9.2 review

[RocShemp]

Originally Posted by oldgame

2.0 review. Using the X-files season 8 & 9. There is a drastic difference between the two. Neo X has a well balanced sound stage. The sound sounds tighter and equally balanced for all 9 channels. The center channel sounds very clear and crisp. PLIIZ sounds unbalanced. The mains and center seem louder, and the heights and surrounds are softer. The center channel seems wider and not tightly focused. It is harder to hear the vocals on IIZ. Neo X is the clear winner with the source being recorded in 2.0. I have done some comparisons with 5.1 and 7.1, and its obvious that the more discrete channels the source is recorded in the less of a difference there is between the two. Can't wait till I receive Expendables 2 and compare the two.

So have you tested The Expendables 2 already?

[PEEKABOO2K]

Originally Posted by RocShemp

So have you tested The Expendables 2 already?

If your renting it from Netflix witch i did just receive it today unfortunately the only option you have is 5.1 Dolby Digital i have a 9.3 set up front presence B&W speakers and Yamaha Aventage 3010 and the sound was horrible i was so disappointed they could at least put 7.1 DTS HD

[RocShemp]

Originally Posted by PEEKABOO2K

If your renting it from Netflix witch i did just receive it today unfortunately the only option you have is 5.1 Dolby Digital i have a 9.3 set up front presence B&W speakers and Yamaha Aventage 3010 and the sound was horrible i was so disappointed they could at least put 7.1 DTS HD

That's a shame studios are doing that to rental discs.

Sadder still is that I have the movie (with the Neo:X 11.1 optimized 7.1 track) and receiver capable of playing it back in 11.1 but only have a 5.2 configuration.

[dholmes]

Are you guys saying that neo 6 or x whatever its called sounds better than plllz? I havnt tried any of them but plllz. thanks

[oldgame]

I watched Expendables 2 but havn't compared between the two. I'm to busy right now and more reviews will have to wait till after Christmas. But I will try to keep up with this thread.

[PEEKABOO2K]

Originally Posted by dholmes

Are you guys saying that neo 6 or x whatever its called sounds better than plllz? I havnt tried any of them but plllz. thanks

NOO did not say that it was the fact that now Blu ray rentals like Expandable 2 has Dolby Digital sound witch is regular compress audio it was not True HD or DTS HD or had the option for DTS NEO-6 witch its suppose to come with witch i was looking forward to try out since i recently upgraded to 9.3 set up soon will upgrade to 11.3 so basically now some movie you have to Buy it to get the full movie experience as of sound and bonus features also I haven't done the comparison but from some forums i have read other people who have done the comparison there personal opinion i notice more people say that DTS Neo6 is better than the Dolby Pro Logic IIz but me personally it come down to personal preference this is a argument that can go on forever.

[dholmes]

Thanks peekaboo2k,I have a 9.2 system & my height chs make movies sound better.I thought the new TDKR blu-ray didnt sound all that great,could have been better.You are going to 11.3 thats great,wish I had the room for that! Ill try different surround modes & see which one sounds better.

[Remo]

Just put up my front high speakers last night. I played some music for an hour or so then popped in a couple blu-rays.
Yup I'm hooked, it was a good choice going with 9, to bad bad my receiver doesn't support 11.x processing I can only choose between the configuration of 9, whether it be front wides or front highs playing with the other 7, can't play both high and wide unless the rear surrounds are off.

For music I prefer PLIIz
For movies I have not decided yet as I haven't tried any DSPs. For what ever reason I don't need to engage a DSP mode for blu-ray movies, my receiver outputs to how ever many speakers are connected. When I hit display the receiver shows "Audio: input DTS-HD Master Audio 5.1(or 7.1)", " Output: DTS-HD Master Audio 9.1H " again no DSP has been engaged other than Audyssy Dynamic EQ. I had no idea that it would do that.
IMG_0139.jpg
IMG_0140.jpg

[oldgame]

Anyone who still watches laserdisc's, Neo X does an excellent job with movie soundtracks. I still prefer stereo mode for music.

