9.2 review

[oldgame]

I'm reviewing the differences between Dolby IIz and DTS neo X.
PLEASE DON'T TURN THIS INTO A 5.1 VS 9.1 BASHING.
I want to hear opinions between the two decoders.
I'm using and Integra 50.4 reciever with back surrounds and heights. It's a 9.2 system.
Switching between the two I noticed that PlIIz has a wider front stage,meaning the front's and center have a wide sound stage and the heights and surrounds tend to get lost and not localized.

The Neo X has a narrower but higher sound stage. And all 9 channels seam to be equally balanced better.

Now some might prefer the wider sound stage, but I think that the Neo x sounds much tighter.

The heights really fill in nicely using Neo x, and with PLIIz they seam to only occasionly output anything.

Now I prefer using Neo x but this is pesonal preference. Please let me know what you think.

[Big Daddy]

I don't have any experience with Dolby PLIIz or DTS Neo X, but I do have extensive experience with Dolby PLIIx and other DSP modes.

There is a third alternative and that is Audyssey DSX. It supports both front height and front wide speakers. You can find more information about Audyssey DSX in Post #4 of the Audyssey Calibration thread.

I use the Yamaha-RX-A3010 Receiver. It supports eleven speakers and two subwoofers. That is 11.2. I use two front speakers, two center speakers, two front effect (commbination of height and wide) speakers, two side surround speakers, two rear surround speakers, and two rear effect speakers. The rear effect speakers are placed between the side surround and rear surround speakers. I also have ten subwoofers in the room. You can say my system is 12.10.

The yamaha receiver has many DSP options for both movies and music that support all the speakers. I use them for both movies and music. There are absolutely no audio holes around and the sound circles around your head. I have become so addicted that I can't enjoy anything with less speakers. Even commercial movie theaters are not as enjoyable.

[oldgame]

I hear you. Now I want 11.2. Did you hear about Dolby Atmos? It can have somewhere up to 82 speakers. This is why I love this hobby. You can always tweak what you have.

[Mr.Terry]

The Dolby Atmos sound is used on The Hobbit.It is overhead speakers.
I am interested in this thread as I only have 5.1 and am considering adding more speakers to flush out my sound.
I am a tweaker and am just not quite satisfied with my present sound.
It may be that my room is just too small to achieve the kind of sound I want.
I can go up to 11.1 with my Pioneer.
I shall follow this thread but can't offer any information or advice.
Thanks for the info,

[Hearing specialist]

Interesting...so, the height codec (PLIIz) doesn't seem to enhance the height channels? I also dig the Audyssey DSX theory and the audiologic backing is solid. Dig it! But, my room would benefit more from height than width due to wall limitations and placement.

Neo x is also a very interesting flavor, dig it but not on everything. Seems like the PLII's and their various flavors are also content specific. My example, the Neo to me keeps it really tight and my center channel seems to dig super deep and because its a DTS product seems to come alive only when it has to.

The PLIIx and z seems to not go as deep with the extension within the center but opens up a bunch of high freqs and the effects come to life via L&R's. Some content because of the tilted freq response can sometimes sound thin due to enhanced high freqs.

I love exploring the different theories like these and with DirectTV's default of Dolby Digital, sometimes going to some of these various modes can almost layer too much added processing and distort the signal as DD is so very stout within itself. Just my opinion, love this stuff!

[Stitches]

Originally Posted by oldgame

I'm reviewing the differences between Dolby IIz and DTS neo X.
PLEASE DON'T TURN THIS INTO A 5.1 VS 9.1 BASHING.
I want to hear opinions between the two decoders.
I'm using and Integra 50.4 reciever with back surrounds and heights. It's a 9.2 system.
Switching between the two I noticed that PlIIz has a wider front stage,meaning the front's and center have a wide sound stage and the heights and surrounds tend to get lost and not localized.

The Neo X has a narrower but higher sound stage. And all 9 channels seam to be equally balanced better.

Now some might prefer the wider sound stage, but I think that the Neo x sounds much tighter.

The heights really fill in nicely using Neo x, and with PLIIz they seam to only occasionly output anything.

Now I prefer using Neo x but this is pesonal preference. Please let me know what you think.

