Lyngdorf MP-50 | 12 Channel AV Processor; 9.1.6 with matrixed Wides and Top Middles - Page 52 - AVS Forum | Home Theater Discussions And Reviews
Forum Jump: 
 1242Likes
Reply
 
Thread Tools
post #1531 of 3025 Old 11-03-2017, 09:15 AM
gsr
Oppo Beta Group
 
gsr's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2001
Location: Massachusetts, USA
Posts: 10,332
Mentioned: 32 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 1961 Post(s)
Liked: 2372
Quote:
Originally Posted by ARROW-AV View Post
Hi everyone,

I have an update regarding the issues with respect to the latest firmware update 3.0.0

Good news and bad news.

Bad news first... Further to the malfunctioning DTS Neural:X and Auro-2D, the playback/decoding functionality of the native encoded DTS:X is unfortunately also malfunctioning.
Kind of surprising that none of this was caught before releasing it to users. And why do you seem to give Lyngdorf a pass on bugs or being slow to add promised features but take such a harsh stance with Oppo when they have bugs? Your point that much / all of the DTS issues may come from a 3rd party company (Analog Devices) is the same situation Oppo often faces with MediaTek being the one that needs to fix an issue before Oppo can deliver a fix. The unfortunate truth is that in both cases, many products would never get delivered at all if the manufacturers waiting to have everything working perfectly.
love_that_sound likes this.
gsr is offline  
Sponsored Links
Advertisement
 
post #1532 of 3025 Old 11-03-2017, 09:46 AM
We're Nuts About AV
 
ARROW-AV's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2016
Posts: 4,489
Mentioned: 260 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 4117 Post(s)
Liked: 6655
Quote:
Originally Posted by Nalleh View Post
Did you try both «height» and «top» setups? Because it is a well known fact that DTS:X is encoded in a 7.1.4 setup with heights, not tops. And if you have a setup with tops, they will bleed down to the ear level speakers to try to phantom to where the heights would be.
Should the SURROUNDS being emanating from the FRONT L/R speakers?

ARROW-AV is offline  
post #1533 of 3025 Old 11-03-2017, 09:59 AM
AVS Forum Special Member
 
Nalleh's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2014
Location: Norway
Posts: 3,861
Mentioned: 334 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 2659 Post(s)
Liked: 3647
Quote:
Originally Posted by ARROW-AV View Post
Should the SURROUNDS being emanating from the FRONT L/R speakers?

No, that one is new

But then again, i did not quote that part.

Just pointed out that DTS:X behaves different if setup with heights compared to tops.
ARROW-AV likes this.

Dual Atmos Receivers - Atmos 13.1.8/DTS X 9.1.8/Auro 3D 13.1 - Denon AVCX8500H+AVRX7200WA - Klipsch+KEF - 6xSI18" - 12xJBL 12" w/6xSLAPS M12 downfiring VNF - 3x2 stacked Crowson MA - 4xBK-LFE - 6xNU6K(fan&trig mod) - Minidsp 10x10HD - Oppo UDP203 - XBox OneX - Apple TV4K - JVC RS600 Dreamscreen V2 120"- Philips 65OLED873.
Nalleh’s HT
Nalleh is online now  
Sponsored Links
Advertisement
 
post #1534 of 3025 Old 11-03-2017, 12:37 PM
AVS Forum Addicted Member
 
Marc Alexander's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2001
Location: Inland Empire, CA
Posts: 13,648
Mentioned: 251 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 5596 Post(s)
Liked: 5189
Quote:
Originally Posted by RapalloAV View Post
Marc have you not played round with DTS-X Neural X yet?
Life keeps getting in the way. Plus, I don't want to waste valuable time testing when issues have already been identified.

Quote:
Originally Posted by ARROW-AV View Post
Hi everyone,

I have an update regarding the issues with respect to the latest firmware update 3.0.0

Good news and bad news.

