Any one see the Lexicon MC-12HD replacement at CES? - Page 13 - AVS Forum | Home Theater Discussions And Reviews
First ... 11  12  13 14  15  ... Last
Ultra Hi-End HT Gear ($20,000+) > Any one see the Lexicon MC-12HD replacement at CES?
sdurani's Avatar sdurani 08:26 PM 08-15-2011
Quote:
Originally Posted by noah katz View Post

Left height speaker faces the right wall and vice versa.

If you're using a pair of speakers, then you don't have to deal with the the reversal problem, unless both speakers are right next to each other along the listener's centre line (a la THX).

I think the height effect might be possible with a single pair of height speakers, by placing them directly to the sides of the listeners, really high up (like where the side walls meet the ceiling). Point the speakers at the listening area, to maximize imaging, and they should create a phantom image above the listening area.
Quote:


I don't imagine that this would be the case for speakers with high elevation angles, say within 45 deg of the vertical.

Back-to-front reversals can happen anywhere along the centre line, regardless of whether the speaker is at ear level or elevated (45 degrees or otherwise).

sdurani's Avatar sdurani 08:40 PM 08-15-2011
Quote:
Originally Posted by LarryChanin View Post

...if the intent of the height channels is to create a diffuse, unlocalized soundfield, then wouldn't a height speaker positioned above the listener be the perfect location for reproducing ambience?

Larry, this isn't an all or nothing proposition. Diffuse sound doesn't necessarily mean completely unlocalizable. You can have a clear perception of sound coming from above, even if you can't pin-point the exact location. See my previous example about decorrelated sound coming from your left; you ought to try it for yourself some time.

A single speaker directly above the listener is even more prone than a single rear speaker to confusing the listener into perceiving the sound as coming from in front. Why would you deliberately create such a problem when avoiding it couldn't be simpler (just use more speakers)?
noah katz's Avatar noah katz 09:22 PM 08-15-2011
OK, seems like we're on the same page then.

What I was hoping for was some discussion on why this obvious/optimum placement has yet to be one chosen by the mfgr's.

Quote:
Originally Posted by sdurani View Post

If you're using a pair of speakers, then you don't have to deal with the the reversal problem, unless both speakers are right next to each other along the listener's centre line (a la THX).

I think the height effect might be possible with a single pair of height speakers, by placing them directly to the sides of the listeners, really high up (like where the side walls meet the ceiling). Point the speakers at the listening area, to maximize imaging, and they should create a phantom image above the listening area. Back-to-front reversals can happen anywhere along the centre line, regardless of whether the speaker is at ear level or elevated (45 degrees or otherwise).


sdurani's Avatar sdurani 09:52 PM 08-15-2011
Quote:
Originally Posted by noah katz View Post

What I was hoping for was some discussion on why this obvious/optimum placement has yet to be one chosen by the mfgr's.

You'd have to ask Audyssey, Dolby and DTS why they chose a height speaker placement that would make for a taller front soundstage rather than overhead imaging. Maybe they thought that telling consumers they need four speakers would scare them away from adopting height speakers. Gotta break it to the masses slooooowwwwllllyyyy.

As for placing a pair of height speakers high up on either side of the listeners, the effect would be limited to one row. Which may work for the typical living room set-up, but not for a multi-row home theatre. For the latter, sitting under a giant X configuration of four height speakers could expand the effect for more listeners.

Another problem is that many people have their side speakers at that very same location (directly to the sides and high up), so manufacturers may have thought about it, but decided not to use it.
noah katz's Avatar noah katz 12:37 PM 08-16-2011
Quote:
Originally Posted by sdurani View Post

As for placing a pair of height speakers high up on either side of the listeners, the effect would be limited to one row.

Not sure why you say that, unless you think the same is true of side surrounds.

