Is it me or are Emotivas prices getting a little high?

[j_garcia]

I am disappointed that the XMC is going to be that much more. I had planned on doing the upgrade to it from the UMC, but maybe not now.

 

[slipperybidness]

I can understand the pre-amps, but I don't get why people don't just buy pro-amps given the cost.

Superstition and lack of knowledge.

 

[big2bird]

Superstition and lack of knowledge.

I would agree with that. Amps are pretty stupid things. They just take a given signal and increase it's strength. If the specs are good, such as THD is .05% or lower, crosstalk is low, and signal to noise is good, a pro amp such as a crown will have alot better longevity.
Then you have the class a crowd, which can be arguably the better equipment, but they are limiting themselves to very efficient speakers, or stupid money to get large wattages, not to mention the added heat load to the environment to which they are placed.
Not everyone has that Ferrari kind of $$ to spend on audio. Not to mention the type of listening area,(room), that such equipment cries out for.

 

[Irvrobinson]

Superstition and lack of knowledge.

That's not always the case. Amplifiers do indeed have differing distortion, noise, and frequency response measurements. I find myself having sound preferences in electronics, oftentimes preferences I'm frankly adverse to having, and I'd like to think I have a modicum of knowledge and I'm not superstitious. I really want to get on-board with the differences-are-all-in-my-head camp, but it makes for lousy buying decisions. I will say this, a lot more electronic products make me happy now than they did ten or fifteen years ago, especially in digital products. Amps too. Or maybe my hearing is just degrading.

 

[big2bird]

That's not always the case. Amplifiers do indeed have differing distortion, noise, and frequency response measurements. I find myself having sound preferences in electronics, oftentimes preferences I'm frankly adverse to having, and I'd like to think I have a modicum of knowledge and I'm not superstitious. I really want to get on-board with the differences-are-all-in-my-head camp, but it makes for lousy buying decisions. I will say this, a lot more electronic products make me happy now than they did ten or fifteen years ago, especially in digital products. Amps too. Or maybe my hearing is just degrading.

There is no doubt that inferior electronics sound inferior.
I would also venture to say that handling of the source, I.E. choice of stylus and pre amp is more important. Feed an amp trash, and you get loud trash.
I would rather have a $500 stylus with a $2000 speaker and a $100 amp, than visa versa.

 

[slipperybidness]

That's not always the case. Amplifiers do indeed have differing distortion, noise, and frequency response measurements. I find myself having sound preferences in electronics, oftentimes preferences I'm frankly adverse to having, and I'd like to think I have a modicum of knowledge and I'm not superstitious. I really want to get on-board with the differences-are-all-in-my-head camp, but it makes for lousy buying decisions. I will say this, a lot more electronic products make me happy now than they did ten or fifteen years ago, especially in digital products. Amps too. Or maybe my hearing is just degrading.

I won't argue with you there. I'm simply stating that a lot of people (audiophools) will not even consider a class D amp or pro amp, they won't even audition the gear, rule it out without giving it a fair shot.

Another good example is the Technics SL1200. Many people rule it out as a DJ turntable and not suitable for home use. I love my SL-1210, bought it new, and will never get rid of it. I also really want a Pro-Ject Carbon, but that doesn't take anything away from my Technics.

 

[Irvrobinson]

I won't argue with you there. I'm simply stating that a lot of people (audiophools) will not even consider a class D amp or pro amp, they won't even audition the gear, rule it out without giving it a fair shot.

That may be true. It might be that a Class D amp would sound better.

I've always wanted to hear one of the Class I Macro-Techs in my system, but the only way to do that has been to buy one.

 

[big2bird]

I won't argue with you there. I'm simply stating that a lot of people (audiophools) will not even consider a class D amp or pro amp, they won't even audition the gear, rule it out without giving it a fair shot.

