WANTED: Happy members who like to discuss audio and other topics related to our interest. Desire to learn and share knowledge of science required. There are many reviews of audio hardware and expert members to help answer your questions.
Click here to have your audio equipment measured for free!
We're in the same boat (I have two 8801's). Every time I get ready to pull the trigger I start thinking about it more rationally and decide that 100% more cost for ~10% better performance and/or more features isn't nearly as compelling a proposition as I initially thought.
Indeed and it's a costly affliction too. It's only a matter of time before we succumb to it. Fortunately ASR has become the greatest resource in helping at separating the wheat from the chaff. I wish it had been around a decade earlier. Thank you once more Amir for the incredible work you're doing to help out the audio community.
I waited for a couple months but since they never posted any specs or measurements of the XMC-2 I didn't order. In retrospect it turned out to be a good decision for me. I went with the X8500 which I used for almost 2 years and never had one issue with it. I am now using a Storm MK2 and enjoying it throughouly.
I can't find performance specifications for Storm processors. Their amps have the absolutely minimum specs and not 20Hz to 20kHz.
High priced processor companies seem to deem performance specs unnecessary. If Emotiva and others had published measurements, then I expect ASR would not be finding these anomalies.
IMO, AVP's are becoming so complicated that small companies simply can't make them - or if they do they are bug filled and don't meet expectations. The situation is a lot like cars, where a few high performance companies (Ferrari, Lamborghini, Porsche) were making expensive but great cars, only to be swallowed up by large corporations because the technology went far beyond their capabilities.
Is the audio equivalent of Elon Musk going to show up and start an amazing brand of audio equipment? I doubt it.
Perhaps it wouldn't be that complicated in terms of building in adherence to existing "reference designs", the complexity is in the chips and the software. However, this would result in many companies building identical stuff, probably even using ready-made PCBs from third parties. Would some small design features suffice as a "unique point of sale"? Probably not. On the other hand, this is often the case with laptops or PC components. There are by far not as many "real" manufacturers as there are brands in the PC "world".
I wonder if such standardized manufacturing would contribute to better quality, by avoiding strange design decisions (like the "legendary" HDAM)... I myself would always prefer a mature, if "bog standard" AVR/AVP over one spoiled by desperate attempts to make it "better" or just different.
I can't find performance specifications for Storm processors. Their amps have the absolutely minimum specs and not 20Hz to 20kHz.
High priced processor companies seem to deem performance specs unnecessary. If Emotiva and others had published measurements, then I expect ASR would not be finding these anomalies.
Good point. I don't see any either and they really should post some in their manual and in the product description. However, in the Storm Audio MK2 review from Amir, we get the following...
"Some background is in order. Storm was kind enough to send me this processor back in November of last year I think. They are the only high-end AV processor company to choose to do so. I tested the unit a few weeks later and found some performance issues. As is my common practice, when manufacturers send me something and I find problems, I provide feedback to them prior to publication. Sometimes this causes defensiveness on the part of the company. Not here. Storm immediately took the results in and worked on resolving the issues I had identified. They provided updated firmware to me for testing but by then, I was on to testing mountain of other gear. This went on until about a couple of weeks ago when I finally got around to testing and creating the results you see. Support from the company during this time was superb. "
They sent a unit in to test. Contrast that with what we have had from Emotiva processors. In addition to not posting specs on their new processors, their response has been quite poor in my opinion (although they did result in some firmware fixes). If you have read responses from Keith on the Emotiva forum regarding past performance issues found, he was quite dismissive of the results and Amir's testing in general. But yes, very good point on Storm not providing specs either. But their attitude and actions towards getting their product out to Amir to test speaks volumes IMHO.
May I remind you that both Storm and Trinnov are small companies with 40-50 employees. There’s this fallacy that unless you are a global behemoth like Harman you can’t produce AVRs. Those two prove alone that it is not the case.
Perhaps it wouldn't be that complicated in terms of building in adherence to existing "reference designs", the complexity is in the chips and the software. However, this would result in many companies building identical stuff, probably even using ready-made PCBs from third parties. Would some small design features suffice as a "unique point of sale"? Probably not. On the other hand, this is often the case with laptops or PC components. There are by far not as many "real" manufacturers as there are brands in the PC "world".