IMO the goal isn't a phantom image directly overhead, though it would be nice, but moreso expanding the soundfield vertically.
sdurani's Avatar sdurani 02:56 PM 08-16-2011
Quote:
Originally Posted by noah katz View Post
Not sure why you say that, unless you think the same is true of side surrounds.
I do. That is why some home theatres use multiple pairs of side speakers, depending on the number of rows.
Quote:
IMO the goal isn't a phantom image directly overhead, though it would be nice, but moreso expanding the soundfield vertically.
It might work to expand the soundfield vertically, just as a pair of height speakers up front can expand the soundstage vertically. I'm guessing that's not Lexicon's goal, else the MP-20 wouldn't be configurable for up to 5 height speakers.
Steve Goff's Avatar Steve Goff 03:11 PM 08-16-2011

Roger Dressler's Avatar Roger Dressler 08:57 PM 08-16-2011
Quote:
Originally Posted by LarryChanin View Post

Hi Roger,

Thanks for the response.

However, aren't we discussing height channel sound processing in which the processors are either extracting out of phase content, or extracting reverberation from the recording, and routing them to the height channels? If so, I don't follow how your test with unprocessed sound is relevant.

When it comes to sound from one speaker, it does not matter how it is derived. It's all correlated.

ETA: That is to say, it will sound like a point source.
Spizz's Avatar Spizz 11:42 PM 08-16-2011
Quote:
Originally Posted by Steve Goff View Post


Hmm. Thanks.
LarryChanin's Avatar LarryChanin 08:25 AM 08-23-2011
noah katz's Avatar noah katz 10:24 AM 08-23-2011
Thanks for the link, Larry.

Some pretty lofty and interesting claims:

"Unlike other up-mixing technologies, QLS 3D works in the frequency domain rather than in the time domain, enabling it to up-mix stereo to multiple channels without interfering with the artist's original intent, he said. "We don't add to the original signal," [marketing manager Jim] Garrett explained. "We deconstruct the signal by spatial slice and reverb extraction processing to obtain the direct and reverberant components. Then using only those original components, QLS is able to reconstruct a previously unachievable surround experience that remains true to the original recording."

The QLS 3D will widen the sweet spot to cover a larger seating area while also optimizing it for specific seating locations. According to Lexicon, it can also digitally compensate for non-optimal speaker placements and move listeners from an audience location to an on-stage location and back. This sounds like a room correction system on steroids, though that is not specified in the released materials. Keep in mind that in the world of pro audio, Lexicon has long held the title for some of the world's most advanced and highly sought-after DSP. Additional features include four (count 'em!) independent subwoofer outputs and a front panel interface which can rename buttons as you change functions."

From the article author as well: "The QLS 3D processing will make every seat in even huge rooms sound great."

Seems rather biased and speculative for something hasn't heard.

I wonder if the video processing matched features, like fully flexible AR, multiple memories etc, with standalone video processors.
sdurani's Avatar sdurani 12:10 PM 08-23-2011
Quote:
Originally Posted by noah katz View Post

Some pretty lofty and interesting claims:

Interesting yes, but I don't see them as being so lofty. More evolutionary than revolutionary.

Separating the audio into dry and reverbererant streams is something surround processing designers had been talking about for years; sorta the next step in ambience extraction. Even Griesinger (inventor of LOGIC7) had published papers about it a decade ago. And JJ's latest paper on surround sound (presumably DTS Neo:X) describes "direct vs diffuse" processing.

Moving listeners towards or away from the stage is done by extracting less or more ambience, respectively, which users have long been able to do with L7 and PLIIx. Note that the author of the article thinks this is an aspect of room correction.

Other companies have already done height channels, both extracted and generated. Lexicon likely has their own extraction method, though the big difference is more outputs in order to create overhead imaging rather than a taller front soundstage.

The MC-12 already had 3 subwoofer outputs, the ML No.502 had 4 sub outs, so being able to configure up to 4 subs on the MP-20 isn't so lofty. In fact, it was almost expected, considering Welti's AES paper 5 years ago. The main differentiator here will be SFM (Sound Field Management).

Now, it's possible that Lexicon is the first with some of these technologies and/or doing it better. I still think it's more evolutionary than revolutionary.
Quote:


From the article author as well: "The QLS 3D processing will make every seat in even huge rooms sound great."

Neither lofty nor interesting, just the oldest marketing line when it comes to home theatres. Heard it from people who design HT rooms, surround processing, room correction, etc.
Quote:


Seems rather biased and speculative for something hasn't heard.

