOU have spoiled me and my decisions and I respect your opinions!!! Thanks

 

[amirm]

In other words, you're agreeing it's probably not audible under normal circumstances (let alone "objectionable").

What the heck is "normal circumstances?" This is why I don't like gray areas because you will paint a different shade than someone else will. The only answer is to strive for full transparency. Anything else is an argument.

Now, if transparency cost money to you and I, well OK we could back off. But it does not at all in the context of multi-thousand dollar processor. As I explained, the inclusion of AKM4490 already made you pay for the critical component. Why you are OK with the manufacturer messing that up without giving you anything extra is beyond me.

Exactly whose side are you in this discussion? The company or consumers? You have to decide. In this forum we have. We are on the side of consumers. You are making excuses for them as if you are their PR person.

 

[amirm]

Yes, the measurements could be better, but apparently they're not worse than a typical D&M product and on Home Theater forums, those products aren't just popular, the Denon 8500 is king of the hill except for the Trinnov Altitude 32.

I don't care how broken some other processor is. My job is to use the tools and expertise I have to analyze performance the unit and tell you if a good job was done. It was not. Proof is right there in the review:

By joining us and pushing the manufacturer to do better in the next revision, we will all be happy. The whole AV industry has created this dark secret of poor performance because typical AV reviewer just gushes about this surround format and that number of connectors in the back instead of measuring the unit and see if it is implemented correctly.

A proper analog designer could have produced a wonderful audio pipeline. They also need better signal processing people. I mean what is with losing 7 dB because you turn on the DSP? How do you even get motivated to try to paper over things like this?

Don't be part of the FUD campaign. Act like a true consumer. Stand up like the rest of us and demand the industry in general, and Emotiva specifically to build well-implemented products that are architected and designed correctly.

 

[Tks]

What the heck is "normal circumstances?" This is why I don't like gray areas because you will paint a different shade than someone else will. The only answer is to strive for full transparency. Anything else is an argument.

Now, if transparency cost money to you and I, well OK we could back off. But it does not at all in the context of multi-thousand dollar processor. As I explained, the inclusion of AKM4490 already made you pay for the critical component. Why you are OK with the manufacturer messing that up without giving you anything extra is beyond me.

Exactly whose side are you in this discussion? The company or consumers? You have to decide. In this forum we have. We are on the side of consumers. You are making excuses for them as if you are their PR person.

He seems to suffer from what is known as an appeal to futility fallacy. Talking about "how things be" in the industry, not at all about what he himself would care to support really.

Just see for yourself.

The thing is BMWs are status symbols. They aren't necessarily better made cars. Emotiva has become a status symbol compared to D&M and other mass market brands. But if money were no object, I'd be buying a Trinnov Altitude 32. Of course, I'd also live in a nicer house and own more than one car. I don't need to read a measurement review of the Trinnov. I already know it does everything all the other processors out there CANNOT do. Its DAC section doesn't worry me in the slightest (and I have not worried about DACs since the late 1980s in general). I simply don't listen loud enough to hear the noise floor nor do frequency response improvements of 0.4dB or whatever impress me in the slightest when the average loudspeaker (high end or not) is +/- 3dB on average (before the room). I buy PSBs for home theater (I have Carver Ribbons in my music only room) because they are +/- 1.5dB. That at least gives my room a fighting chance with treatments and/or correction. But those are numbers that are plainly audible in a room. If the difference were 0.3db better than another set of speakers, I wouldn't worry about it. The room would obliterate the results anyway.

High end speakers don't sell based on their frequency response graphs. Stereophile magazine can plot waterfall plots and impulse response all day long and most of their readership doesn't even know what they're looking at, let alone have REW set up on their notebook to do it themselves. Most are lucky these days to hear a speaker in a bad room at a trade show as the boutique local market dried up long ago. Most people buy on recommendation these days. And I'm saying I want a recommendation based on things I can actually hear and things the device can actually do, not what the DAC section could do that I can't hear anyway.

