DTS Neo.X - Page 4 - AVS Forum
Forum Jump: 
Reply
 
Thread Tools
post #91 of 1283 Old 06-06-2011, 11:05 AM
Advanced Member
 
pochoboy's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2003
Posts: 829
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 17 Post(s)
Liked: 10
are they really going to come out with some type of Neo sound track? or is this feature some type of digital sound processing? I thought the latter
pochoboy is online now  
Sponsored Links
Advertisement
 
post #92 of 1283 Old 06-06-2011, 11:47 AM
AVS Special Member
 
ss9001's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2003
Location: metro Atlanta
Posts: 8,697
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 248 Post(s)
Liked: 340
you would be correct, it's sound processing, like PLIIz & Audyssey DSX
no neo x tracks are in the works as far as I've read. Heck, we don't even get that many 7.1's

Steve
ss9001 is offline  
post #93 of 1283 Old 06-06-2011, 11:57 AM
Senior Member
 
PLC1843's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2006
Posts: 260
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 10
Any idea when reviews might surface? I'm interested to see how it fairs against DSX.
PLC1843 is offline  
post #94 of 1283 Old 06-06-2011, 12:19 PM
AVS Special Member
 
SoundChex's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2008
Location: USA, west coast
Posts: 2,733
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 132 Post(s)
Liked: 108
Quote:
Originally Posted by ss9001 View Post

Quote:
Originally Posted by pochoboy View Post

are they really going to come out with some type of Neo sound track? or is this feature some type of digital sound processing? I thought the latter

you would be correct, it's sound processing, like PLIIz & Audyssey DSX
no neo x tracks are in the works as far as I've read. Heck, we don't even get that many 7.1's

Quote:
Originally Posted by SoundChex View Post

Quote:
Originally Posted by M Code View Post

[...] @ CES DTS product manager mentioned that soon they will be delivering a couple of DTS Neo.X encoders to some of the leading Blu-ray mastering facilities, and that some titles with DTS Neo.X will be released by this Fall.

Quote:


From a Big Picture Big Sound CES 2011 Show Report:
"Neo:X builds upon the common 5.1 model by adding side, front-height and wide channels. Although the demos were specially recorded and mixed for 11.1, the DTS Neo:X technology is designed to convert everything from 2.0 thru 9.1 up to 11.1-channel goodness. This means a clear center channel for dialogue amid a stronger front soundstage for movies, a more transportative (not a word) musical experience, and enhanced directionality in interactive games. The DTS representatives were a little vague about exactly how discrete 11.1 could be delivered on formats such as Blu-ray, which is spec'd for up to 7.1, so we're not entirely sure if it can be piggybacked onto a more traditional DTS-HD Master Audio track, for example."

As I don't intend to "re-buy" [the vast majority] of my [pre Neo:X encoding technology] CDs, DVDs, and BDs, it is far more important to me that the Neo:X post processor feature perform well when applied to material NOT specifically encoded for Neo:X playback [as opposed to its performance in the "closed" Neo:X encode+decode sequence playing some DTS-HDMA(Encoded-for-Neo:X) BD!] Otherwise, it effectively becomes just some part of a "newer" DTS-HDMA standard.

However I still think DTS-HDMA 9.1_Front-Height+Wide "encoded DTS Neo:X but 5.1_Standard & 7.1_Standard compatible" looks like the perfect way for live concert material to be delivered on BD (and there will have been NO 5.1/7.1 soundtrack assembled previously for movie theater use!)

[Home Office system schematic]
"My AV systems were created by man. They evolved. They rebelled. There are many speakers. And they have . . . A PLAN."

SoundChex is online now  
post #95 of 1283 Old 06-06-2011, 12:54 PM
AVS Special Member
 
Roger Dressler's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2000
Location: Oregon
Posts: 8,903
Mentioned: 2 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 758 Post(s)
Liked: 351
Quote:
Originally Posted by pochoboy View Post

are they really going to come out with some type of Neo sound track? or is this feature some type of digital sound processing? I thought the latter

As a technology, Neo:X has two components, an encoder and a decoder. The decoder can work with either encoded or non-encoded content. As with any such thing, the decoder will work better with encoded content.

The only question is whether anyone will use their encoder. I postulate that it will happen on some level beyond demo clips. How much, how far, how soon, no one knows.