Bad news first... Further to the malfunctioning DTS Neural:X and Auro-2D, the playback/decoding functionality of the native encoded DTS:X is unfortunately also malfunctioning.

Specifics as per follows:

(1)SURROUNDS encoded DTS:X audio plays back / emanates out of both the SURROUNDS speakers and the FRONT L/R speakers

(2)FRONT HEIGHTS/TOPS encoded DTS:X audio plays back / emanates out of both the FRONT HEIGHTS/TOPS and the FRONT L/R speakers

(3)REAR HEIGHTS/TOPS encoded DTS:X audio plays back / emanates out of both the REAR HEIGHTS/TOPS and the BACK SURROUNDS speakers
If Lyngdorf is simply relying on Analog Devices' default implementations DTS:X would have been available at launch.

As @Nalleh mentioned, items 2 & 3 are well known bugs with DTS:X implementations. Both with ADI and TI chipsets. There really is no excuse for the MP-50 to exhibit this bug after this long wait! The workaround has long been to reconfigure TOPS as HEIGHTS for DTS:X. I'm hoping to test the workarounds today.
@ARROW-AV in your testing, please make sure you are not using matrixed WIDES or TOP MIDS.
@cannga was this DTS:X issue (2 & 3) resolved for the Theta Casablanca IVa?
Marc Alexander is offline  
post #1535 of 3025 Old 11-03-2017, 01:01 PM
AVS Forum Special Member
 
cannga's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2001
Location: Palos Verdes - Lakers Land
Posts: 3,412
Mentioned: 72 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 1904 Post(s)
Liked: 1853
Quote:
Originally Posted by ARROW-AV View Post
(2) FRONT HEIGHTS/TOPS encoded DTS:X audio plays back / emanates out of both the FRONT HEIGHTS/TOPS and the FRONT L/R speakers
(3) REAR HEIGHTS/TOPS encoded DTS:X audio plays back / emanates out of both the REAR HEIGHTS/TOPS and the BACK SURROUNDS speakers
Quote:
Originally Posted by Marc Alexander View Post
@cannga was this DTS:X issue (2 & 3) resolved for the Theta Casablanca IVa?
Marc, not an expert but this is how best I understood it, as confirmed to me by a pro (filmmixer): At least in *my* case of testing Theta Casablanca 7.1.4 using the DTS:X Demo Disc's channel call-out, 2 and 3 above is how it is supposed to be. Nothing wrong. Basically it's remapping function using available speakers to produce a particular sound in a particular position.

For example, with #2 , the channel call-out is asking for a sound directly above my front speaker (front height), let's say left front height. If my setup has a left front height speaker, that speaker alone would make sound. However... since my setup only has left top front, to reproduce a left front height sound, the Theta has to use left top front AND left main front to reproduce left front height sound. It's remapping at work. Hope this helps.

Regards, Can
My System & Theta Casablanca Mini-Review (CB IVa setup help HERE) Uncontrolled passion for music, and sound.
Interesting Audio Diagrams :-) & High-End Speaker Reviews
JTR Subwoofer Thread I don't always listen to subwoofers, but when I do, it's JTR :-).
cannga is offline  
post #1536 of 3025 Old 11-03-2017, 04:11 PM
AVS Forum Addicted Member
 
Marc Alexander's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2001
Location: Inland Empire, CA
Posts: 13,648
Mentioned: 251 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 5596 Post(s)
Liked: 5189
Quote:
Originally Posted by cannga View Post
Marc, not an expert but this is how best I understood it, as confirmed to me by a pro (filmmixer): At least in *my* case of testing Theta Casablanca 7.1.4 using the DTS:X Demo Disc's channel call-out, 2 and 3 above is how it is supposed to be. Nothing wrong. Basically it's remapping function using available speakers to produce a particular sound in a particular position.

For example, with #2 , the channel call-out is asking for a sound directly above my front speaker (front height), let's say left front height. If my setup has a left front height speaker, that speaker alone would make sound. However... since my setup only has left top front, to reproduce a left front height sound, the Theta has to use left top front AND left main front to reproduce left front height sound. It's remapping at work. Hope this helps.
Filmmixer explained this properly.