Another good example is the Technics SL1200. Many people rule it out as a DJ turntable and not suitable for home use. I love my SL-1210, bought it new, and will never get rid of it. I also really want a Pro-Ject Carbon, but that doesn't take anything away from my Technics.

My response to this would be:
If the music you are listening to was recorded with pro equipment, the concert you are attending is using pro equipment, what on earth makes you think that pro equipment cannot replicate that at home?

 

[slipperybidness]

My response to this would be:
If the music you are listening to was recorded with pro equipment, the concert you are attending is using pro equipment, what on earth makes you think that pro equipment cannot replicate that at home?

+1

Here is another very valid argument in that same line of thinking.

How many audiophools will reject any preamp that has tone controls? They prefer the simple, short signal path.

How many potentiometers has that signal passed through during recording and mastering? In the grand scheme of things, do the presence of tone controls on a pre really make a difference?

 

[Irvrobinson]

My response to this would be:
If the music you are listening to was recorded with pro equipment, the concert you are attending is using pro equipment, what on earth makes you think that pro equipment cannot replicate that at home?

This portion of the discussion wasn't about pro audio equipment in general, it was about amplifiers. Classifying any equipment in categories and claiming the equipment is good or bad just because of the marketing category is irrational. As for your assertion, I find a critical listening home environment to be more demanding than any professional audio tasks save mixing and mastering, and a few monitoring situations (though not the ones I've been present for). Even then, I find a lot of mixes are done with cheap speakers mounted on the mixing console. Pro audio equipment can be awesome, but let's not get all misty-eyed about what happens in the recording chain. It's often analogous to sausage-making.

 

[Irvrobinson]

+1

Here is another very valid argument in that same line of thinking.

How many audiophools will reject any preamp that has tone controls? They prefer the simple, short signal path.

How many potentiometers has that signal passed through during recording and mastering? In the grand scheme of things, do the presence of tone controls on a pre really make a difference?

Tone controls are usually not just potentiometers, they're additional gain stages. As for potentiometers, on high-end mixing consoles the potentiometers are often better quality than on home equipment, almost any home equipment. Not necessarily for audible reasons, but for longevity under hard use.

Audiophiles get nervous about potentiometers because they're conductive plastic rather than wires or trace. Personally, I'm more of a fan of just measuring the output signals and not caring about the implementation, but lots of people think some electronic components are good and some are bad. Lots of people in the industry like playing into those biases too; there's money in it.

 

[big2bird]

How many audiophools will reject any preamp that has tone controls? They prefer the simple, short signal path.

In theory, the simpler the circuit, the less coloration. However, in reality, anything can, such as speakers or environment.
The first thing a sound engineer at a concert does is jamb on some pink noise, and listen for standing waves and roll offs, and try to get as large a sweet spot as possible.
An audiophile that swears to class a amps and no tone controls is kidding himself without at least some accoustical treatments or equalization. If the room is sucking up 200 htz, it needs more to be true.

 

[big2bird]

Tone controls are usually not just potentiometers, they're additional gain stages. As for potentiometers, on high-end mixing consoles the potentiometers are often better quality than on home equipment, almost any home equipment. Not necessarily for audible reasons, but for longevity under hard use.

Audiophiles get nervous about potentiometers because they're conductive plastic rather than wires or trace. Personally, I'm more of a fan of just measuring the output signals and not caring about the implementation, but lots of people think some electronic components are good and some are bad. Lots of people in the industry like playing into those biases too; there's money in it.

ANY electronics degrade with time. As sure as an automobile wears out, so do pots, caps, drivers, etc.

 

[Irvrobinson]

ANY electronics degrade with time. As sure as an automobile wears out, so do pots, caps, drivers, etc.

Okay, so what? I'm missing your point.

 

[darien87]

I am disappointed that the XMC is going to be that much more. I had planned on doing the upgrade to it from the UMC, but maybe not now.