[slimdude]

Originally Posted by Remo

Just put up my front high speakers last night. I played some music for an hour or so then popped in a couple blu-rays.
Yup I'm hooked, it was a good choice going with 9, to bad bad my receiver doesn't support 11.x processing I can only choose between the configuration of 9, whether it be front wides or front highs playing with the other 7, can't play both high and wide unless the rear surrounds are off.

For music I prefer PLIIz
For movies I have not decided yet as I haven't tried any DSPs. For what ever reason I don't need to engage a DSP mode for blu-ray movies, my receiver outputs to how ever many speakers are connected. When I hit display the receiver shows "Audio: input DTS-HD Master Audio 5.1(or 7.1)", " Output: DTS-HD Master Audio 9.1H " again no DSP has been engaged other than Audyssy Dynamic EQ. I had no idea that it would do that.
Attachment 56249
Attachment 56250

Those extra channels are only matrix, not discrete. I prefer to listen all discrete channels, the way digital sound is supposed to be heard. If you had 22.1 channels, all of those extra channels will be matrixed. 5.1 is still the norm, regardless the number of extra channels you may have!

[oldgame]

Originally Posted by slimdude

Those extra channels are only matrix, not discrete. I prefer to listen all discrete channels, the way digital sound is supposed to be heard. If you had 22.1 channels, all of those extra channels will be matrixed. 5.1 is still the norm, regardless the number of extra channels you may have!

Then how do you explain soundtracks that are enhanced for DTS Neo X and DD surround EX.

[slimdude]

Originally Posted by oldgame

Then how do you explain soundtracks that are enhanced for DTS Neo X and DD surround EX.

Personally, I think DTS Neo X is an overkill! 7.1 is tolerable, but any channels over 7.1 is definitely an overkill.

[Remo]

Originally Posted by slimdude

Those extra channels are only matrix, not discrete. I prefer to listen all discrete channels, the way digital sound is supposed to be heard. If you had 22.1 channels, all of those extra channels will be matrixed. 5.1 is still the norm, regardless the number of extra channels you may have!

I'm not useing DSPs so it is not matrixed, I found out in a different thread that the DTS decoder duplicates channels to the maximum number of channels connected to the receiver. This change happened in the 2011 model receivers. According to DTS this is how they want it. Does not happen on Dobly tracks. While this does not make them discrete it surely doesn't make them matrixed.

Everybody is different, you prefer to listen to discrete channels, I prefer to listen to.... well im not sure yet as I am still trying many different things with my HT. 7.1 is gaining ground on Blu-ray with more and more 7.1 tracks, I'd like to see 11.1 become the norm someday.

[oldgame]

Originally Posted by Remo

, I'd like to see 11.1 become the norm someday.

It will + I think overhead will be next.

[gotmule]

Originally Posted by slimdude

Personally, I think DTS Neo X is an overkill! 7.1 is tolerable, but any channels over 7.1 is definitely an overkill.

Home theater is a lot like working out in that there are several ways to accomplish the desired outcome. There are a lot of right ways to go about accomplishing your goals, and there are definitely a lot of wrong ways....but ultimately it comes down to what works best for you. With that in mind, the room and space play a huge role in what will sound the best to your ears. Given space limitations, a 5.1 system might sound the best, but if you have an opportunity to add more, it can be a very cool thing.

As far as your anti-matrix stance, that is also a matter of opinion as a matrix channel can also add to the experience. Keep in mind back in the days of Dolby surround, the center channel was a matrix channel in that anything that was common to both left and right main channels was sent to the center channel...and people were blown away. In a 6.1 setting where the processor matrixes the rear center from a 5.1 track, it pulls anything that is common to both the left and right rear channel to give the rear center. If the producer or sound engineer steers the same information to both surrounds, there is a a good chance he or she is attempting to give you a phantom image behind you. By matrixing that channel behind you, the experience will be much more realistic than a phantom image. This is all nothing new, but the same theory applies to today's current sound formats. If a producer or sound engineer places identical audio to both right surround and right main speakers, they are possibly trying to give you a possible phantom image somewhere in between those channels. A wide channel might help anchor that sound in that location and once again, that can be a cool thing.