He's more concerned with not overburdening magazine outfits. Goodness forbid they took the initiative to now only advertise to the consumer, but imagine for a moment they took some time to educate them with the basics they need to be more informed consumers, instead of connoisseurs of Hollywood script preliminary writings.

Imagine using infographics to help folks get better understanding (those that do better with visual aids, instead of just dry statistics being hurled at them), or simply teaching them what they can expect out of each specification in terms of quality eventually..

Can't be having magazines burdened with that, you could run the risk of actually having an educated consumer-base then.

Don't be part of the FUD campaign. Act like a true consumer. Stand up like the rest of us and demand the industry in general, and Emotiva specifically to build well-implemented products that are architected and designed correctly.

He can't, this sort of stuff in this review are taken as a personal affront to his sensibilities.

 

[amirm]

Premium parts sell well in ads. Measurements that you cannot hear and probably will never see don't.

What a defeatist attitude. Measurements absolutely sell products. The first company that gets them right will kill their competitors with the types of graphs I am showing. It will be so obvious who has a well implemented product. I don't know which world you live in to not know that performance sells in audio.

And I like the way you went back to "you cannot hear." You have no proof of that. Only a PR person for the company would try to hide under that talking point. Go ahead and tell people that this processor measures poorly but you probably won't hear the problems and see how well that works out in your marketing.

It is just incredible to me how customers become defenders of companies when reviews like this come out. It is like they forget their place in the world. "Let me pay full price for high-end companies and get bad implementation. I probably won't hear it so it is fine."

 

[amirm]

High end speakers don't sell based on their frequency response graphs.

They will soon if we have anything to do with it. Have you bothered to read the research behind speaker design and what makes them sound good? And our reviews of speakers? The right sort of speaker frequency response by far sets listener preference in controlled testing. This has been shown over three decades of research. If you don't know that, then you have far bigger issues than trying to be the PR person for Emotiva.

I suggest instead of posting and running away, you stick around and read and truly learn what makes for great sound reproduction in a room.

 

[GD Fan]

I'm sure they are.. which begs the question, why not publish specs from the beginning. My opinion is it is easier to make it a channels/features/audiophile language game than simply post measurements/bench test results.

From an earlier post quoting Lonnie: "In the meantime, I have asked Ray to put together test data that will be published in a little bit. I would simply publish our full test except its over 250 pages long and everyone would just get bogged down in the mire. So Ray is running an abridged version now to show the performance specs using industry standard test."

So, they're admitting they have 250+ pages of testing data but rather than release that they are running new tests.

Thanks, but I'd rather see objective data from a disinterested third party than trumped-up self testing after the fact. I wouldn't put much credence in whatever they sling tomorrow.

 

[GD Fan]

This from Lonnie at Emotiva Lounge:
"I have to admit I'm a little surprised at all the varying comments about the review. I guess it shouldn't because people are passionate about this. So please indulge me for a minute and allow me to give you my perspective. His review, at least in how I see it, is his opinion of the unit just like everyone else. That is to say, everyone who has one of our processors, amps, pre-amps, CD-player and on has an opinion about it be it good, bad or indifferent. The only difference is his review has some AP test with it. The AP is a very powerful tool that was designed to standardize the industry and for all practical purposes has, if you use the standardized test. We run the same test in the same way as virtually every other audio company in the world. He sees things differently and has chosen to run his own test in his own way. I'm not saying he's wrong or right, its simply different. Just like everyone's opinion of their gear is different. For me, I respect his opinion, but I don't agree with it. I know what our gear does and the specs we get far exceed what he is showing and on that note, I have to apologize for not getting those posted today. We were running test for one of the licensed technology providers (i.e. DTS) and were not able to get them posted. I'm sorry but when they call, we jump.

. We will get up early tomorrow and you can decide for yourselves.

As always, thanks very much for all the support,

Lonnie "

Spinning objective third party testing as 'opinions' bodes poorly for what the company puts out next in terms of data. They better hope whatever they publish on the matter is independently verifiable.

 

[Dj7675]

Quite a second post Why so angry that the emotiva measured poorly?