However, dts created this issue (yes, it's an issue) by following Dolby's nomenclature of HEIGHT and TOP for positioning, but mucking up the angles and screwing up manufacturers attempt for finding a proper universal placement.



To simplify,

Dolby's definition of TOPS is that they be placed ~45° & 135° and HEIGHTS ~30° & 150°.

Dts [in their infinite wisdom] defined TOPS at ~60° & 120° and HEIGHTS ~45° & 135°.

Dts:X does not have a placement which corresponds to Dolby's HEIGHTS at 30° & 150°.

Whether speakers are mounted on-wall, on-ceiling, or in-ceiling is of no consequence. Elevation Angle is what matters.



Dts HEIGHTS and Dolby TOPS correspond. Unfortunately, if you chose TOPS Atmos would render properly (without phantom imaging) but dts:x would not. It HEIGHTS were selected, it was optimal for dts:X but not Atmos.

It was expected that manufacturers would rectify this. Has anyone tested the latest D+M (ADI) or Yamaha (TI) AVRs or firmware? Theta's (ADI) implementation did not and doesn't even have an option to select HEIGHTS and now Lyngdorf (ADI) has not.

The solution is easy (in my mind), always report to the dts decoder that HEIGHTS are deployed and not TOPS. No one [in their right minds, at least] is building around dts:X primarily and placing speakers at 60° & 120°

Until then, two separate configs have to be maintained and switched between (easy on Yamahas). This may end up the case if Lyngdorf does not address it.

Quote:
Originally Posted by sdurani View Post
Check out the DTS:X slides at the following link: http://58.64.214.132/wordpress/?p=92868

As with Atmos, there are two layers of speakers above the listeners: Heights and Tops. All 8 Heights all are evenly spaced on a ring at 45° elevation, all 4 Tops are evenly spaced on a ring at 60° elevation. I guess VOG can be considered a third layer, at 90° elevation.

Quote:
Originally Posted by sdurani View Post
Atmos Tops fall close to DTS:X Heights. Problem is, if you designate that location as Tops in your AVR, it will be correct for Atmos but incorrect for DTS:X (which calls those same locations "Heights"). If you designate that location as Heights in your AVR, it will be correct for DTS:X but incorrect for Atmos (which calls those same locations "Tops"). Hence the compromise of one of the formats.

Last edited by Marc Alexander; 07-18-2018 at 04:20 PM.
Marc Alexander is offline  
post #1537 of 3025 Old 11-03-2017, 04:29 PM
AVS Forum Addicted Member
 
Marc Alexander's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2001
Location: Inland Empire, CA
Posts: 13,648
Mentioned: 251 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 5596 Post(s)
Liked: 5189
^^ I configure my setup with Atmos in mind and let the other formats fall where they may. However, I do think it is important to get dts:X right as it is being used a channel based format and not object based (for now and into the future it appears). There's is no need to phantom image any of the main dts:X 7.1.4 channels. Reserve that for WIDES & TOP MIDS.
Marc Alexander is offline  
post #1538 of 3025 Old 11-04-2017, 10:23 AM
AVS Forum Special Member
 
Join Date: May 2016
Posts: 1,342
Mentioned: 7 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 862 Post(s)
Liked: 717
Quote:
Originally Posted by ARROW-AV View Post
IMO what would be best of all is to have BOTH the wides rendered AND being used properly all of the time... Which would be the case if you used Neural:X instead of DSU in combination with a speaker configuration wherein the wides are rendered as opposed to matrixed... after Lyngdorf fix the Neural:X functionality that is...

What about having the wides active for music. I'm really curious to see what they add to 2.1, but I imagine it will be good. I hate using DSU for music, Neural:X probably uses the center channel in the same horrible way. It just sounds so awful/wrong compared to 2.1.

