shake777 Posted November 23, 2011 Share Posted November 23, 2011 ref and td, I've owned two Denons, both better models 4306 and 4810. I thought they were the best thing since the wheel. Now I have one for sale and have already sold the first. I'm very unimpressed with the mildly stated appreciation for the Denon. Apparantly niether of you have heard the UMC-1 and 4810 next to one another and given that everyone has their own taste and opinion, I still would never give advise about something I hadn't heard. Sure some people will like the Denon. With the excellent equalizer in the UMC-1 Its easy to make it sound flat and dull like the Denon. I even saw someone making reference to the great ampliifiers in the 4810. Check the Home Theater review to see thats not true either. I'll take Emo pre-pro and amps any day. No offense intended. Nic Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Heritage_Head Posted November 23, 2011 Share Posted November 23, 2011 ref and td, I've owned two Denons, both better models 4306 and 4810. I thought they were the best thing since the wheel. Now I have one for sale and have already sold the first. I'm very unimpressed with the mildly stated appreciation for the Denon. Apparantly niether of you have heard the UMC-1 and 4810 next to one another and given that everyone has their own taste and opinion, I still would never give advise about something I hadn't heard. Sure some people will like the Denon. With the excellent equalizer in the UMC-1 Its easy to make it sound flat and dull like the Denon. I even saw someone making reference to the great ampliifiers in the 4810. Check the Home Theater review to see thats not true either. I'll take Emo pre-pro and amps any day. No offense intended. Nic Sorry you misunderstood my post. I was only saying that just because you don’t like the denon avr doesn’t mean you had it set up wrong or something like he kind of suggested. I’m not a big fan of denon anything to be honest. I have had a few denon pieces over the years and wasn’t that impressed. My friend has the denon 3808 avr and its nothing special imo. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Vital Posted November 23, 2011 Share Posted November 23, 2011 I don't understand what you mean by "general sonics," being "far superior" and the claim that one is"very bland" compared to one that has "exciting musicality" negates the fact that the Denon AVR-4810ci does get good marks by experienced users. That's not to say that the UMC-1 isn't a good bang-for-your-buck, but given your description I contend something was wrong with the setup on the Denon in your comparison...My 2 centsIf you were listening to the UMC and then switched to a Denon AVR it would sound just like someone put a blanket over your speakers. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dad311 Posted November 23, 2011 Share Posted November 23, 2011 What's its worth today maybe different then what's its worth next week when the new firmware comes out. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Fish Posted November 23, 2011 Share Posted November 23, 2011 I've owned several Denons, all rock solid and easy to operate.I had several, the last being a 3805 .... Hey Fish, I have the AVR-3803 and AVR-3805 running two different HTs nicely, but the THX processing in the 4806 (and AVR-4802 prior) along with Audyssey EQ really is superior than in earlier, mid-level units, imo. That's a good point so I'll defer to your judgement on the 4xxx models. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Moderators Youthman Posted November 23, 2011 Moderators Share Posted November 23, 2011 What's its worth today maybe different then what's its worth next week when the new firmware comes out. Where did you hear that? Nevermind, I found it - Link Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Moderators Youthman Posted November 23, 2011 Moderators Share Posted November 23, 2011 According to Big Dan on the Podcast, the final Firmware release (supposably next week) is a complete rewrite of the UMC-1 code with some "surprises". Guess we will have to wait and see. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rivernuggets Posted November 23, 2011 Share Posted November 23, 2011 ...most UMC-1 owners probably paid the $699 price, as opposed to the current $499 sale price. I'm one of those owners. Had it for a year now and feel it's worth what I paid at $699. If you have the money I'd jump at $499 if I were you. It replaced my Harman Kardon AVR525 (no HDMI) and made a huge difference in clarity. After setting up, all volumes (even very quiet) sound excellent for movies. It has so many tweaks I was a bit overwhelmed at first, but once you get your brain around the setup process and navigating through the menu, it makes good sense. For me the UMC-1 is a great balance between music and movies. I'm very happy with it! Emotiva is having a Black Friday sale. Wait and see if they price it down even further. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dad311 Posted November 23, 2011 Share Posted November 23, 2011 Wont be discounted any more, but maybe some new products. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