Deadwood Atmos theater
AV7702 Atmos 7.4.4, SSP-800 PLIIx 7.4
Aerial Acoustics 7B/CC3B fronts, B&W CWM8180 surrounds, Tannoy Di6 DC heights, Hsu ULS-15 subs
Roger Dressler is online now  
post #96 of 1283 Old 06-06-2011, 02:47 PM
Advanced Member
 
rana_kirti's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2010
Posts: 587
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 4 Post(s)
Liked: 12
Quote:
Originally Posted by Roger Dressler
Movies, as in theaters, or on discs? And how near is near? While DTS is out of the content business, that does not mean they would not commission some sort of project to illustrate the capabilities of the encoding side of the equation. They already mixed some nice demo clips, for example. No reason a complete movie could not be done as they did with DTS-ES in the Gladiator remix.

No. They all sound different and there will always be plenty of regular content in need of upmixing/enhancement.
I meant as in bluray discs to be played at home.

Is it true that a Bluray DTS HD MA can hold only unto 7.1 channels limit ?

If that is the case then will there have to be a new Super Bluray disc technology to make space for 11.1 discrete channels..?

I'm so confused with this DTS NEO X.

Thanks,

Rana

a few funny stories from my life ------->http://www.kirtirana.blogspot.com
rana_kirti is online now  
post #97 of 1283 Old 06-06-2011, 02:58 PM
AVS Special Member
 
Roger Dressler's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2000
Location: Oregon
Posts: 8,903
Mentioned: 2 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 758 Post(s)
Liked: 351
Quote:
Originally Posted by rana_kirti View Post
I meant as in bluray discs to be played at home.
Ok. That is the more likely scenario in the nearterm case since it is easier to get done than in the D-Cinema space. But both are technically possible.

Quote:
Is it true that a bluray dts hd ma can hold only unto 7.1 channels limit ?
The current BD spec limits to 8 channels. However, the codec technologies can support several more channels, and can do so in a backward compatible way. All that would need changing is the paper spec document to permit it. And of course the encoders and decoders...

Quote:
If that is the case then will there have to be a new Super bluray disc technology to make space for 11.1 discrete channels..?
No need unless the industry decides to create content with 11.1 channels.

Quote:
I'm so confused with this DTS NEO X.
Neo:X is a means to fold down, say, 11.1 channels into a 5.1-channel stream, so it can be delivered with no extra bitrate or no new delivery formats/channels. Then the decoder reconstructs speaker signals based on whatever complement is available in the room. It is not discrete though, in case that matters.

Deadwood Atmos theater
AV7702 Atmos 7.4.4, SSP-800 PLIIx 7.4
Aerial Acoustics 7B/CC3B fronts, B&W CWM8180 surrounds, Tannoy Di6 DC heights, Hsu ULS-15 subs
Roger Dressler is online now  
post #98 of 1283 Old 06-06-2011, 03:01 PM
AVS Special Member
 
LarryChanin's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 1999
Location: Sarasota, Florida
Posts: 6,810
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 10
LarryChanin is offline  
post #99 of 1283 Old 06-06-2011, 03:07 PM
AVS Special Member
 
LarryChanin's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 1999
Location: Sarasota, Florida
Posts: 6,810
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 10
Quote:
Originally Posted by Roger Dressler View Post
Neo:X is a means to fold down, say, 11.1 channels into a 5.1-channel stream, so it can be delivered with no extra bitrate or no new delivery formats/channels. Then the decoder reconstructs speaker signals based on whatever complement is available in the room. It is not discrete though, in case that matters.
Hi Roger,

Just like Dolby Pro Logic IIx can take discrete lossless content and upconvert it to high quality, albeit not discrete 7.1, DTS Neo:X can upconvert discrete lossless to 11.1. I guess it remains to be seen how high quality the derived extra channels are.



Larry
LarryChanin is offline  
post #100 of 1283 Old 06-06-2011, 03:39 PM
Advanced Member
 
rana_kirti's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2010
Posts: 587
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 4 Post(s)
Liked: 12
Quote:
Originally Posted by Roger Dressler

The current BD spec limits to 8 channels. However, the codec technologies can support several more channels, and can do so in a backward compatible way. All that would need changing is the paper spec document to permit it. And of course the encoders and decoders...

No need unless the industry decides to create content with 11.1 channels.
Thanks Roger,

I find your above 2 statements confusing.

First statement says BD specs can support several more channels and only needs change in paper spec.

Does that mean Bluray disc in it's current format/capacity can hold more than 7.1 channels probably 11.1...?

Your second statement says not until the industry decide to Create content with 11.1 channels.

So then if they can already put 11.1 into the current Bluray format/capacity then why would their be need to create a new Super Bluray ?

