Receiver Recommendations for Sierra-2

[markie]

Sm, please be aware that the supposed sound difference in the Oppo's DAC and implementation would vanish in an ABX over my $100 Sony player.

But seriously, what a fine choice in the Oppo 105. You have probably already read it, that the Modwright mod of the Oppo 105 takes even the great stock 105 to the next level.

I just visited AVS to read about Emotiva's problems with their processors. Here is what I came away with: despite some irritants with the UMC200 (really dumb problems on Emotiva's part imo), in terms of raw sound capability in Direct mode and manually tweaking the EQ settings it is unmatched at its price point. A post at AVS linked to a homecinemaguru article, which summarizes thusly:

Overall the UMC-200 is an outstanding performer in the home theater preamplifier processor category. It has excellent sound quality and exceptional flexibility. Assuming you can live with it’s limitations and calibrate it manually you would be hard pressed to find a unit that can sound this good for anything close to this price point.

I'm figuring that the upcoming Emotiva Fusion 8100 will essentially combine a 'fixed' version of the UMC200 processor with a somewhat diluted version of their UPA700 amplifier, in one slim package. We'll see how it pans out in a couple of weeks.

Mark

[Mag_Neato]

The UMC 1 processor had it's problems. I think they have about fully recovered from that now. Also, they have Outlaw people working with them now if I recall correctly. I'm looking forward to the upcoming reviews because it's a product I myself am now eyeing, instead of going separates.



Yes, yes, why does that not surprise me? I suspect that even with room correction off there will be very audible differences in sound presentation, probably in Emotiva's favour. But the room correction of the Denon may level the playing field. We'll soon see!

Outlaw people working with Emotiva?? Please elaborate. I loved my old Outlaw 1050 receiver.

[smurraybhm]

Markie - I assume you are joking regarding the first two paragraphs. When one of my staff says "i figured" that is always an indicator of a less then desirable outcome. Since you have this under control I am out and good luck with the Fusion, hope it works for you.

[Kisakuku]

Sm, please be aware that the supposed sound difference in the Oppo's DAC and implementation would vanish in an ABX over my $100 Sony player.

This not nearly as ridiculous as you make it sound. Better question is why would you give up RC in order to use Oppo's DACs.

[smurraybhm]

For 2 channel? I really enjoy listening to my Sierra 2s in Pure Direct when listening to music whether it is 2 channel or a multi channel SACD like Roxy Music Avalon. For HT - room correction (XT32 right now) always and no benefit to the DAC on the 105. By the way I only own a lowly 103, and pass things on to my Denon 4311 or Pioneer SC-07 via HDMI.

Where did I make it sound ridiculous? I just took exception to the Sony/Oppo comparison via analog. Either way it is no big deal for me and I don't believe in snake oil mods or make assumptions before buying. Before spending money on a DAC I am going to invest in improving my speakers, sub and receiver in that order. One reason I have a Horizon center on order and upgraded my 1s to 2s.

I am just a happy Ascend customer who tried to point out that I wouldn't make an assumption on a Emotiva product (outside their amps) until a few more facts are known. How easy it is to get off track. Thanks. Steve

[markie]

Outlaw people working with Emotiva?? Please elaborate. I loved my old Outlaw 1050 receiver.

My apologies Ed, I misremembered and confused Outlaw with Sherbourn. Emotiva (or its parent company Jade) purchased Sherbourn a couple of years ago I think. On top of that, I had heard Emotiva recently partnered with Carver, but I have just now read that in fact it turned out to be only a very short relationship. My memory has more glitches than a new Emotiva processor!

Mark

[Mag_Neato]

My apologies Ed, I misremembered and confused Outlaw with Sherbourn. Emotiva (or its parent company Jade) purchased Sherbourn a couple of years ago I think. On top of that, I had heard Emotiva recently partnered with Carver, but I have just now read that in fact it turned out to be only a very short relationship. My memory has more glitches than a new Emotiva processor!

Mark

Mark, no harm, no foul! The two companies are direct rivals and I know that Scott left Outlaw a while back so just wondered.

[petmotel]

I was just watching a podcast on AVS with guest superstar theater designer Keith Yates. I can't help but thinking about his comment about how some people get way too bogged down in relatively unimportant minutia, and miss the big picture. Differences in modern electronics, amps, pre-amps, DACs, speaker cables, and interconnects all fall directly smack dab in the middle of this category.

For those interested in the truth, watch this video produced by real audio experts whom have been in the know for decades:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Zvireu2SGZM

Jay

[Kisakuku]

Where did I make it sound ridiculous?

You didn't. My post was quoting Markie.

[markie]

I was just watching a podcast on AVS with guest superstar theater designer Keith Yates. I can't help but thinking about his comment about how some people get way too bogged down in relatively unimportant minutia, and miss the big picture. Differences in modern electronics, amps, pre-amps, DACs, speaker cables, and interconnects all fall directly smack dab in the middle of this category.

For those interested in the truth, watch this video produced by real audio experts whom have been in the know for decades:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Zvireu2SGZM

Thank you Jay for an excellent and very informative video!. As long as the video was, one gets the impression that Ethan Winer was greatly truncating what he knew. Even so, it did delve into the 'minutia' which left me thinking that they *are* important. For instance there is distortion but there are various types of distortion, with different volume levels, etc, etc, the measurements of which we are likely never to see in manufacturers specs. Way too much paper! There are a lot of trees in the forest, and the trees define the forest. But if your point is that some trees stand out much more than others, I entirely agree.

I would like to point out some of Winer's views from the video:

3:35 "One common myth is that fidelity is not fully understood so two devices may measure the same but sound very different. This is not true. Of course you have to measure everything and at different volume levels ... Modern test methods are complete ..."

The practical fact of the matter is that our measurements are very incomplete. So it is entirely possible, and has shown to be the case, that two devices may apparently measure the same and yet sound differently. That is because we are *not* measuring everything - something that to me is just about practically impossible.

"If there really was some aspect of audio fidelity that science was unaware of, it would have been revealed years ago by nulling".

While I agree with Winer that nulling guarantees fidelity in a particular device, let's get practical: In a working environment, a device is not in isolation; it interacts with, and its operation is influenced by other devices to which it is connected. This just underlines the point that measurements must be taken for what they are - limited to the context in which they are taken. Real world environments alter that context. So while measurements can no doubt be very informing and useful they should not be construed as absolute nor guaranteeing a real world result.

5:50 "However there is a difference between high fidelity - accuracy of reproduction - and the pleasing character of sound". The former is easily measured, but the latter is subjective and must be accessed by listening."

Yes it comes down to listening. Yet I agree with what Winer said earlier, that listening may not catch all the defects that measurement devices can measure. However on the flip side, listening serves as an excellent holistic *summation* of information which only sifting through a mountain full of measurements might reveal.

In closing, given Winer's firm conviction that we already know everything about sound fidelity we can, I would like him to put that to practical use, and correlate particular measurements to what we subjectively perceive. For instance, what specific set of measurements would reveal specific characteristics which causes one preamp to present a soundstage that POPS in 3D, with a clear perception of space between instruments, and another preamp that sounds flat and 2D?

Those are the types of answers I would like to hear, and frankly I don't think I'll be hearing them anytime soon.

How's that for a receiver recommendation hehe!

Mark