or Connect
AVS › AVS Forum › Display Devices › Ultra Hi-End HT Gear ($20,000+) › Best Surround Processor Currently Available?
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

Best Surround Processor Currently Available? - Page 12

Poll Results: Best Multi-Channel processor currently on the market?

This is a multiple choice poll
  • 11% (23)
    Classe SSP800
  • 10% (21)
    Bryton SP3
  • 1% (3)
    ADA Mach IV
  • 13% (27)
    ADA Mach IV+Trinnov
  • 20% (42)
    Datasat RS20i
  • 15% (32)
    Theta CB3 HDMI + Extreme Dacs
  • 5% (12)
    Krell Evolution 707
  • 11% (24)
    Mcintosh MX151
  • 7% (15)
    JBL Synthesis with SDEC 4500
  • 14% (31)
    Other (comment on your answer)
207 Total Votes  
post #331 of 817
Thread Starter 
Quote:
Originally Posted by wse View Post

I am glad you find this cheap! I think it is a bit much!

Compared to what? Meridian is $25k, Datasat is $18k, ADA with Trinnov is around $16k - $40k. I think it's a bargain for what you are getting. As G-rex stated, Room Perfect stand alone device is $5k and I believe that unit only handles 2 channels. The MX151 is a bargain for what you are getting IMO.
Edited by adidino - 6/30/13 at 7:16pm
post #332 of 817
My Mac experience years ago was not a positive one for home theater.

I think it was the MX121 [?] about 6 years ago. Excellent in two channel but home theater was average. The Cary Audio Design C11 [?] and Parasound Halo C1 sounded better to me.

Now that said I attended a Lyndorf demo about 5 years ago and was very impressed. I am glad this timeless made in America product is making waves in home theater.

The look and feel of the controls and the cosmetics of the silk screen face plate is top shelf.
post #333 of 817
Quote:
Originally Posted by wse View Post

I am glad you find this cheap! I think it is a bit much!

Says he with $30k worth of side and rear surrounds...
smile.gif

B.
post #334 of 817
Thread Starter 
Quote:
Originally Posted by mmiles View Post

My Mac experience years ago was not a positive one for home theater.

I think it was the MX121 [?] about 6 years ago. Excellent in two channel but home theater was average. The Cary Audio Design C11 [?] and Parasound Halo C1 sounded better to me.

Now that said I attended a Lyndorf demo about 5 years ago and was very impressed. I am glad this timeless made in America product is making waves in home theater.

The look and feel of the controls and the cosmetics of the silk screen face plate is top shelf.

I think 6 years ago it was likely the MX119 which was nothing to write home about from what I understand. MX121 a couple of years old and is a very popular unit for it's price point but I never really spent a lot of time with it. From what I understand, it sounds good but it uses Audyssey (not XT32) for room correction which did not interest me.
post #335 of 817
Quote:
Originally Posted by Brian B View Post

Says he with $30k worth of side and rear surrounds... smile.gif B.

Nah, but at least speakers could last over twenty years if not more! The problem with processors, projectors, players is that they become obsolete like computers three years later and the value goes down the drain in a heart beat!

- Amps, speakers usually can last 20 years
- Pre/ pro you are lucky if they last more than five years unless you don't mind having any new features and even then since they are computers they are more prone to failures
- Of course the worst are sources with their moving parts, disk drawer failing and so on....

So having said that, I prefer spend the $ on speakers
post #336 of 817
Wse, I agree that speakers and amps have the most longevity, however if equiment is purchased wisely, there are exceptions to the rule.

However the Lexicon MC12 platform is over 12 years old. This processor served me well for for almost 10 years. Using the analog outs out of my Pioneer 09 gave me hidef sound and using the dual hdmi outs have me no loss of hdmi featurs. This set up still gave me access to the Lexicon room correction. It was more modular than most processors which gave it additional longevity. Did I feel outdated for years? No. It had reasonabley good sound, but I prefer McIntosh sound for reasons I posted earlier. I do wish the McIntosh was more modular/upgradable though.

As far as upcoming new sound formats go...am I interested in 11.2 or Atmos? Not really. With Atmos I am not interested in placing 6 more speakers on the ceiling especially with the cost of EW speakers. I also weigh aesthetics with function and that set up may look a bit ridiculous in a certian rooms. As Thrang said, (for now) the 151's 5.1/7.1 outperformed two 11.2 processors. The 151 has a tendancy to make speakers/the soundfield sound substantial and seamless. Presently, that makes me not feel the need for more speakers. If a true height channel comes out, not matrixed, that can be done with one or two speakers I certainly may try that someday. Is Atmos a true height channel recorded on the source? Lexicon's Quatum Logic sounds interesting, but I got tired of waithing for their next processor and gave up on them.

Many experts, such as Jeff Meier (THX/ISF) engineer recommended not going above 7.2 as it often muddles up the sound.