Sorry buy m confused and find the above statements conflicting. Maybe I'll understand better I you could re-phrase them...

Thanks

Thanks,

Rana

a few funny stories from my life ------->http://www.kirtirana.blogspot.com
rana_kirti is online now  
post #101 of 1283 Old 06-06-2011, 05:10 PM - Thread Starter
AVS Special Member
 
M Code's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2003
Location: Joshua Tree, CA
Posts: 9,954
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 146 Post(s)
Liked: 131
Quote:
Originally Posted by rana_kirti View Post

Thanks Roger,

I find your above 2 statements confusing.

First statement says BD specs can support several more channels and only needs change in paper spec.

Does that mean Bluray disc in it's current format/capacity can hold more than 7.1 channels probably 11.1...?

Your second statement says not until the industry decide to Create content with 11.1 channels.

So then if they can already put 11.1 into the current Bluray format/capacity then why would their be need to create a new Super Bluray ?

Sorry buy m confused and find the above statements conflicting. Maybe I'll understand better I you could re-phrase them...

Thanks

Lets clarify..
If the studio has a DTS Neo.X encoder it can take an 11.1 or 9.1 discrete audio mix and encode this into a 7.1 or 5.1 stream. Then when when played back through a Neo.X decoder one can get an 11.1 or 9.1 output. This procedure is similar to another encoder/decoder (such as a 6.1 DTS ES discrete track) can be played back as 6.1 if the AVR has the proper decoder or as a 5.1 if not. The matrix encode/decode process has been used previously as well by Dolby for Pro Logic 2X. Note that the matrix encode/decode works very well but doesn't have as high as channel separation as discrete tracks, but the later decoders have significantly improved steering and distributed sound-field output capability over earlier decoders..

Time and the market will determine if there is enough demand to master/produce such media encoded as DTS Neo.X.. But again DTS has always tried to outdo Dolby by 1 notch..
The point to keep in mind is that DTS Master Audio is the Blu-ray defacto standard, and if the marketing campaign heats up then anything can happen..

Just my $0.02..
M Code is offline  
post #102 of 1283 Old 06-06-2011, 06:01 PM
AVS Special Member
 
LarryChanin's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 1999
Location: Sarasota, Florida
Posts: 6,810
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 10
Quote:
Originally Posted by M Code View Post

If the studio has a DTS Neo.X encoder it can take an 11.1 or 9.1 discrete audio mix and encode this into a 7.1 or 5.1 stream. Then when when played back through a Neo.X decoder one can get an 11.1 or 9.1 output. This procedure is similar to another encoder/decoder (such as a 6.1 DTS ES discrete track) can be played back as 6.1 if the AVR has the proper decoder or as a 5.1 if not. The matrix encode/decode process has been used previously as well by Dolby for Pro Logic 2X. Note that the matrix encode/decode works very well but doesn't have as high as channel separation as discrete tracks, but the later decoders have significantly improved steering and distributed sound-field output capability over earlier decoders..

Hi,

Based on Roger's earlier comment I gather that even if the discrete 5.1 or 7.1 audio mix wasn't run through a DTS Neo:X encoder, the Neo:X decoder will still produce a 9.1 or 11.1 blind upmix, but encoded content will perform better on decode.

Larry
LarryChanin is offline  
post #103 of 1283 Old 06-06-2011, 06:35 PM - Thread Starter
AVS Special Member
 
M Code's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2003
Location: Joshua Tree, CA
Posts: 9,954
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 146 Post(s)
Liked: 131
Quote:
Originally Posted by LarryChanin View Post

Hi,

Based on Roger's earlier comment I gather that even if the discrete 5.1 or 7.1 audio mix wasn't run through a DTS Neo:X encoder, the Neo:X decoder will still produce a 9.1 or 11.1 blind upmix, but encoded content will perform better on decode.

Larry

Yes..
The DTS Neo.X can work as an open-ended decoding system but it is a crap shoot where the audio content will be steered. The advantage of using encoded sources streams is that it is predictable for audio content direction/placement..
Note that we have actually tested some of the DTS Neo.X processors with discrete 5.1 streams and they do very well for a pleasing, balanced soundfield both for 9.1 & 11.1..

Just my $0.02..
M Code is offline  
post #104 of 1283 Old 06-06-2011, 11:45 PM
AVS Addicted Member
 
sdurani's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2001
Location: Monterey Park, CA
Posts: 19,814
Mentioned: 3 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 1367 Post(s)
Liked: 999
Quote:
Originally Posted by Roger Dressler View Post

The current BD spec limits to 8 channels. However, the codec technologies can support several more channels, and can do so in a backward compatible way. All that would need changing is the paper spec document to permit it.

