Emotiva UMC-200 DAC vs Denon 3313

[shizam1]

Looking for some thoughts/advice... I currently have a Denon 2310 that I use to drive Aperion Verus Grand Towers & Center.

That receiver doesn't support passing 3D... and I now have a 3D projector and blu-ray player so I want to try that functionality out.

Anyhow, a couple of choices are:

Denon 2313 - pretty much same as what I have, just has 3D support
Denon 3313 - a bit more power, possibliy better amplifier, and pre-outs
Emotiva UMC-200 & XPA-5 - 3d and oodles of power.

The only thing turning me off to the Emotiva UMC-200 is the review on this site that said the DAC wasn't that good compared to the Oppo DAC. So... I'm wondering how it compares to the ones in the Denon receivers?

 

[j_garcia]

The Oppo costs twice the price of the UMC-200 and uses some pretty exemplary DACs. The review isn't saying the DACs in the UMC aren't good, they just aren't better than the ones in the Oppo. Gene pretty much said you will have a hard time finding anything that sounds better than the Oppo right now in his opinion.

 

[shizam1]

Thanks for the response. Any reason not to go with the Emotiva solution vs Denon 3313 if I only have HDMI sources?

 

[j_garcia]

The 3313 won't have a better amp section than the XPA-5, so I'd choose the setup with the amp for speakers like that. If you get a lower Denon with pre-outs, you could still have a solid setup though, since you could still add an amp. I don't have experience with the Verus line, but the Grand towers are listed as 92dB sensitive and 6 Ohm, so a receiver might be able to handle them fine if you don't have a massive room and depending on your listening levels. Though I don't think SQ will be a significant difference between the two, just in terms of amplification, I don't think the Denon is going to give you the same performance for the price.

 

[Steve81]

If you get a lower Denon with pre-outs, you could still have a solid setup though, since you could still add an amp.

One alternative would be going with the 3312 as it can still handle 3D, and add an external amp if you want more power.

 

[j_garcia]

Best time to buy last year's model is when the new one comes out I saw a couple of threads saying the 3312 was going for around $500 when on sale? That's a good deal. I bought my dad a refurb 1912 and its a pretty good receiver.

 

[Steve81]

Best time to buy last year's model is when the new one comes out I saw a couple of threads saying the 3312 was going for around $500 when on sale? That's a good deal. I bought my dad a refurb 1912 and its a pretty good receiver.

I can't claim to follow the pricing that closely, but I did see the 3312 refurbed at A4L for $599, which is what the UMC-200 is currently going for.

 

[shizam1]

Thanks for the good advice!

 

[AcuDefTechGuy]

Most people are incapable of differentiating between DACs, with all things being (AVR vs AVR vs Pre-pro vs DAC vs Player).

 

[cpp]

most people are incapable of differentiating between dacs, with all things being (avr vs avr vs pre-pro vs dac vs player).

r...i..g...h....t
Bring your old self down my way, set back and listen while we watch the boaters on the lake as we demo and compare DAC vs player

 

[AcuDefTechGuy]

Well, I haven't compared every player - only the players I've owned (from the $200 Oppo to the $2000 Denon players).

Peter Aczel and the Audio Critic staff members have compared more players and DACs than all of us combined. And they also believe DACs and players sound mostly the same.

 

[cpp]

Well, I haven't compared every player - only the players I've owned (from the $200 Oppo to the $2000 Denon players).

Peter Aczel and the Audio Critic staff members have compared more players and DACs than all of us combined. And they also believe DACs and players sound mostly the same.

lets see, I read one DAC review on Audio Critic and than was in 2009. Nothing new since then ?

 

[AcuDefTechGuy]

lets see, I read one DAC review on Audio Critic and than was in 2009. Nothing new since then ?

After reviewing, measuring, comparing so many DAC, players, amps, preamps, I don't think Peter Aczel was remotely interested in doing anymore. TAC has not been reviewing anything since forever.

DACs & players have only improved in technology since then. For example, the SNR of the bottom of the line DAC is like 112dB and the top of the line DAC is like 132dB. Yes, clearly there is a difference in spec. But even the bottom of the line is already excellent.

I agree that certain applications are not as equal. I am not thrilled about the DAC in PCs and sound cards. But players from $200+ (like Oppo) and AVR from $600+ have solid DAC implementation.

 

[cpp]

After reviewing, measuring, comparing so many DAC, players, amps, preamps, I don't think Peter Aczel was remotely interested in doing anymore. TAC has not been reviewing anything since forever.

DACs & players have only improved in technology since then. For example, the SNR of the bottom of the line DAC is like 112dB and the top of the line DAC is like 132dB. Yes, clearly there is a difference in spec. But even the bottom of the line is already excellent.

I agree that certain applications are not as equal. I am not thrilled about the DAC in PCs and sound cards. But players from $200+ (like Oppo) and AVR from $600+ have solid DAC implementation.

Lots of changes, from 24 to 32 bit dacs, not to mention different chips offer new technologies like, DSD

Agree sounds cards in PC's well I go this fancy sound card in my system and its marginal at best.

 

[AcuDefTechGuy]

Lots of changes, from 24 to 32 bit dacs, not to mention different chips offer new technologies like, DSD

Agree sounds cards in PC's well I go this fancy sound card in my system and its marginal at best.

Yes, specs may improve on paper. But I've never been able to tell the difference between DSD vs PCM when listening to SACD, and I doubt anybody could tell the difference between 24bit & 32bit.

 

[cpp]

Yes, specs may improve on paper. But I've never been able to tell the difference between DSD vs PCM when listening to SACD, .

listen to it on a Sony xa5400es . I can tell the difference between my OPPO and the Sony playing a SACD disc but I think it's just the player and has nothing to do with PCM vs DSD.

24 or 32 bits , agree the human ear is pretty much limited at 20bits

 

[Grador]

listen to it on a Sony xa5400es . I can tell the difference between my OPPO and the Sony playing a SACD disc but I think it's just the player and has nothing to do with PCM vs DSD.

24 or 32 bits , agree the human ear is pretty much limited at 20bits

32 bit does absolutely nothing unless you find yourself a 32 bit source

 

[j_garcia]

Yes, specs may improve on paper. But I've never been able to tell the difference between DSD vs PCM when listening to SACD, and I doubt anybody could tell the difference between 24bit & 32bit.

LOTS of people complain about DSD being converted to PCM in some players and I can also say that I hear no difference.

 

[Grador]

LOTS of people complain about DSD being converted to PCM in some players and I can also say that I hear no difference.

I've never listened to an SACD, so I can't really claim to make any playback comparison, but just looking at it from a technical aspect it is pretty amazingly dumb to do that. Makes SACD completely indistinguishable from DVDA, only far more restrictive to play.

 

[AcuDefTechGuy]

LOTS of people complain about DSD being converted to PCM in some players and I can also say that I hear no difference.

On my AVR's LCD, it will say "DSD Direct" or "Multi-Ch Direct" depending on how it is output from the player. I have compared both outputs many times. Absolutely no difference whatsoever.