As far as projectors go, yes the general rule is that they become obsolete quickly, but my Sony 1000es does not fit into this mold at all. It has been out for some time now and will be state of the art for years to come. Its 4k capability has not even been used yet, but it will in August with the 4k Sony streamer coming. If anything new 4k projectors will eventually come out at a much lower price point but at the cost of a cheaper lens and a smaller sxrd chip. So I think the Sony is a much longer term investment than typical projectors.
Edited by G-Rex - 7/1/13 at 4:59am
post #337 of 817
Quote:
Originally Posted by wse View Post

Fair enough, Classe SSP-800 used to be 8,000

Classe $9500 (current price) + Lyngdorf eq processor (if they even made an external 7 channel stand alone version) $6000= $15,500
McIntosh MX151= $12,500

The 151 also has the added benefit of having the eq device hard wired into to box. Clearly connecting an eq processor with 7 additional xlr cables is not optimal.

Let's not forget that McIntosh gear holds its value more than just about any other manufacturer.
Edited by G-Rex - 7/1/13 at 5:16am
post #338 of 817
Thread Starter 
Quote:
Originally Posted by G-Rex View Post

Classe $8000 + Lyngdorf eq processor (if they even made an external 7 channel stand alone version) $6000= $14,000
McIntosh MX151= $12,500
The 151 also has the added benefit of having the eq device hard wired into to box. Clearly connecting an eq processor with 7 additional xlr cables is not optimal.

Classe is $9500 retail
post #339 of 817
I co
Quote:
Originally Posted by adidino View Post

Classe is $9500 retail

I corrected it while you were typing. wink.gif
post #340 of 817
Quote:
Originally Posted by adidino View Post

Classe is $9500 retail

And now manufactured in china...if that matters to anyone...
post #341 of 817
Quote:
Originally Posted by thrang View Post

And now manufactured in china...if that matters to anyone...

Yes that's a shame!
post #342 of 817
Quote:
Originally Posted by G-Rex View Post

Wse, I agree that speakers and amps have the most longevity, however if equiment is purchased wisely, there are exceptions to the rule. However the Lexicon MC12 platform is over 12 years old. This processor served me well for for almost 10 years. .... The 151 has a tendency .....

.....Sony 1000es does not fit into this mold at all. It has been out for some time now and will be state of the art for years to come. Its 4k capability has not even been used yet, but it will in August with the 4k Sony streamer coming. If anything new 4k projectors will eventually come out at a much lower price point but at the cost of a cheaper lens and a smaller sxrd chip. So I think the Sony is a much longer term investment than typical projectors.

Yes you make a good point, I still have an INTEGRA RESEARCH RDC-7 that I use every day in my gym and it is I've 10 years old, on the other hand I had a SIM2 projector that cost me a fortune 7 years ago, lasted 3 years before having a bunch of problem and is now an expensive dust collector!

I am actually looking forward to DTS-MDA and Dolby ATMOS or Auro-3D, I don't think you need to add anymore speakers plus I have two in ceiling speakers in my room over the listening position already! http://www.auro-technologies.com/consumer/experience

In regards to projector, if it last yes the Sony should keep you happy until 8K comes out in 10 years:)
post #343 of 817
For us MX 151/150 owners, I've started an Offical Owners Thread, link in my sig...
post #344 of 817
Thread Starter 
Quote:
Originally Posted by thrang View Post

For us MX 151/150 owners, I've started an Offical Owners Thread, link in my sig...

Future owners are welcome.. I'm sure.. smile.gif
post #345 of 817
Quote:
Originally Posted by adidino View Post

Future owners are welcome.. I'm sure.. smile.gif

Well, yes, of course...window shopping can be fun...
post #346 of 817
Quote:
Originally Posted by adidino View Post

I suspect Lyngdorf was involved in the development but that's just me guessing.

Tony, try e-mailing Peter Lyngdorf and ask! tongue.gif He will most likely answer your mail...
post #347 of 817
Thread Starter 
Quote:
Originally Posted by Peter Nielsen View Post

Tony, try e-mailing Peter Lyngdorf and ask! tongue.gif He will most likely answer your mail...


I'll do that. Nice idea..

BTW - Ever get your Synth processor?
post #348 of 817
So...

How great are the dacs in the ILLUSONIC? Compared to Datasat,Theta, ADA?



Is the Illusonic related to the Barco AURO UPCONVERTING Procsessing?
post #349 of 817
Thread Starter 
I'll bite... How great is it? smile.gif
post #350 of 817
Quote:
Originally Posted by adidino View Post

BTW - Ever get your Synth processor?

Nope, still on order... cool.gif
post #351 of 817
Quote:
Originally Posted by sdurani View Post

Indeed, in Sean Olive's blind comparison of various room correction technologies a few years back, Lyngdorf was one of the only to score better than no room correction. I often cite their research papers on finding target curves that sound natural to listeners.