Quote:
Originally Posted by rana_kirti View Post

First statement says BD specs can support several more channels and only needs change in paper spec.

Does that mean Bluray disc in it's current format/capacity can hold more than 7.1 channels probably 11.1...?

I don't know how you got that from Roger's post. As he said, the current specification for the Blu-ray Disc format is limited to 8 (7.1) discrete channels of audio. No more. If you want more discrete channels (e.g., 11.1), then the specification needs to be changed.

But none of this has anything to do with Neo:X, which is matrix surround processing (like PLIIx, Neo:6, Neural, Circle Surround, etc). Think of it like video processing. If you have a 720p display, then a video processor will upconvert 480i content and downconvert 1080p content to fit the number of pixels in your display. Likewise, if you have a 5.1-speaker layout, Neo:X will upmix 2-channel material and downmix 7.1 material to fit the number of speakers in your layout.

As matrix decoders/processors have evolved over time, the number of outputs have increased. Old Pro Logic used to output only 4 channels: left, centre, right, surround. LOGIC7 processing on my old Lexicon could output 7 channels. Currently Dolby PLIIz can output up to 9 channels. In the near future DTS Neo:X will be able to output up to 11 channels.

But the number of output channels is based on how many speakers you have configured. Nothing to do with the number of channels on the disc. Doesn't matter if the soundtrack is 2 channels, 5.1 channels or 7.1 channels; it can all be upmixed to 11 outputs using Neo:X processing.

Sanjay
sdurani is offline  
post #105 of 1283 Old 06-07-2011, 12:41 AM
Advanced Member
 
rana_kirti's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2010
Posts: 587
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 4 Post(s)
Liked: 12
Guys thanks, I understand this better now. DTS NEO X takes anything thrown at it and makes it 11.1 and the source does not matter.

Now as far as DTD HD MA on a Bluray disc is concerned i had a few doubts...

1. Can the current Bluray discs store more than 7.1 discrete channels if the movie studio wants to put in more channels..?

If studios decide to put specific height and wide sounds can the 50 gb Bluray disc hold 11.1 channels ? Is 50gb enough capacity or will they need to come out with a Newer version of Bluray disc with more capacity to hold the extra data..?

2. Will movie studios actually put in Height and Wide discrete info/channels in the near future ? Is there already work going on on this with some upcoming movies ?

Thanks

Thanks,

Rana

a few funny stories from my life ------->http://www.kirtirana.blogspot.com
rana_kirti is online now  
post #106 of 1283 Old 06-07-2011, 03:20 AM
AVS Club Gold
 
Hugo S's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2001
Posts: 528
Mentioned: 1 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 79 Post(s)
Liked: 42
Hi,

Quote:
Originally Posted by M Code View Post

Yes..
The DTS Neo.X can work as an open-ended decoding system but it is a crap shoot where the audio content will be steered. The advantage of using encoded sources streams is that it is predictable for audio content direction/placement..
Note that we have actually tested some of the DTS Neo.X processors with discrete 5.1 streams and they do very well for a pleasing, balanced soundfield both for 9.1 & 11.1..

Just my $0.02..

If you have tested DTS Neo X equipped processors on 9.1 and 11.1 systems, all these processors must have been incorporating Audyssey's DSX.

So how did/do both Neo X and DSX compare? ... and please, don't tell us you haven't tried that!

Hugo
Hugo S is offline  
post #107 of 1283 Old 06-07-2011, 04:05 AM
AVS Club Gold
 
Hugo S's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2001
Posts: 528
Mentioned: 1 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 79 Post(s)
Liked: 42
Hi again,

Anyway beyond the DTS Neo X concept itself, discussed here, what is fascinating is that M. Tom Holman made it again!!!

Today we all speak about 9.x, 11.x, but we shouldn't forget that just 2 years ago, something beyond 7.x was just "science-fiction".

Now somewhere in @ 2003, Tom started "preaching" in the desert about his "revolutionary" 10.2 system. But at that time, who didn't consider him being "a bit ..."?

Personally I had the privilege of assisting to a presentation of his 10.2 system when he came to Paris in 2006. Waow, that was something... now this was also the time when transiting from 5.1 to 7.1 was considered "difficult". So 10.2 was objectively totally out of even a glimpse of thinking.