One piece of information I learned just a short time ago is in regards to this:

And NO ONE will hear it! Average QUIET room noise level 55-65db! Average playback volume for movies in home theaters (max peak), 85db! Max I play it at 105dB. Can I hear that noise floor above the room noise floor while things are making explosions at 105dB? You're kidding me, right???

This article explains how there is more dynamic range in your room than you think:
https://www.audiosciencereview.com/forum/index.php?threads/dynamic-range-how-quiet-is-quiet.14/

 

[Worth Davis]

I find it hard to believe people are defending this dumpster fire. I learned my lesson on Emotiva processors with the LMC era stuff. All of the posters defending should be pushing emotiva to do a better job. Its a $5000 processor! If I had bought one I would be going bananas on their executives. I have multiple amps from them, so I am a relatively happy client. Shameful behavior. Amirm great work as always.

 

[RayDunzl]

Lonnie: "In the meantime, I have asked Ray to (blah blah blah)"

Not my job, man.

 

[Tks]

From an earlier post quoting Lonnie: "In the meantime, I have asked Ray to put together test data that will be published in a little bit. I would simply publish our full test except its over 250 pages long and everyone would just get bogged down in the mire. So Ray is running an abridged version now to show the performance specs using industry standard test."

So, they're admitting they have 250+ pages of testing data but rather than release that they are running new tests.

Thanks, but I'd rather see objective data from a disinterested third party than trumped-up self testing after the fact. I wouldn't put much credence in whatever they sling tomorrow.

Tbh I'd want to see the already existing test data more than this new data they're somehow too busy to produce.. I want to see how they adhere to all sorts of standards they accuse others of not following. THEN I want to see the new ones, and if there are any differences, they should get ready to state why they differ.

 

[doodlebro]

Kind of gets worse (better?) the more they tell us

There used to be a lag in the menu and operating system, so we added the please wait. But we have refined the code considerably where the menu no longer has lag and switching times are the same as the other companies using the Panasonic video chips, but we still have the please wait in the system. So I believe its a perception issue. We are going to pull the please wait on the next round of code. It’s just buried deep into a lot of different places, so removing it will be a surgical thing that needs to be tested really well.

Lonnie

We refined the code considerably, but taking out what should be a simple routine/function call is somehow "surgical." As a software engineer, I cringe.

 

[amirm]

And NO ONE will hear it! Average QUIET room noise level 55-65db!

It absolutely is not. That is an Internet myth. Read my full published article on that here: https://www.audiosciencereview.com/forum/index.php?threads/dynamic-range-how-quiet-is-quiet.14/

As you see, average of the surveyed room had noise around 5 dB where our hearing is most sensitive (between 2 and 5 kHz), NOT 55 to 66 dB. Your dumb single number SPL meter lies to you because it gets fooled by high levels of inaudible noise in bass frequencies (climbing to 40 dB in above survey).

 

[Thomas savage]

Kind of gets worse (better?) the more they tell us



We refined the code considerably, but taking out what should be a simple routine/function call is somehow "surgical." As a software engineer, I cringe.

That's code for , we don't have good/any software expertise in house so doing this is expensive. Knowing nothing about it we just have to rely on what the out sourcing software guy ( one man band cheapest we could find ) tells us.

 

[amirm]

I get it. I'm an EET myself. But I learned a long time ago what OVER ENGINEERING a product means.

You don't get it I am afraid. This product is over engineered from parts selection point of view. Why do you think it retails for thousands of dollars? Massive box. Lots of electronics. All meant to imply good precision and performance but doesn't deliver.

Do I need 99% or 99.2% if the latter costs another $25 million to achieve, but only save $15 million over the lifespan of the device when all is said and done?

The heck you are talking about? I can show you countless $99 DACs with small, simple PCB that run circles around this processor's DAC subsystem.

I can show you a headphone amplifier than has a SINAD of nearly 120 dB and is designed and run through their own manufacturing by one person.

A pocket DAC doesn't do what the Emotiva does.