shake777 Posted November 23, 2011 Share Posted November 23, 2011 Thanks ref, it's all fine among friends. Nic Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JasonJCarney Posted November 23, 2011 Author Share Posted November 23, 2011 River..... Don't you think that it's a jaded opinion since your previous avr didn't have hdmi? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
blargman Posted November 24, 2011 Share Posted November 24, 2011 Nobody here thinks that things such as Audyssey room correction are worth paying extra for? UMC-1 seems to have great reviews but yet it also seems like every time MultiEQ XT is brought up as a necessity for a new AVR. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Zen Traveler Posted November 24, 2011 Share Posted November 24, 2011 ... I'm very unimpressed with the mildly stated appreciation for the Denon. Apparantly niether of you have heard the UMC-1 and 4810 next to one another and given that everyone has their own taste and opinion, I still would never give advise about something I hadn't heard. Sure some people will like the Denon. With the excellent equalizer in the UMC-1 Its easy to make it sound flat and dull like the Denon. I even saw someone making reference to the great ampliifiers in the 4810. Check the Home Theater review to see thats not true either. I'll take Emo pre-pro and amps any day. No offense intended. Nic I don't take any offense and give my opinion based on my years of experience in this hobby and I used to spend considerable time auditioning and research and now like to share what I've learned...Your opening comment about the Denon being well regarded in reviews and then going on to characterize it as "dull and flat needed a second opinion to collaborate those other views. Fwiw, klipsch speakers are known to be on the bright side and Denon AVRS have a good reputation on here and elsewhere and it appears that the UMC-1 will have some fans as well. That being said and given your comments above: 1) How long did you A/B both units side by side before making a desion on which one to keep? 2) When you compared did you have the external amps connected to the Denon AVR-4810ci? 3) Did you run Audyssey (as per the instructions) on the Denon and what EQ setting did you use? Insofar as the "great amps" in the AVR 4810, unfortunately that is where Denon chose not to keep the same quality as previous 48XX series models...It has an adequate power supply for small to medium HTs but they saw the writing on the wall with Emotiva coming out and chose to put their R&D money into it's processor. Fwiw, the amps in my AVR run my HT efficiently and are every bit as good as in the lower end Emotiva 7 channel unit, and still has a high resale value. EDIT: Here is a link to the AVR-4806 Benchmark results: http://www.hometheaterhifi.com/volume_12_4/denon-avr-4806-receiver-12-2005-part-5.html Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Zen Traveler Posted November 24, 2011 Share Posted November 24, 2011 Nobody here thinks that things such as Audyssey room correction are worth paying extra for? UMC-1 seems to have great reviews but yet it also seems like every time MultiEQ XT is brought up as a necessity for a new AVR. Welcome to the Forum blargman. I wouldn't say that the UMC-1 has "great reviews" but definitely seems like a good bang-for-your-buck...That being said, everyone hears things differently but unless you are a pro mixer the science behind Audyssey and room correction has come along way to making end-user graphic equalizers obsolete, imo. One person might want more bass whereas another would find it offensive and the goal should be to experience what the artist wanted us to in the first place...With multichannel sources being more consistent ( I hardly ever have to adjust anything but the volume) it is easier to accomplish that goal. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
willland Posted November 24, 2011 Share Posted November 24, 2011 I even saw someone making reference to the great ampliifiers in the 4810. Check the Home Theater review to see thats not true either. In defense of the Denon, this bench test looked pretty good. Remember, all modern avr's are equipped with power limiting circuitry that kicks in to prevent any unwanted damage to the speakers. The Denon's 60w/channel with all 7 channels driven is with the limiters engaged. The 1 channel, 2 channel and 5 channel tests are pretty darn good. Denon AVR-4810CI Test Report: An in-depth look at Denon's flagship A/V receiver. DOLBY DIGITAL PERFORMANCEAll data were obtained from various test DVDs using 16-bit dithered test signals, which set limits on measured distortion and noise performance. Reference input level is -20 dBFS, and reference