I just spent about an hour listening to the first 2 chapters of Expendables 2 using dts neo x, pure direct dts master audio, and plIIz. Not a perfect test given the way you might or might not remember previous rounds, but I can honestly say I enjoyed the dts neo x processing more than anything else as the front soundstage is huge. The room was also more balanced as the 7.1 round was very heavy in the back of the room with music and effects that sometimes did not make sense as to their placement there. Granted, I can adjust the levels, but I also noticed the dts neo x did not place as much music out of the surrounds but instead placed it in the width channels which only expanded the front soundstage further. The effects that appeared in the surrounds made perfect sense being there as it matched the on screen action.

I also watched a chapter of a 5.1 dts track, Looper, using the same formats, and I still feel the the dts neo x sounds the best to me. I once again keyed into the front soundstage as being huge.

Speaker placement and calibration is the key however as you cant just throw a speaker behind you or along side your main speakers and call it a day. In order to create a totally immersive experience, invest the time, use the science and technology that is available to calibrate, and watch a mindless movie like Expendables 2 over and over and over again.

Just my 2 cents.

[oldgame]

^^^ +1

[Theos]

For anyone running wide channels. How wide is your room? I have them set up in a room that is about 14 feet wide now, mounted on the side walls and don't hear much of a benefit, they are only 4 feet or so from my mains.

Is this room too narrow to receive the full benefit? My mains image very well already and have a broad soundstage. I tested with Heights also and enjoyed what I heard and I haven't tested with rear surrounds yet, the room is 20 L x 14 W x 8 H. Is there anyone that has tested all 3 different methods and preferred rear surrounds?

I'm using DTS Neo:X

[gotmule]

Originally Posted by Theos

For anyone running wide channels. How wide is your room? I have them set up in a room that is about 14 feet wide now, mounted on the side walls and don't hear much of a benefit, they are only 4 feet or so from my mains.

Is this room too narrow to receive the full benefit? My mains image very well already and have a broad soundstage. I tested with Heights also and enjoyed what I heard and I haven't tested with rear surrounds yet, the room is 20 L x 14 W x 8 H. Is there anyone that has tested all 3 different methods and preferred rear surrounds?

I'm using DTS Neo:X

A few questions come to mind. What are your main speakers and width speakers? Have you run an auto calibration? Are your width channels facing the listening area or are they facing in from the side walls? Are they also closer to the listening area than your mains?

My room is 17' wide, so not a lot bigger, but my width channels are roughly 7' away from the mains.

[Theos]

Originally Posted by gotmule

A few questions come to mind. What are your main speakers and width speakers? Have you run an auto calibration? Are your width channels facing the listening area or are they facing in from the side walls? Are they also closer to the listening area than your mains?

My room is 17' wide, so not a lot bigger, but my width channels are roughly 7' away from the mains.

Mains are Martin Logan Theos and the width speakers are Motion 8s mounted on the wall. I've done calibration with XT32 and that is all good to go, I have them toed in slightly towards the main listening position and they are about 3 feet closer from the mains and about 4 feet apart from them. So 3 feet in and 4 feet to the side if you were walking from one of the mains.

I'm starting to think the room just isn't an ideal fit for them, everything is placed at the recommended DSX angles of 60 degrees for the wides.

[gotmule]

Originally Posted by Theos

For anyone running wide channels. How wide is your room? I have them set up in a room that is about 14 feet wide now, mounted on the side walls and don't hear much of a benefit, they are only 4 feet or so from my mains.

Is this room too narrow to receive the full benefit? My mains image very well already and have a broad soundstage. I tested with Heights also and enjoyed what I heard and I haven't tested with rear surrounds yet, the room is 20 L x 14 W x 8 H. Is there anyone that has tested all 3 different methods and preferred rear surrounds?

I'm using DTS Neo:X

Originally Posted by Theos

Mains are Martin Logan Theos and the width speakers are Motion 8s mounted on the wall. I've done calibration with XT32 and that is all good to go, I have them toed in slightly towards the main listening position and they are about 3 feet closer from the mains and about 4 feet apart from them. So 3 feet in and 4 feet to the side if you were walking from one of the mains.

I'm starting to think the room just isn't an ideal fit for them, everything is placed at the recommended DSX angles of 60 degrees for the wides.

That sounds like it possibly might be the case. What are your channel levels after the calibration was run? Curious due to electrostatics for mains and traditional drivers for your widths.

Nice choice in speakers by the way.