Without any hands-on testing, all they can do at this point is repeat what the marketing manager has said.
noah katz's Avatar noah katz 01:06 PM 08-23-2011
Quote:
Originally Posted by sdurani View Post

Interesting yes, but I don't see them as being so lofty. More evolutionary than revolutionary."

The particular point that caught my attention was

"Unlike other up-mixing technologies, QLS 3D works in the frequency domain rather than in the time domain, enabling it to up-mix stereo to multiple channels without interfering with the artist's original intent."

That's a new one to me, and I don't grasp how it would work.
swanlee's Avatar swanlee 01:25 PM 08-23-2011
It is sad to see the comments of that article call out lexicon as a company that ONLY re-badges other people's gear. While they do that for AMPS and the horribly done Oppo re-badge their top of the line Pre\\Pro's have always been original creations from scratch and some of the best gear on the market.

Seems lexicon really needs to get that oppo mess out of people minds.
Roger Dressler's Avatar Roger Dressler 05:42 PM 08-23-2011
Quote:
Originally Posted by noah katz View Post
The particular point that caught my attention was

"Unlike other up-mixing technologies, QLS 3D works in the frequency domain rather than in the time domain, enabling it to up-mix stereo to multiple channels without interfering with the artist's original intent."

That's a new one to me, and I don't grasp how it would work.
Have a read of this Harman patent.
noah katz's Avatar noah katz 06:46 PM 08-23-2011
Thanks for the link, Roger.

But I *hate* patent-speak; anyone care to give a synopsis?
sdurani's Avatar sdurani 10:06 PM 08-23-2011
Quote:
Originally Posted by noah katz View Post

I *hate* patent-speak

Too bad, 'cause here's another Harman patent to go with the one Roger linked to.
Roger Dressler's Avatar Roger Dressler 02:02 AM 08-24-2011
Quote:
Originally Posted by noah katz View Post

Thanks for the link, Roger.

But I *hate* patent-speak; anyone care to give a synopsis?

The text is cleaner here. Paragraph 0028 has a nice summary:
Quote:


[0028] The present invention provides a system for altering the reverberant component of a signal. This is accomplished generally by first obtaining a perceptually relevant estimate of the frequency-domain representation of the impulse response of the underlying reverberant system. Using this estimate of the impulse response, the signal may be processed so as to extract the reverberant component of the signal, thus obtaining an estimate of the dry signal and an estimate of the reverberant signal. In some examples, further processing may be applied to the dry signal and the reverberant signal.


dsmith901's Avatar dsmith901 07:30 AM 08-24-2011
Quote:
Originally Posted by LarryChanin View Post

Lexicon 12.4 Channel MP-20 "Media" Processor Preview

Larry

I saw that earlier and my first response was: "They are raising the price even higher? Don't they know we are in a deep recession?" My second response was: "I wish they would announce a more affordable model for those of us who are not millionaires." So, does anyone have any info on a planned "affordable" model, like the old MC-4/8?
Randy Bessinger's Avatar Randy Bessinger 08:16 AM 08-24-2011
Quote:
Originally Posted by dsmith901 View Post

I saw that earlier and my first response was: "They are raising the price even higher? Don't they know we are in a deep recession?" My second response was: "I wish they would announce a more affordable model for those of us who are not millionaires." So, does anyone have any info on a planned "affordable" model, like the old MC-4/8?

On that note, it will be interesting to see if attendance at Cedia is up or down this year and what that means for high end releases such as the Lexicon.
noah katz's Avatar noah katz 10:06 AM 08-24-2011
Roger, thanks for that, it makes more sense now.

My puzzlement was due to my misinterpreting "frequency domain" to mean "spectral content".

Quote:
Originally Posted by Roger Dressler View Post

The text is cleaner here. Paragraph 0028 has a nice summary:


AndreYew's Avatar AndreYew 12:00 PM 08-24-2011
I've skimmed (emphasis on "skimmed") through the patent Sanjay referenced, and it doesn't talk about the important bits, which is how they analyze the frequency domain to do their separation. The author is apparently an expert on forensic analysis, so I assume he has a few tricks up his sleeve.
Roger Dressler's Avatar Roger Dressler 03:19 PM 08-24-2011
Quote:
Originally Posted by AndreYew View Post

I've skimmed (emphasis on "skimmed") through the patent Sanjay referenced, and it doesn't talk about the important bits, which is how they analyze the frequency domain to do their separation. The author is apparently an expert on forensic analysis, so I assume he has a few tricks up his sleeve.