It has the identical subsystem Emotiva has. Identical. Takes digital data and produces analog. That subsystem is what is not performant in Emotiva.

 

[amirm]

The thing is BMWs are status symbols. They aren't necessarily better made cars. Emotiva has become a status symbol compared to D&M and other mass market brands.

Are you messing with me now? Emotiva is a status symbol? Since when?

Emotiva is a budget brand. It is not a luxury AV product.

And you best drive a BMW before you say what you said about them. They put a smile on my face every time I drive them. I was not smiling when I tested the Emotiva RMC-1. Nor would have I shown it off to anyone coming over like I might with a BMW.

 

[Koeitje]

And the fact that we on this forum do know what the APX is and does makes us better somehow?? If it was not for HT (install and sales) brick and mortar audio shops would be practically non-existent. Don’t get me wrong I’m a measurements guy above all.

Russ

No, but if you want to complain about measurements the very least you can do is look up how they have been done.

 

[Robbo99999]

Since Amirm bothered to reply, I'll give one last response here.



In other words, you're agreeing it's probably not audible under normal circumstances (let alone "objectionable"). Yet you don't merit the AVR in question on its features (beyond having buggy software), but only measured stats that are unlikely to be noticed by anyone in any listening use whatsoever. So what's the value in the measurements if they can't be heard? You like products designed for dog hearing?

Someone can engineer the a really really great shovel (far better performing pocket DAC), but if a mere average made jack hammer (Emotiva AVR with 16-channel Atmos and room correction, etc.) works functionally far better for moving dirt in every practical circumstance, what difference does it make if the shovel is "perfect" even? Yes, the measurements could be better, but apparently they're not worse than a typical D&M product and on Home Theater forums, those products aren't just popular, the Denon 8500 is king of the hill except for the Trinnov Altitude 32. I don't know what the Trinnov measures, but I'm pretty sure people laying down 30 Grand for one aren't buying it for the DAC section's measurements beyond the hearing range. They're buying it for 34-channel Atmos support, room correction, etc. DTS:X Pro support was just added for free (32.2 speaker support for everything upmixed with Neural X).



If you listen to sound (I don't know care what kind) at a level where your ears can actually hear 116dB of dynamic range in a REAL ROOM, congratulations, you are now DEAF! Seriously. You'd need well over 120dB in any kind of normal room and that's like listening to a Space Shuttle like rocket taking off nearby without any hearing protection! Your "ideal" case is insanity in actual usage. Sorry. That's PRECISELY why I don't take your reviews seriously. Anyone can learn to measure and interpret the meaning. It takes WISDOM to know what is actually important for real world listening and what is absolute FLUFF. You've clearly chosen fluff when it comes to "not recommending" something based on theoretical performance rather than actual audible sound and more importantly for home theater, FEATURES. Emotiva has 16-channel decoding. No one buys a Denon 8500 because they think it's better made than a Denon 4500 or a Marantz 7013. They buy it because they want 13.2-channels instead 11.2.



And NO ONE will hear it! Average QUIET room noise level 55-65db! Average playback volume for movies in home theaters (max peak), 85db! Max I play it at 105dB. Can I hear that noise floor above the room noise floor while things are making explosions at 105dB? You're kidding me, right???



I get it. I'm an EET myself. But I learned a long time ago what OVER ENGINEERING a product means. It means $$$$ lost. Time is money. I jus need an industrial piece of equipment to do what it's designed to do (e.g. separate parts with little or no human intervention). Do I need 99% or 99.2% if the latter costs another $25 million to achieve, but only save $15 million over the lifespan of the device when all is said and done? You want to compare the Emotiva to a pocket DAC. A pocket DAC doesn't do what the Emotiva does. If I could play 15.2 channel Dolby Atmos on that pocket DAC, I'd agree with you. Buy the better engineered product (at a fraction of the cost!) But you're comparing Apples and Oranges. You're thinking DAC section and I'm saying the Emotiva is a HELL of a lot more than just the DAC section. I've seen audiophiles pay THOUSANDS on high-end DACs over the years and I bet not a single one actually heard (in a double blind test) what they think they did.