I wonder if such standardized manufacturing would contribute to better quality, by avoiding strange design decisions (like the "legendary" HDAM)... I myself would always prefer a mature, if "bog standard" AVR/AVP over one spoiled by desperate attempts to make it "better" or just different.
You kind of nailed it - IIRC there's less than a handful of chip companies making AVR processors, Texas Instruments is "the one" for most if not all. Additionally, the Arcam, JBL and Audio Control AVRs are already built on the same platform for their Dirac solution. It would be cheaper if Denon just licensed their AVR platform and let third parties go to town with the GUI and room EQ. Smaller independent companies doing their own thing like Anthem and Emotiva are still struggling to get everything to work with their new generation of processors. At this point, it makes no sense to pay the premium above Denon unless it's the HTP-1 or you really go high end into Storm/Trinnov territory.
You kind of nailed it - IIRC there's less than a handful of chip companies making AVR processors, Texas Instruments is "the one" for most if not all. Additionally, the Arcam, JBL and Audio Control AVRs are already built on the same platform for their Dirac solution. It would be cheaper if Denon just licensed their AVR platform and let third parties go to town with the GUI and room EQ. Smaller independent companies doing their own thing like Anthem and Emotiva are still struggling to get everything to work with their new generation of processors. At this point, it makes no sense to pay the premium above Denon unless it's the HTP-1 or you really go high end into Storm/Trinnov territory.
If a company is really capable to surpass the performance of "industry standard" designs, they should make their own and then (given the rather small sales volumes) it is OK to have a high price tag. But just a few really are at that level IMHO. This is the difference between real progress and "me too".
May I remind you that both Storm and Trinnov are small companies with 40-50 employees. There’s this fallacy that unless you are a global behemoth like Harman you can’t produce AVRs. Those two prove alone that it is not the case.
Both Storm and Trinnov use components from MDS that are essential for their AVPs - Storm uses MDS APM-* DSP boards for the Dolby/DTS/Auro decoding, Trinnov uses MDS HDMI boards (although they are apparently developing their own solution). Both still lack an on screen menu.
I wish Amir's AVR comparisons included key metrics such as input switching time. This kind of "nuance" gets lost when people look at the SINAD comparison chart. Perhaps compute an overall score that's a nonlinear function of the SINAD, channel imbalance, input switching time, etc.?
BTW, very useful review. I agree with a few others in this thread that this is unfortunately expected based on Emotiva's reputation.
May I remind you that both Storm and Trinnov are small companies with 40-50 employees. There’s this fallacy that unless you are a global behemoth like Harman you can’t produce AVRs. Those two prove alone that it is not the case.
Their pricing is also absolutely ludicrous and performance is still not even close to state of the art. They basically don't exist, as far as typical end users go, so no. The rule still holds. They are the ultra high priced, very low volume equivalent of a company like Pagani or Koenigsegg (to stick with the car analogy) just without the world beating performance.
I wish Amir's AVR comparisons included key metrics such as input switching time. This kind of "nuance" gets lost when people look at the SINAD comparison chart. Perhaps compute an overall score that's a nonlinear function of the SINAD, channel imbalance, input switching time, etc.?
BTW, very useful review. I agree with a few others in this thread that this is unfortunately expected based on Emotiva's reputation.
There are 2 Emotiva pre pros that are ranked near the top. The XMC2 has the same hardware as the RMC1 for the L/C/R channels. The fact that it didn’t measure the same makes me believe that ASR got a defective unit OR quality control is not so great at Emotiva.
Maybe I’m crazy but I expected the review to be identical to the RMC1. Regardless, just because of this review, I don’t plan on selling my XMC2. It’s doing a fine job with Dirac as part of my system’s front end. My salons are sounding just as good today as it did before the review came out. Just my 2 cents.
Both Storm and Trinnov use components from MDS that are essential for their AVPs - Storm uses MDS APM-* DSP boards for the Dolby/DTS/Auro decoding, Trinnov uses MDS HDMI boards (although they are apparently developing their own solution). Both still lack an on screen menu.
While not a full OSD for the entire menu structure/setup, Storm does offer volume control and the like on screen (which I find quite nice). I don’t know if Trinnov does or not.
There are 2 Emotiva pre pros that are ranked near the top. The XMC2 has the same hardware as the RMC1 for the L/C/R channels. The fact that it didn’t measure the same makes me believe that ASR got a defective unit OR quality control is not so great at Emotiva.