To me, it appears to start off a lot like Neo:6 with more analysis filters. Neo:X also has a lot more filter bands, 64 IIRC. But then goes even further.

Where it gets interesting is as described starting at paragraph 0071. It can decide the genre of the source, such as classical music, jazz music, rock music, talk, and can classify the source such as a voice, a particular musical instrument, or audience noise such as applause.

Based on the above, it may adjust the filtering to ensure the whole source comes from the same speaker, rather than be redistributed to different speakers depending on variations in strength in each frequency bin. Smart!

Quote:
[0069] "In general, the perceptual model 734 and the source model 736 may cooperatively operate to enable adjustments in calculation of the gain location vectors on a snapshot-by-snapshot basis to compensate for abrupt changes in the calculated locations of sources of audible sound within the listener perceived sound stage."

IOW, they are trying to ensure the decoder "steering" activity is not exposed.

Can't wait to hear it!
sdurani's Avatar sdurani 04:12 PM 08-24-2011
Quote:
Originally Posted by Roger Dressler View Post

It can decide the genre of the source, such as classical music, jazz music, rock music, talk, and can classify the source such as a voice, a particular musical instrument, or audience noise such as applause.

Pass the salt shaker please.
sdurani's Avatar sdurani 04:16 PM 08-24-2011
Quote:
Originally Posted by swanlee View Post

It is sad to see the comments of that article call out lexicon as a company that ONLY re-badges other people's gear.

Not just comments on that article: http://www.avsforum.com/avs-vb/showp...ostcount=20382
AndreYew's Avatar AndreYew 04:59 PM 08-24-2011
Quote:
Originally Posted by sdurani View Post

Pass the salt shaker please.

I hope it can determine if it's ensconced within an audiophile shrine, so it can add a dash of musicality.

The patent appears to be relatively broad, describing the architecture of QL, but doesn't describe the particulars. It tells you what it does, but not how.

It's sort of like MP3 encoders where they tell you how to organize the bits you've calculated, but they don't describe the perceptual models used to find those bits in the first place. So you can have 2 encoders, and one can sound markedly superior to another because it has a much better perceptual model, even though both output MP3.

--Andre
sdurani's Avatar sdurani 09:26 PM 08-24-2011
Quote:
Originally Posted by AndreYew View Post

It tells you what it does, but not how.

Ah, the great art of patent writing, where you bare all the ingredients, but not the entire recipe.
dsmith901's Avatar dsmith901 07:30 AM 08-31-2011
Quote:
Originally Posted by Steve Goff View Post


Hmmm, it looks familiar, like something I saw once at Radio Shack? They obviously didn't waste any money on an industrial designer! Can you say UUUUUGGGLLLYYY!? Just MHO! Hopefully they will finally offer a black version, which will hide most of the ugly. Otherwise I will stick with the JBL Synthesis models.
Peter Nielsen's Avatar Peter Nielsen 07:53 AM 08-31-2011
Quote:
Originally Posted by dsmith901 View Post

Can you say UUUUUGGGLLLYYY!?

It looks good to me. Granted those black buttons look a bit cheap (chrome would match the silver front panel better) and I'm not sure about the blue light around the dial, but apart from that it's not bad...
audioguy's Avatar audioguy 09:23 AM 08-31-2011
Quote:
Originally Posted by dsmith901 View Post
Hmmm, it looks familiar, like something I saw once at Radio Shack? They obviously didn't waste any money on an industrial designer! Can you say UUUUUGGGLLLYYY!? Just MHO! Hopefully they will finally offer a black version, which will hide most of the ugly. Otherwise I will stick with the JBL Synthesis models.
I'm not interested in the product but I sorta like the looks. Clean, sterile, "crisp". In my case it doesn't matter since all of my equipment sits in another room.

My guess is that once they get all of the bugs worked out, it will be an outstanding piece.
First ... 11  12  13 14  15  ... Last

Up