I received a link from James Tanner a couple days ago. It has a video on room correction that I (being a newbie at this) found very interesting and I wanted to ask ya'll what you thought of what was presented in the video. I must warn you it's a bit long...it's 1:09:07. eek.gif Yikes! Here's the link: The Science of the Room Scott Wilkinson chats with Paul Hales of Professional Home Cinema about the science behind optimizing audio for a room.
post #352 of 817
Thread Starter 
I watched this video a while back. I don't fully agree with it. I say that because I've participated in several comparisons of system with and without room correction and there is no comparison. Room correction or the ability to make corrections with a peq is a requirement as far as I'm concerned.

You should read the Harman whitepaper on room correction.


Read this... you will find it interesting.

http://seanolive.blogspot.com/2009/11/subjective-and-objective-evaluation-of.html
Edited by adidino - 7/19/13 at 5:37am
post #353 of 817
Quote:
Originally Posted by adidino View Post

I watched this video a while back. I don't fully agree with it. I say that because I've participated in several comparisons of system with out without room correction and there is no comparison. Room correction or the ability to make corrections with a peq is a requirement as far as I'm concerned.

You should read the Harman whitepaper on room correction.


Read this... you will find it interesting.

http://seanolive.blogspot.com/2009/11/subjective-and-objective-evaluation-of.html

I don't think Hales is suggesting that room correction is bad. In fact, just the opposite. What he is saying is that many if the current auto room correction systems are flawed. Those are 2 very different conclusions.
post #354 of 817
Thread Starter 
Quote:
Originally Posted by dminches View Post

I don't think Hales is suggesting that room correction is bad. In fact, just the opposite. What he is saying is that many if the current auto room correction systems are flawed. Those are 2 very different conclusions.

I think he was making a general statement that room correction is flawed. I don't think he indicated any were effective but I did jump around this video a little.
post #355 of 817
Quote:
Originally Posted by adidino View Post

I think he was making a general statement that room correction is flawed. I don't think he indicated any were effective but I did jump around this video a little.

I watched the whole thing and he does not think that room correction is flawed. He thinks some if the techniques are flawed. He makes some excellent points.
post #356 of 817
Quote:
Originally Posted by dminches View Post

I watched the whole thing and he does not think that room correction is flawed. He thinks some if the techniques are flawed. He makes some excellent points.
Even if we assume that all of the points Mr. Hales expounds are valid, actual objective data from Harman's study demonstrates that, provided the room correction yields a smooth, downward-sloping response, real people will prefer correction to no correction.

More is being made of this video than is warranted.
post #357 of 817
The head shots are so close in those podcasts, I generally can't get past the nasal hairs, forehead grease, and occassional rosacea...
post #358 of 817
Quote:
Originally Posted by RUR View Post

Even if we assume that all of the points Mr. Hales expounds are valid, actual objective data from Harman's study demonstrates that, provided the room correction yields a smooth, downward-sloping response, real people will prefer correction to no correction.

More is being made of this video than is warranted.

I'm a real person, and my preference thus far has always been "no correction", even though I have zero acoustical treatments. Keeping in mind though that the only correction I've experienced thus far is (up to) Audyssey MultEQ XT32 (in various processors and forms) and Arcam's room correction. I would like to hear McIntosh's correction and others, and it's very possible that I would like those better than "no correction". If that ends up being the case, then "subjectively" for "me", some corrections are not to my taste and other(s) sound right to me. For me, no matter how good the objective data looks, it still may not be my preference.


Dave
post #359 of 817
Quote:
Originally Posted by thrang View Post

The head shots are so close in those podcasts, I generally can't get past the nasal hairs, forehead grease, and occassional rosacea...

LOL. Yeah, it must be rough with that Sony projector you have. :-)

Dave
post #360 of 817
Quote:
Originally Posted by thezaks View Post

I'm a real person, and my preference thus far has always been "no correction", even though I have zero acoustical treatments. Keeping in mind though that the only correction I've experienced thus far is (up to) Audyssey MultEQ XT32 (in various processors and forms) and Arcam's room correction. I would like to hear McIntosh's correction and others, and it's very possible that I would like those better than "no correction". If that ends up being the case, then "subjectively" for "me", some corrections are not to my taste and other(s) sound right to me. For me, no matter how good the objective data looks, it still may not be my preference.


Dave
And that's fine, since folks are absolutely entitled to their own subjective experiences. Indeed, those fortunate enough to have anechoically flat on-axis speakers with good off-axis performance and who enjoy acoustically ideal rooms may well find no correction to be preferable. The latter, at least, probably represent a very small percentage of the population. The vast majority who live in real-world, acoustically challenged rooms are those who will best benefit from RC.

What surprises me is the sudden proliferation of folks using blurbs from Messrs. Hales and Tanner to assert that room correction is fatally flawed, in general.
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:
  Return Home
  Back to Forum: Ultra Hi-End HT Gear ($20,000+)
AVS › AVS Forum › Display Devices › Ultra Hi-End HT Gear ($20,000+) › Best Surround Processor Currently Available?