Maybe I’m crazy but I expected the review to be identical to the RMC1. Regardless, just because of this review, I don’t plan on selling my XMC2. It’s doing a fine job with Dirac as part of my system’s front end. My salons are sounding just as good today as it did before the review came out. Just my 2 cents.
Could also be part quality, tolerance, PS design, or even the layout needed to fit in a smaller chassis. I hope it’s a faulty unit, but it’s really on Emotiva to prove they didn’t muck up the XMC2s now that these measurements are out.
As best I can tell, my XMC2 sounds really good too, but it’s kind of a slap in the face that we may have been sold a much more inferior product than we were lead to believe we were spending $3k on.
There are 2 Emotiva pre pros that are ranked near the top. The XMC2 has the same hardware as the RMC1 for the L/C/R channels. The fact that it didn’t measure the same makes me believe that ASR got a defective unit OR quality control is not so great at Emotiva.
Maybe I’m crazy but I expected the review to be identical to the RMC1. Regardless, just because of this review, I don’t plan on selling my XMC2. It’s doing a fine job with Dirac as part of my system’s front end. My salons are sounding just as good today as it did before the review came out. Just my 2 cents.
Also don’t overlook firmware issues that are the cause of the poor results. We have seen this before on the RMC1 . These processors are so complex they really need to be running these kinds of bench tests to verify a firmware doesn’t cause serious performance issues. If it is a firmware issue, I would start to question whether they are doing any type of bench tests prior to releasing them to the public to make sure a fix doesn’t have unintended consequences.
Could also be part quality, tolerance, PS design, or even the layout needed to fit in a smaller chassis. I hope it’s a faulty unit, but it’s really on Emotiva to prove they didn’t muck up the XMC2s now that these measurements are out.
As best I can tell, my XMC2 sounds really good too, but it’s kind of a slap in the face that we may have been sold a much more inferior product than we were lead to believe we were spending $3k on.
The chassis doesn’t seem to be the issue. The RMC1 has a blank space for the expansion modules which is why it’s taller. The RMC1L is the same size as the XMC2.
I agree that it’s up to Emotiva to respond. I’ve compared the XMC2 to BAT VK33SE and the XMC2 was only a little worse so I know the XMC2 is good especially with Dirac. I’m listening to music right now and the sound quality it’s nothing short of excellent.
We will see what Emotiva says….I may give Lonnie a call.
Also don’t overlook firmware issues that are the cause of the poor results. We have seen this before on the RMC1 . These processors are so complex they really need to be running these kinds of bench tests to verify a firmware doesn’t cause serious performance issues. If it is a firmware issue, I would start to question whether they are doing any type of bench tests prior to releasing them to the public to make sure a fix doesn’t have unintended consequences.
My XMC2 has no issues with outputting via HDMI so who knows. In the Emotiva forums there have been lots of problems reported that I didn’t suffer from. Maybe I’m lucky.
My XMC2 has no issues with outputting via HDMI so who knows. In the Emotiva forums there have been lots of problems reported that I didn’t suffer from. Maybe I’m lucky.
Mine has no problems with HDMI either (at least that i know of) but i dont think amir tested that. Except of course the bass boost issue that is independent of what input or output used
IMO, AVP's are becoming so complicated that small companies simply can't make them - or if they do they are bug filled and don't meet expectations. The situation is a lot like cars, where a few high performance companies (Ferrari, Lamborghini, Porsche) were making expensive but great cars, only to be swallowed up by large corporations because the technology went far beyond their capabilities.
Is the audio equivalent of Elon Musk going to show up and start an amazing brand of audio equipment? I doubt it.
Its not just how complex they are, its also hard to get all the licensing for all the standards it has to support. There is a reason there is only one Chinese manufacturer making these.
May I remind you that both Storm and Trinnov are small companies with 40-50 employees. There’s this fallacy that unless you are a global behemoth like Harman you can’t produce AVRs. Those two prove alone that it is not the case.
May I remind you that both Storm and Trinnov are small companies with 40-50 employees. There’s this fallacy that unless you are a global behemoth like Harman you can’t produce AVRs. Those two prove alone that it is not the case.
Both Storm and Trinnov use components from MDS that are essential for their AVPs - Storm uses MDS APM-* DSP boards for the Dolby/DTS/Auro decoding, Trinnov uses MDS HDMI boards (although they are apparently developing their own solution). Both still lack an on screen menu.