Anyway this 10.2 sound reproduction, has always been something I considered as my "Reference" Audio experience... So 2 years ago when DSX became available, I couldn't resist and our system evolved into a DSX 11.2 type of system... even though all of our friends considered that as being totally "unreasonable".

Today 9.1 and even better 11.1, seem to become something considered by a large majority of people as being the new "standard", the "must-have"...

How did that happen precisely? This is History! But let's not forget who started the move and imposed the vision...

BRAVO Tom!!!

Hugo
Hugo S is offline  
post #108 of 1283 Old 06-07-2011, 06:28 AM
Senior Member
 
Balbolito's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2009
Posts: 231
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 13 Post(s)
Liked: 21
it would be nice to read a head to head if we could say challenge or comparison between Neo:X and Audyssey DSX, and know the advantages and disadvantages of each.
Balbolito is offline  
post #109 of 1283 Old 06-07-2011, 06:50 AM
AVS Special Member
 
Roger Dressler's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2000
Location: Oregon
Posts: 8,903
Mentioned: 2 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 758 Post(s)
Liked: 351
Quote:
Originally Posted by Hugo S View Post

Now somewhere in @ 2003, Tom started "preaching" in the desert about his "revolutionary" 10.2 system. But at that time, who didn't consider him being "a bit ..."?

Personally I had the privilege of assisting to a presentation of his 10.2 system when he came to Paris in 2006. Waow, that was something... now this was also the time when transiting from 5.1 to 7.1 was considered "difficult". So 10.2 was objectively totally out of even a glimpse of thinking.

Anyway this 10.2 sound reproduction, has always been something I considered as my "Reference" Audio experience... So 2 years ago when DSX became available, I couldn't resist and our system evolved into a DSX 11.2 type of system... even though all of our friends considered that as being totally "unreasonable".

Tom was suggesting that "factors of 2" were the relevant steps to make a noticeable difference. 1-2-5-10, as on the steps of an oscilloscope.

If you are on that wavelength, get ready for the next step:

Deadwood Atmos theater
AV7702 Atmos 7.4.4, SSP-800 PLIIx 7.4
Aerial Acoustics 7B/CC3B fronts, B&W CWM8180 surrounds, Tannoy Di6 DC heights, Hsu ULS-15 subs
Roger Dressler is online now  
post #110 of 1283 Old 06-07-2011, 09:56 AM
AVS Club Gold
 
Hugo S's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2001
Posts: 528
Mentioned: 1 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 79 Post(s)
Liked: 42
Hi Roger,

Quote:
Originally Posted by Roger Dressler View Post

Tom was suggesting that "factors of 2" were the relevant steps to make a noticeable difference. 1-2-5-10, as on the steps of an oscilloscope.

Yes, I heard this interesting podcast/interview where Tom is saying that... even if I personally prefer a Fibonacci type of progression, which can be somehow applied here: 1-1-2-3-5-8-13...21

Quote:


If you are on that wavelength, get ready for the next step:

so what we can see in the image above, wouldn't that be the last 21 figure, but distorted?

Then next steps being 34 and 55... interesting!!!

Hugo
Hugo S is offline  
post #111 of 1283 Old 06-07-2011, 04:07 PM
AVS Addicted Member
 
sdurani's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2001
Location: Monterey Park, CA
Posts: 19,814
Mentioned: 3 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 1367 Post(s)
Liked: 999
Quote:
Originally Posted by rana_kirti View Post

DTS NEO X takes anything thrown at it and makes it 11.1 and the source does not matter.

Neo:X can output any number of channels. 11.1 is the maximum.
Quote:


Can the current Bluray discs store more than 7.1 discrete channels if the movie studio wants to put in more channels..?

No.
Quote:


If studios decide to put specific height and wide sounds can the 50 gb Bluray disc hold 11.1 channels ? Is 50gb enough capacity or will they need to come out with a Newer version of Bluray disc with more capacity to hold the extra data..?

50GB of storage space is enough to hold the typical length movie with 11.1 channels of losslessly packed audio.
Quote:


Will movie studios actually put in Height and Wide discrete info/channels in the near future ? Is there already work going on on this with some upcoming movies ?

No indication that studios are doing any of this nor planning to do it in the near future.

Sanjay
sdurani is offline  
post #112 of 1283 Old 06-07-2011, 06:48 PM
AVS Special Member
 
Woof Woof's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2002
Posts: 1,502
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 18 Post(s)
Liked: 40
There were some briefly posted sites which broke news of the new Pioneer LX95 which had DTS Neo:X and supported 11.x channels.

But many have been pulled.