Guess? That's what double blind testing is for. Things like AAC compression were built around double blind testing. It's just as scientific as any measurement gear and more closely related to what a human can actually hear than what some device can measure.



Premium parts sell well in ads. Measurements that you cannot hear and probably will never see don't. Could they have shaved $1000 off the price using cheaper parts? Sure. But you've got Stereophile types that won't buy it, then (not based on the sound, but based on whatever John Atkinson's replacement tells them what to think...not about the AVR, of course. It's unlikely they will review it. But they do like to talk about PARTS when I read the magazine.

You see you think like an engineer that wants to build the best possible product. I think like an engineer that wants the best possible experience and that means ignoring things that DON'T MATTER (aka INAUDIBLE at any SANE volume). Should this product do better? Probably. I don't know who worked on it or what they know. The software thing is the real bugaboo that would keep me far away.

The thing is BMWs are status symbols. They aren't necessarily better made cars. Emotiva has become a status symbol compared to D&M and other mass market brands. But if money were no object, I'd be buying a Trinnov Altitude 32. Of course, I'd also live in a nicer house and own more than one car. I don't need to read a measurement review of the Trinnov. I already know it does everything all the other processors out there CANNOT do. Its DAC section doesn't worry me in the slightest (and I have not worried about DACs since the late 1980s in general). I simply don't listen loud enough to hear the noise floor nor do frequency response improvements of 0.4dB or whatever impress me in the slightest when the average loudspeaker (high end or not) is +/- 3dB on average (before the room). I buy PSBs for home theater (I have Carver Ribbons in my music only room) because they are +/- 1.5dB. That at least gives my room a fighting chance with treatments and/or correction. But those are numbers that are plainly audible in a room. If the difference were 0.3db better than another set of speakers, I wouldn't worry about it. The room would obliterate the results anyway.

High end speakers don't sell based on their frequency response graphs. Stereophile magazine can plot waterfall plots and impulse response all day long and most of their readership doesn't even know what they're looking at, let alone have REW set up on their notebook to do it themselves. Most are lucky these days to hear a speaker in a bad room at a trade show as the boutique local market dried up long ago. Most people buy on recommendation these days. And I'm saying I want a recommendation based on things I can actually hear and things the device can actually do, not what the DAC section could do that I can't hear anyway.

I think this is a good post with some interesting points. I'm new to the ASR forums here and I have found them incredibly useful, and I think the absolute objectivity of Amirs measurements is a good thing for the industry....but perhaps there should be more emphasis here in these forums as to what is audible and what isn't in terms of products not measuring to the ideal. Having said that I have seen comments by Amir in various reviews he's done where he says "this or that" is not an audible spike or distortion....perhaps it's just about classifying the thresholds for what is audible and what is not audible, perhaps those thresholds are too strict on this site, or maybe they're not....it's food for thought though. I would rather buy an over-engineered product though that allows for enough space beyond those audible thresholds...as long as it wouldn't mean a big markup in price, and my impression based on product reviews on this site that such a standard is achievable in this industry without breaking the bank, so viewing it in this way does cast the product in this review in a poor light.

 

[Koeitje]

Is that actually AUDIBLE above? For that matter, are ANY of the things Amirm makes mountains out of actually audible with the intended signals and output levels meant for this device or the AV7500 Marantz review I just read, etc.? I sure as heck can't hear 24kHz, for example nor can my speakers reproduce 24kHz. So why would I CARE from a consumer standpoint?

You should care because these are the basics of DAC design. Even if you can't hear the difference it just shows the sheer incompetence that went into a $4000 device. If they can't get an elementary filter right, chances are that their DSP processing is filled with weird bugs. It shows they didn't care, so why should I as a consumer care about them if they can't be bothered to reach 2020 standards with their expensive piece of equipment. It tells you how everything you need to know about Emotiva's goals. If I am correct the used DAC has its own filters, so that makes it even more strange they managed to mess it up so badly.