I'd like to thank you for this thread. I've been using PLIIz ever since I set up my height channels, and while I thought they were on ok addition I never really noticed them extensively. However, I just tried watching part of a movie with Neo 6 and I think I enjoyed what it did for the heights more.

I'm going to keep listening with it on this set-up and see how I feel about it after a week or so (I'm concerned it might be too aggressive with heights with some material like my gaming - who knows maybe I ultimately use one set up with games the other with movies). However, without your thread I probably wouldn't have even considering there being another listening mode to try.

[oldgame]

I will review more movies and games. But because of this storm and my tournaments it might be few days. But I will check this thread daily, because I am still very interested in what other people think. Thank you.

[pentatonic]

Curious but any of you guys have tried Audyssey DSX also?

[Stitches]

Originally Posted by pentatonic

Curious but any of you guys have tried Audyssey DSX also?

Pretty sure when I use Neo: 6 and my heights it is using the Audyssey DSX also.

[gotmule]

Originally Posted by pentatonic

Curious but any of you guys have tried Audyssey DSX also?

I have experience with both Audyssey DSX (with a Denon 4810) and Yamaha's version of height speakers (with a Yamaha RX-Z9) and liked both of them. I have not yet unboxed a new Onkyo 3010 due to construction in my basement just finishing up, but I should be able to enjoy dts Neo X very shortly as my system has been boxed up to avoid drywall dust and sawdust. Pictures of my room are a little old as the Denon has been sold, my sub eq system has been changed out to a dspeaker anti-mode 8033 (which is a killer inexpensive tweak for your subs) and I have also changed out some cosmetics.

What I noticed going from the Yamaha to the Denon was that the Yamaha did a better job with height information, but the rear height speakers made transitions and panning through the rear soundstage a little fuzzy and I could never quite get the rear height placement dialed in where I like the back of the room. The Denon using front height and width speakers produced a huge soundstage up front (my room is 22' x 17' so I can accurately place width speakers) but I noticed a little drop off in the vertical soundfield. The Yamaha handled front to rear pans better as well, but once I dialed in the width speakers, I was back in business. I read a couple of articles explaining the rationale for placing more speakers up front is the fact that our hearing by the nature of how our ears work is designed to be more focused on what is in front of us, and not behind us. Seemed to make sense I guess, as I now will have a hard time ever going without width speakers in my theater.

What I did to tweak the height aspect was something that is used in Widescreen Review's reference theater and reviewed a few years back. Smart Devices used to make a CS-3X jr, which is in essence a matrix decoder used to produce 6.1 before that became a standard feature. Part of this little device is also the ability to produce an overhead channel, so I have a pair of in ceiling speakers located right in front of my projector along with another speaker located at the top of the back wall. It took a long time to tweak everything in as my room has a total of 14 speakers and 5 subs in it, but I have been very pleased with the end result. I remember them mentioning in Widescreen Review article that We were Soldiers was the first movie to have information placed in an overhead channel configuration. This current configuartion does not take away from transitions through the rear soundstage I have found and effects can appear to come from vectors in between the surrounds.

I am switching out to the Onkyo because I am a huge dts fan, and cannot wait to spend a day re-tweaking everything in order to be able to report back, hopefully by the time Expendables 2 comes out since it is being released with a dts neo x track. Also I have Red Tails queued up as well as I know their is overhead information in there as well.

Should be interesting...

[oldgame]

I am reviewing the game mode between the two. I am using FEAR 3 for the xbox 360. Fear 3 has an outstanding soundtrack. Between the music, atmosphere, gun fights, helicopters, rain, this game has everything. This is an outstanding game to show off your system. When your in the middle of a fight and constantly moving, it is very difficult to distinguish between the two. Only when the action stop's and you can move around and listen to the atmospheric sounds can you hear a difference between the two. Neo X has a slightly narrow but tighter soundstage. While IIz has a slightly wider sound stage. IIz really shines with this game compared to any movie that I have used. The heights really stay active while not overbearing.
You cannot go wrong with either, and you will be satisfied with both. But I prefer IIz with the wider sound stage.
I also tried using Audyssey DSX. This has an even wider sound stage but it does not use the back surrounds. While some might find the exciting, It sounds to much like a "concert" or "hall" effect to me. But once again you cannot go wrong using this.

