What's the latest word on the Emotiva UMC-1?

Kenobi, I had the 40.2 running with Parasound power for a bit. The Onkyo preamp is very old-school Japanese sounding. It lacks depth and weight. My friend runs his theater with the Marantz 8003, which is VASTLY superior in sound to the Onkyo. But even he admits the Emotiva's preamp section is better. BTW, speaker systems involved are Merlin, Magnepan, Focal and Def tech.

Chadnliz, I own Emotiva amps as well as Odyssey, Rotel and the beautiful tube based Manley Stingray II. I've also had Parasound, Rogue and others. I don't comment on gear that I've never heard or heard once at a shop. The gear I discuss has been in my home.

Denon is mid-fi. It's good stuff. But you're being silly if you think a Denon anything will match the Emotiva gear. Using a Rogue Metis preamp the UPA-1 monoblocks held their own against a Odyssey stratos and certainly bested the Rotel 1075. You might also want to read my comparison of how the Emotiva ERC-1 CD player did vs. a far more expensive tube based player. If you don't actually hear this stuff with appropriate associated gear then you have no idea.

Sorry guys. Get back to me when you actually do more than read about these components. Like I said, my system is elaborate. I would not tolerate the UMC-1 if it wasn't excellent. I'm anxious to see Emotiva's full blown processor coming soon.

Rob

Rob

"I'm anxious to see Emotiva's full blown processor coming soon."

Well you should get that based upon how you feel about the UMC-1. I bet that new one will really be something special.
Hope they beta test it before they release it, unlike the UMC-1.

I never said I hadnt tried the gear, Denon is midfi, but from what I have seen and heard so is Emotiva. The amps sound cold and dry, the Pro has so many issues its not worth going into, look its nice for the price but lets not lose touch with reality.......it aint hifi.
The Anthem D2V (I do own to this day) has a much better pure sounding preamp and internal DACS, yes it costs but the last few percent is what some pay for.
BTW I dont think either is a real 2 channal pre and thats why I use a dedicated Ref 3 for music side....I also own a 2channel Anthem tube unit, Rotel 1068, Lexicon MC8 aswell.
This isnt my first trip around the block.....I have been swimming these waters for years.

The Anthem D2v is an expensive unit that I have heard several times. Have you compared it's sound to the Emotiva unit? Have you compared a highly regarded amp like the Odyssey Stratos or Parasound Halo to the Emotiva using a good pre-amp?

Your comments remind me of a friend who was telling me that Definitive Technology "Buys" all of their good reviews. He had heard their big tower speakers many times and they were steely, bright and two dimensional. So, after letting him listen to my new Merlin speakers I then connected my mid-fi Def Tech towers to the Manley Stingray amp and his draw dropped. Not that they were a match for a high end Merlin speaker, but he certainly learned why the speakers are well reviewed. The same goes for many components including the Emotiva amps.

Again, the Emotiva processor's issues are fixed. I own it and the latest firmware upgrades repaired all problems.

It's no fun to consider that a 7000 dollar product sounds no better or inferior to a 1000 dollar product. But it happens all the time in audio.

BTW, I don't consider ANY processor high end gear regardless of cost. The Onkyo, Marantz and Anthem units are not worth their cost (based on my experience with them) when you hear what a company like Emotiva is doing. True, I'm a recent tube convert, so a lot of SS gear sounds mid-fi to me these days.

As for Lexicon, I always thought their gear was pseudo-high-end and laughed hysterically when a dealer told me about the tests of their BD-30 blu-ray player. Getting what you pay for takes a lot of hard work. When someone, who spent a ton of cash on a component hears about something with the same functionality for a lot less, they prefer to assume that theirs is better. Understandable, but it's often not the case. I have an expensive tube based CD player next to a 300 dollar Oppo player that illustrates that point very nicely.

Cheers,

Rob

Robbob: Your world is a dedicated, acoustically tuned theater....and it's easy to say that you don't believe in or use room equalization. I would love to have that luxury as would most buyers of processors and amplifiers....but that's not our real world. we have real rooms, we have spouses opinions, we have large picture windows, etc. In an untuned environment, I will take a mid-fi Denon over an Emotiva UMC-1 every time...and yes, I had a UMC-1 for many months. I have heard an audyssey tuned room vs EMOQ because I have an Audyssey Sound Equalizer and I could compare the two....there was no comparison in my lousy to average acoustically family room. I now have a denon 4311 on order with Audyssey xt32 which will allow me to equalize multiple subs as well....and I'll sell the sound equalizer since it's no longer needed with Audyssey XT32.

Yes, the UMC-1 sounded quite good when it worked....I sent it back when the return period ended and Emotiva still had a number of outstanding problems that were driving my wife and I nuts. Perhaps they fixed them since then, but I wasn't going to take a risk of wasting my money on a buggy processor. But keep in mind that I was using it with the Audyssey Sound Equalizer...and I doubt that any UMC-1 user is going to buy a sound equalizer and pro install kit for $3000 to make their $699 processor sound good in THEIR real room.

I believe that an Onkyo, Integra, Denon,.... box with Audyssey multEq and certainly one with the more powerful Audyssey Multeq XT will sound much better in the average room than a UMC-1 using or not using Emoq.

Just for completeness, all my tests were done with an NHT Power 5 amp, James sub and NHT speakers all around (2.9's, ac2,L5's)