Same here. Getting an XMC for $900 was stretching my budget. Now I think it's out of my reach. I still haven't watched Dredd because I was waiting for the damn XMC to come out so I could watch it in 3D. Now it's not going to be out for another 6 months and it's $300 more?!?!? Guess I'll just look for a 3D BD player with dual outs and call it a day. Though I'm not totally happy with my UMC 1 either. Lame.

 

[big2bird]

Okay, so what? I'm missing your point.

If an audiophile is nervous that a pot is plastic, and can get scratchy or a burn spot, he is missing out. If a dead room is sucking up 15Khtz, and needs a little gain in that band to get a more flat and true response over fear of an electronic component, he is misled.
The IDEAL is to replicate the experience of live sound. Virtually impossible at a home level, but we pursue it nontheless.
I played trumpet, french horn, and baritone at university. Very few here will ever hear what I heard sitting in that orchestra. It just isn't going to happen.
But we all try to replicate it as much as possible. Any tool that can be used to reach for that quest should never be discounted.

 

[Irvrobinson]

If an audiophile is nervous that a pot is plastic, and can get scratchy or a burn spot, he is missing out. If a dead room is sucking up 15Khtz, and needs a little gain in that band to get a more flat and true response over fear of an electronic component, he is misled.

That isn't what audiophiles are nervous about. They think that a pot is going to cause more signal degradation than a wire or some trace. They are correct, BTW. The incremental degradation just isn't of a magnitude that matters. More problematic is one or more analog equalization gain stages, but irrelevant to me since I'd never use such a crude tool in my primary system.

 

[slipperybidness]

Tone controls are usually not just potentiometers, they're additional gain stages. As for potentiometers, on high-end mixing consoles the potentiometers are often better quality than on home equipment, almost any home equipment. Not necessarily for audible reasons, but for longevity under hard use.

Audiophiles get nervous about potentiometers because they're conductive plastic rather than wires or trace. Personally, I'm more of a fan of just measuring the output signals and not caring about the implementation, but lots of people think some electronic components are good and some are bad. Lots of people in the industry like playing into those biases too; there's money in it.

Yeah, good point. I suppose that I didn't realize they were gain stages, that COULD give the argument against tone controls a LITTLE merit. Of course if done correctly, then should make no difference.

 

[big2bird]

That isn't what audiophiles are nervous about. They think that a pot is going to cause more signal degradation than a wire or some trace. They are correct, BTW. The incremental degradation just isn't of a magnitude that matters. More problematic is one or more analog equalization gain stages, but irrelevant to me since I'd never use such a crude tool in my primary system.

Then let me ask you this:
Discount that vinyl tech invented by Mr. Edison for a moment, or that CD invented by a digital geek.
Imagine you live in a garage next door to the Hollywood Bowl.
Your source is a nice array of Nueman U-87 mics fed directly to your garage.
Now you have a speaker you are trying to get to replicate that sound. Is it the signal that matters or the sound?
The signal is the DNA, but what you are trying to do is get those transducers to replicate that sound.
If you had a "magical" box that could take that pure DNA and feed it to the speaker to trick it into replicating the desired sound, would you use it?
I understand the need to keep that DNA pure, but ultimately, the trick is to take those drivers, and electromechanically get them to induce the same sound waves you would hear in that H. Bowl seat.
Sorry to take this thread so far off track. I apologize.

 

[ahblaza]

Same here. Getting an XMC for $900 was stretching my budget. Now I think it's out of my reach. I still haven't watched Dredd because I was waiting for the damn XMC to come out so I could watch it in 3D. Now it's not going to be out for another 6 months and it's $300 more?!?!? Guess I'll just look for a 3D BD player with dual outs and call it a day. Though I'm not totally happy with my UMC 1 either. Lame.

Darien, quick suggestion for a dual HDMI 3D BD player with excellent two channel analog outs is the Panasonic DMP-BDT500, great player for the money.
Amazon.com: Panasonic DMP-BDT500 Integrated Wi-Fi 3D Blu-ray DVD Player: Electronics
Great player........