[oldgame]

Here's what Dolby has to say.
http://www.dolby.com/us/en/professio...logic-iiz.html

[oldgame]

Here's what DTS has to say. Click on the pdf file for a more detailed explanation.
http://www.dts.com/professionals/sou...-3d-audio.aspx

[pentatonic]

Interesting bit of info but The Expendables 2 will be the first blu with DTS Neo:X optimized soundtrack. Looking forward to reviews

Link

[ZoetMB]

Originally Posted by Mr.Terry

The Dolby Atmos sound is used on The Hobbit.It is overhead speakers.

Dolby Atmos is much more than overhead speakers. It's a system where you can have 64 channels at any given time.

Dolby Atmos places an object model on top of the standard channel model. You still mix to 7.1. But you also mix "objects" not to a channel, but to a location in 3D space. In the theatre, the Dolby Atmos processor sends that signal to the appropriate speakers based on the configuration in the theatre.

In order to facilitate this, each speaker in the theatre is separately wired to its own amplifier channel. In addition, Dolby recommends the use of rear woofers to give a fuller sound to the surrounds. Atmos also recommends the use of additional side front speakers, which are used in the object model only, so when you have sounds that move from the sides to the front or from the front to the sides, there's a smoother transition to the sound. And as you state, there are also ceiling speakers.

Dolby has elected not to have a "required" configuration. So some theatres will fully implement and some won't. So YMMV. I can't see Atmos being used at home, but I'm sure that some (very rich) hobbyists who have a dedicated room for home theatre would attempt it, but it would require an entirely new type of receiver or pre pro.

I've heard both the Dolby demo and Taken 2 in Dolby Atmos. I was very impressed - the sound was quite spectacular. It was announced today that the next Star Trek movie will be in Dolby Atmos (in a few selected theaters) as will "Chasing Mavericks", "Life of Pi", and "The Hobbit". 2013 will bring "Pacific Rim" and "Star Trek: Into Darkness" in Dolby Atmos.

There are 15 commercial screens in North America equipped with Dolby Atmos in NY, San Francisco, Sherman Oaks, Fremont, Pittsburg (CA), Aventura and Lake Buena Vista FL, Chicago, Kansas City, Las Vegas, San Antonio, + Vancouver and Ontario. Dolby announced the new Dolby 850 processor today, which includes Dolby Atmos, although they haven't announced an availability date.

[oldgame]

Does anyone know what configuration Blu-ray.com uses for their reviews?

[boardinguy100]

I've experimented with Dolby PLllz and Audyssey DSX and DTS Neo X and ultimately decided on DTS Neo X as the best sounding for me. I'm currently running 9.2 in a sealed rectangular room that doesn't allow for wides, so I'm doing heights and rears. I have an Onkyo 818 and I'm using and external amp for the heights. I've tried several configurations and always come back to heights even though the difference is a little more than subtle it seems to increase the soundstage. After recently adding rears I couldn't be happier. I watched the Averngers again last night as well as Live Free or Die Hard and I grinning from ear to ear, fully immersive(wife was out of town and I had it cranked)

[slimdude]

Originally Posted by boardinguy100

I've experimented with Dolby PLllz and Audyssey DSX and DTS Neo X and ultimately decided on DTS Neo X as the best sounding for me. I'm currently running 9.2 in a sealed rectangular room that doesn't allow for wides, so I'm doing heights and rears. I have an Onkyo 818 and I'm using and external amp for the heights. I've tried several configurations and always come back to heights even though the difference is a little more than subtle it seems to increase the soundstage. After recently adding rears I couldn't be happier. I watched the Averngers again last night as well as Live Free or Die Hard and I grinning from ear to ear, fully immersive(wife was out of town and I had it cranked)

After doing all of this experimenting, don't you rather listen to a lossless audio soundtrack in it's original full range 5.1, 7.1 discrete channels, instead of using a matrix processing soundfield? It's simulated! Generally, Dolby and DTS matrixed soundfields are normally use for to enhance 2, 4 channel stereo, not for high definition audio, that's been previously recorded direct from the master.

[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.

[soundwave628]

when you run dolby PLIIz (and probably the others) you still get the lossless 5.1/7.1 but it just takes some of that data and puts to two extra height speakers.