Lemme see if I can still find one.
http://www.martinshifi.co.uk/product...ioneer-sclx85/

Better grab a snapshot of the specs while it's still up.

Just some puzzling numbers.

Why 96kHz when even a base on can handle 192?

My only gripe is that it doesn't have any Audyssey stuff. No DSX I can understand. But no XT32 EQ. No SubEQ. Bummer.

o32-Bit Hi-Bit Process / 96KHz Hi-Sampling
o190w Per Channel (810w Simultaneous)
o7.1 Multi-Channel Input
oComponent Video Zone 2 Output
oRF Remote Included (OEL Display)
oTHX Ultra 2 Plus Certification
oPrecision Distance Setup

o11.1 Channel Pre-Outs
oAluminium Front Panel
oIR DirectFETDigital Amplification
o9-Channel Amplifier
oAir Studios Tuned
oDTS Neo X
o32-Bit DAC
oBluetooth Ready (Via AS-BT200)
oiPod Digital USB Connection (Front)
oiPhone/ iPadCompatibility
oMCACC Advanced Room Calibration
oDolby Pro-Logic IIzSpeaker Out
oiControlAV2 Control App
oAirJamApp Via Bluetooth
oInternet Radio With vTuner
oApple Lossless Support
oAV Navigator Setup
oAdvanced Video Adjust
oAnchor Bay 1080p UpscalingHDMI / Analog
oDLNA Compatible (V.1.5)
oApple Airplay Compatible
oPC File Playback @ 192KHz / 24-Bit
oPQLS BitstreamMulti-Channel
oHDMI 7 in / 2 out (1 Front input)
oJitter Reduction Plus
oRS232 Control
o12v Triggers x 2 @ 150mA
oFLAC Support @ 192KHz / 24-Bit
oWindows 7 Certification
oIP Control
oC4 / AMX / Crestron/ Savant Control
oDiscrete Commands For Audio Settings
oZone 3 Line Level Output
o1080p / 24Fps Conversion
oStream Smoother Processing
oTriple Video Noise Reduction
oFull Band Phase Control (Front Align)
oWireless LAN Included
oAmplified Zone 2 Output (5.1 Mode)
oIR in / out
On-Screen Display (HDMI)
Woof Woof is online now  
post #113 of 1283 Old 06-07-2011, 07:13 PM
Advanced Member
 
pochoboy's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2003
Posts: 829
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 17 Post(s)
Liked: 10
Quote:
Originally Posted by Woof Woof View Post

There were some briefly posted sites which broke news of the new Pioneer LX95 which had DTS Neo:X and supported 11.x channels.

But many have been pulled.

Lemme see if I can still find one.
http://www.martinshifi.co.uk/product...ioneer-sclx85/

Better grab a snapshot of the specs while it's still up.

Just some puzzling numbers.

Why 96kHz when even a base on can handle 192?

My only gripe is that it doesn't have any Audyssey stuff. No DSX I can understand. But no XT32 EQ. No SubEQ. Bummer.

o32-Bit Hi-Bit Process / 96KHz Hi-Sampling
o190w Per Channel (810w Simultaneous)
o7.1 Multi-Channel Input
oComponent Video Zone 2 Output
oRF Remote Included (OEL Display)
oTHX Ultra 2 Plus Certification
oPrecision Distance Setup

o11.1 Channel Pre-Outs
oAluminium Front Panel
oIR DirectFETDigital Amplification
o9-Channel Amplifier
oAir Studios Tuned
oDTS Neo X
o32-Bit DAC
oBluetooth Ready (Via AS-BT200)
oiPod Digital USB Connection (Front)
oiPhone/ iPadCompatibility
oMCACC Advanced Room Calibration
oDolby Pro-Logic IIzSpeaker Out
oiControlAV2 Control App
oAirJamApp Via Bluetooth
oInternet Radio With vTuner
oApple Lossless Support
oAV Navigator Setup
oAdvanced Video Adjust
oAnchor Bay 1080p UpscalingHDMI / Analog
oDLNA Compatible (V.1.5)
oApple Airplay Compatible
oPC File Playback @ 192KHz / 24-Bit
oPQLS BitstreamMulti-Channel
oHDMI 7 in / 2 out (1 Front input)
oJitter Reduction Plus
oRS232 Control
o12v Triggers x 2 @ 150mA
oFLAC Support @ 192KHz / 24-Bit
oWindows 7 Certification
oIP Control
oC4 / AMX / Crestron/ Savant Control
oDiscrete Commands For Audio Settings
oZone 3 Line Level Output
o1080p / 24Fps Conversion
oStream Smoother Processing
oTriple Video Noise Reduction
oFull Band Phase Control (Front Align)
oWireless LAN Included
oAmplified Zone 2 Output (5.1 Mode)
oIR in / out
On-Screen Display (HDMI)