output is 1 watt into 8 ohms. Volume setting for reference level was 1.5. All level trims at zero, except for subwoofer-related tests, all speakers were set to "large," subwoofer on. All are worst-case figures where applicable. Output at clipping (1 kHz into 8/4 ohms)1 channel driven: 183/298 W (22.6/24.7 dBW)5 channels driven (8 ohms): 132 W (21.2 dBW)7 channels driven (8 ohms): 60 W (17.8 dBW)* * Power tests on more 7 channels simultaneously (or more) quickly induced current limiting to a level of approximately 60 watts on all channels Distortion at 1 watt (THD+N, 1 kHz)8/4 ohms: 0.02/0.03%Noise level (A-wtd): -75.9 dBExcess noise (with sine tone)16-bit (EN16): 0.2 dBFrequency response: 20 Hz to 20 kHz +0, -0.1 dB MULTICHANNEL PERFORMANCE, ANALOG INPUTReference input and output level is 200 mV; volume setting for reference output level was 2.Distortion (THD+N, 1 kHz, 8 ohms): 0.015%Noise level (A-wtd.): -92.3Frequency response: <10 Hz to >200 kHz +0, -3 dB STEREO PERFORMANCE, DIGITAL INPUTReference level is -20 dBFS; all level trims at zero. Volume setting for reference level was 1. Output at clipping (1 kHz, 8/4 ohms, both channels driven): 164/235 W (22.1 /23.7 dBW)Distortion at reference level: 0.02% Bill Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
StephenM Posted November 24, 2011 Share Posted November 24, 2011 I wouldn't say that the UMC-1 has "great reviews" but definitely seems like a good bang-for-your-buck...That being said, everyone hears things differently but unless you are a pro mixer the science behind Audyssey and room correction has come along way to making end-user graphic equalizers obsolete, imo. One person might want more bass whereas another would find it offensive and the goal should be to experience what the artist wanted us to in the first place...With multichannel sources being more consistent ( I hardly ever have to adjust anything but the volume) it is easier to accomplish that goal. FWIW, I agree with this assessment. IMO Audyssey is a powerful automated tool for those with the aim of acheiving a "reference quality" performance. Depending on the version (MultEQ to MultEQ XT32) we're talking about FIR filters with hundreds to tens of thousands of FIR filters which aim to correct issues in both the frequency and time domain. A graphic EQ in the right hand can be a powerful tool as well, presuming you know what you're doing and you take in room measurements. In the wrong hands, which is likely the majority of cases, its a tool to tune to "preference" as opposed to "reference". Whether this is a good thing or a bad thing depends on your goals. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Fish Posted November 24, 2011 Share Posted November 24, 2011 While I'm sure the Denon is a nice unit the amps are lightweight when compared to the Emotiva upa7.Compared to many avrs though they are superior.The Denon weighs about 45 lbs amp/prepro, the upa7 weighs 66 lbs, over 20 lbs more and that's just the amp.I looked inside and saw no bricks or wasted metal.[] I can't comment on the sound of the prepro but as to amps there's not much to compare.That may or may not even matter to some according to needs. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Zen Traveler Posted November 24, 2011 Share Posted November 24, 2011 While I'm sure the Denon is a nice unit the amps are lightweight when compared to the Emotiva upa7. Sorry Fish, but the Amps in the AVR-4806 (as per my posted benchmark results above) may be "lighter" but are comparable to the ones in the Emotiva UPA 7. Fwiw, here is a Benchmark review of the UPA-5: http://www.hometheaterhifi.com/power-amplifiers/824-emotiva-upa-5.html?showall=1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Fish Posted November 24, 2011 Share Posted November 24, 2011 Denon rated 60 watts x 7 and rated at 1khz? Once again I'll defer to your judgement on the Denon. I'm sure if you like it on 7's it has to sound pretty good. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
shake777 Posted November 24, 2011 Share Posted November 24, 2011 Wil, this is supposed to be a nine channel amp and the power drops off drastically there. When I converted to a ffve channel system and two hundred real watts per channel it woke the whole thing up with an XPA-5. This is in spite of the fact that the pre-pro section in the Denon is just boring comparitively. Its a good amp but dull compared to the UMC-1. if you take the UMC-1 you can create infinite profiles of sound and all while your in the middle of listening to your music or movie. Mostly the thing that makes the least sense to me is members who have little or no experience listening to both 4810 and UMC-1 giving advise about the two side by side. I imagine if I asked for opinions from those that had at least a week listening to both the responses would drop off to close to none. Your opinion is not as strong to me other wise. Nic Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.