Besides the ICE amp change to IR
the Marvell Qdeo is being replaced w/Anchor Bay Upscaler ? <---- it this the upscaler used in the OPPO's ?
pochoboy is online now  
post #114 of 1283 Old 06-07-2011, 07:47 PM - Thread Starter
AVS Special Member
 
M Code's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2003
Location: Joshua Tree, CA
Posts: 9,954
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 146 Post(s)
Liked: 131
Quote:
Originally Posted by pochoboy View Post

Besides the ICE amp change to IR
the Marvell Qdeo is being replaced w/Anchor Bay Upscaler ? <---- it this the upscaler used in the OPPO's ?

A couple of revs..
1. The IR amp has increased bandwidth vs. the ICE and faster mos-fets
2. Anchor Bay processor has a better de-interlacer vs. the Marvel
3. USB, DLNA, Internet Radio done by BridgeCo DM870 processor

Just my $0.02...
M Code is offline  
post #115 of 1283 Old 06-07-2011, 09:07 PM
AVS Special Member
 
Roger Dressler's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2000
Location: Oregon
Posts: 8,903
Mentioned: 2 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 758 Post(s)
Liked: 351
Quote:
Originally Posted by Woof Woof View Post

Why 96kHz when even a base one can handle 192?

All these DSP algorithms are processor intensive. It takes significantly more MIPs to do this at 192 kHz than 96 kHz, with no particular sonic benefit.

Quote:


My only gripe is that it doesn't have any Audyssey stuff. No DSX I can understand. But no XT32 EQ. No SubEQ. Bummer.

Pioneer has their own room EQ solution.

Deadwood Atmos theater
AV7702 Atmos 7.4.4, SSP-800 PLIIx 7.4
Aerial Acoustics 7B/CC3B fronts, B&W CWM8180 surrounds, Tannoy Di6 DC heights, Hsu ULS-15 subs
Roger Dressler is online now  
post #116 of 1283 Old 06-08-2011, 03:09 AM
AVS Special Member
 
Woof Woof's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2002
Posts: 1,502
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 18 Post(s)
Liked: 40
FWIW, I found PureMusic upsampling to 192 vs 96 to show a noticeable difference. And why the "32 bit" in front of the 96kHz. If anything, I think the 32 bit is more fluffy and less "discernable" given there's no 32 bit native material. Also odd is the spec later on that it supports 24/192 FLAC. I sure hope the 96kHz is a typo.

Otherwise, it would seem odd that in 2011, we are still accepting excuses for this 96kHz limitation that Marantz faced 3 years or so back but have fixed in their 2010 models by adding another SHARC processor or using a faster one.

I understand Pioneer have their own EQ systems but I do feel the added resolution of the XT32 plus the ability to do sub EQ for dual subs is a very noticeable improvement. Frankly, I could have done without the THX option and readily paid for Audyssey AutoEQ and DSX.
Woof Woof is online now  
post #117 of 1283 Old 06-08-2011, 04:12 AM
cwt
AVS Special Member
 
cwt's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2006
Location: nsw australia
Posts: 1,229
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 8 Post(s)
Liked: 32
Quote:
Originally Posted by Roger Dressler View Post

All these DSP algorithms are processor intensive. It takes significantly more MIPs to do this at 192 kHz than 96 kHz, with no particular sonic benefit.

I found this interesting Roger [and Woof woof] and also reminds me of a recent review of the oppo 95 which said to set the sp/dif out to 96khz rather than 192 as it sounded better. This all makes me think of the sample rate upconversion of the anthem d2v2 and its efficacy

http://www.avsforum.com/avs-vb/showt...1#post20452881
cwt is offline  
post #118 of 1283 Old 06-08-2011, 07:34 AM
AVS Special Member
 
Roger Dressler's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2000
Location: Oregon
Posts: 8,903
Mentioned: 2 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 758 Post(s)
Liked: 351
Quote:
Originally Posted by Woof Woof View Post

FWIW, I found PureMusic upsampling to 192 vs 96 to show a noticeable difference.

Maybe so. Upsampling is very easy to do, but not easy to do well. Papers by Meridian and Ayer on upsampling/apodizing are enlightening. If the upsampling is done right, there would be no audible difference between 96 and 192 kHz, unless that difference is due to other factors downstream, such as the DACs.

More importantly, how do native hi-rez recordings sound without upsampling?

Quote:


And why the "32 bit" in front of the 96kHz. If anything, I think the 32 bit is more fluffy and less "discernable" given there's no 32 bit native material.

Whenever you do processing in DSP, the product outputs more wordlength. Since digits come in 8-bit chunks, I guess they retain that as 32-bit words. But in the end it has to be sent to a DAC or passed over a link, either of which may limit at 24-bits, so the audio would have to be requantized and dithered back to 24 in that case.

Quote:


Otherwise, it would seem odd that in 2011, we are still accepting excuses for this 96kHz limitation that Marantz faced 3 years or so back but have fixed in their 2010 models by adding another SHARC processor or using a faster one.

I was not saying that the reason they went to 96 kHz was lack of DSP resources, only that it is a significant burden to go to 192 kHz. If you read DAC spec sheets, some perform better at 96 than 192. Such is the case for Burr Brown's used in my SSP-800, so they run them at 96 kHz.

Quote:


I understand Pioneer have their own EQ systems but I do feel the added resolution of the XT32 plus the ability to do sub EQ for dual subs is a very noticeable improvement. Frankly, I could have done without the THX option and readily paid for Audyssey AutoEQ and DSX.

Sure. Except Pioneer does not do Audyssey. So you need to look to another brand for the feature set you prefer.

Deadwood Atmos theater
AV7702 Atmos 7.4.4, SSP-800 PLIIx 7.4
Aerial Acoustics 7B/CC3B fronts, B&W CWM8180 surrounds, Tannoy Di6 DC heights, Hsu ULS-15 subs
Roger Dressler is online now  
post #119 of 1283 Old 06-08-2011, 10:25 AM
AVS Special Member
 
WiWavelength's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2006
Posts: 1,806
Mentioned: 3 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 20 Post(s)
Liked: 20
Quote:
Originally Posted by Woof Woof View Post

Also odd is the spec later on that it supports 24/192 FLAC. I sure hope the 96kHz is a typo.

Otherwise, it would seem odd that in 2011, we are still accepting excuses for this 96kHz limitation that Marantz faced 3 years or so back but have fixed in their 2010 models by adding another SHARC processor or using a faster one.

No, you misunderstand the situation. The upcoming top model Elite AVR (LX85 equivalent) does not lack DSP power. It accepts and processes 24 bit 192 kHz input signals, be they LPCM, Dolby TrueHD, DTS-HD Master Audio, or FLAC. When Hi-bit32/Hi-sampling is engaged, the internal DSP dithers word length output to 32 bit and sample rate converts to 96 kHz. This requires additional DSP resources and is in no way parallel to the DSP limitations in the Marantz AV8003.

AJ
WiWavelength is online now  
post #120 of 1283 Old 06-08-2011, 07:32 PM
AVS Special Member
 
SoundChex's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2008
Location: USA, west coast
Posts: 2,733
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 132 Post(s)
Liked: 108
Since the beginning of DTS-HDMA, it has been possible to author BDs in 7.1_Front-Wide configuration (with the mandatory 5.1_Standard mixdown available for non-7.1_Front-Wide-'ready' systems); as there were no(?) AVRs capable of decoding (more accurately: "capable of reproducing in full") DTS-HDMA 7.1_Front-Wide soundtracks, there was (until now) presumably no incentive to author soundtracks using that configuration!

So what happens if a (discrete) DTS-HDMA 7.1_Front-Wide soundtrack is decoded by an AVR with a DTS-HDMA+Neo:X decoder on a system equipped with Front Wide speakers? Does the original fully discrete 7.1_Front-Wide soundtrack (as authored on the BD) 'reappear' with NO mixdown-to-5.1_Standard-plus-'synthetic'-Neo:X-expansion-to-7.1_Front-Wide 'degradation' consequences? If so, then perhaps we might look forward to some concert footage reissues in DTS-HDMA 7.1_Front-Wide, where they could really shine!

[Home Office system schematic]
"My AV systems were created by man. They evolved. They rebelled. There are many speakers. And they have . . . A PLAN."

SoundChex is online now  
Reply Receivers, Amps, and Processors

Tags
Dts , Denon Avr 4311ci 9 2 Channel Network Multi Room Home Theater Receiver With Hdmi 1 4a
Gear in this thread

Thread Tools
Show Printable Version Show Printable Version
Email this Page Email this Page


Forum Jump: 

Posting Rules  
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are Off
Pingbacks are Off
Refbacks are Off