Lyngdorf MP-50 | Yamaha MX-A5200 | Ascend Sierra Towers | Ascend Sierra Horizon | Ascend Sierra Lunas | Ascend HTM-200SE | SVS SB-13 x4
duckymomo is offline  
post #1539 of 3025 Old 11-04-2017, 08:06 PM
AVS Forum Addicted Member
 
Marc Alexander's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2001
Location: Inland Empire, CA
Posts: 13,648
Mentioned: 251 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 5596 Post(s)
Liked: 5189
Quote:
Originally Posted by madhuski View Post
anyone have issues with the setup screen not fitting on their TV? not a big deal, just a little annoying....
No. Is your display overscanning?

Regardless, it's better and easier to use the web interface. Even from a phone browser!
Marc Alexander is offline  
post #1540 of 3025 Old 11-04-2017, 08:15 PM
AVS Forum Addicted Member
 
Marc Alexander's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2001
Location: Inland Empire, CA
Posts: 13,648
Mentioned: 251 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 5596 Post(s)
Liked: 5189
Quote:
Originally Posted by duckymomo View Post
What about having the wides active for music. I'm really curious to see what they add to 2.1, but I imagine it will be good. I hate using DSU for music, Neural:X probably uses the center channel in the same horrible way. It just sounds so awful/wrong compared to 2.1.
I always preferred Pure Direct 2.0 for music with my Yamahas, Denons and Marantz.

But I must admit, I like the effect of both matrixed WIDES and Auro3D processing of 2.0 music content. It truly broadens the sound stage in 3 dimensions.

I'm currently maintaining two configs: full 7.1.4 with matrixed WIDES & TOP MIDS and 5.1.4 + WIDES with a mono rear extracted by DPLII (Outlaw 950).
Marc Alexander is offline  
post #1541 of 3025 Old 11-04-2017, 08:32 PM
Advanced Member
 
Join Date: Oct 2017
Location: Louisiana
Posts: 562
Mentioned: 5 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 423 Post(s)
Liked: 179
Quote:
Originally Posted by gsr View Post
Kind of surprising that none of this was caught before releasing it to users. And why do you seem to give Lyngdorf a pass on bugs or being slow to add promised features but take such a harsh stance with Oppo when they have bugs? Your point that much / all of the DTS issues may come from a 3rd party company (Analog Devices) is the same situation Oppo often faces with MediaTek being the one that needs to fix an issue before Oppo can deliver a fix. The unfortunate truth is that in both cases, many products would never get delivered at all if the manufacturers waiting to have everything working perfectly.
I was actually seriously considering purchasing this, but seems to still be in beta trials.

Whats really happening - R&D budgets are diminishing or are much too small and manufacturers are depending on end users to fund the development ..and use "updates" as an excuse for functions that should have been implemented previous.

The McIntosh MX160 is another fine example of this nonsense.
normandia likes this.
love_that_sound is offline  
post #1542 of 3025 Old 11-05-2017, 01:56 AM
AVS Forum Addicted Member
 
Marc Alexander's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2001
Location: Inland Empire, CA
Posts: 13,648
Mentioned: 251 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 5596 Post(s)
Liked: 5189
Quote:
Originally Posted by love_that_sound View Post
I was actually seriously considering purchasing this, but seems to still be in beta trials.

Whats really happening - R&D budgets are diminishing or are much too small and manufacturers are depending on end users to fund the development ..and use "updates" as an excuse for functions that should have been implemented previous.

The McIntosh MX160 is another fine example of this nonsense.
Is this insight or a conspiracy theory?

Lyngdorf's core competency is music reproduction and SQ, not bells & whistles. Bugs will be fixed.

Ain't no shame going with a Denon or Marantz as they are feature rich. On the higher end there is the Theta Casablanca IVa, Datasats, and Trinnov of course!
Marc Alexander is offline  
post #1543 of 3025 Old 11-05-2017, 01:37 AM
Advanced Member
 
Join Date: Oct 2017
Location: Louisiana
Posts: 562
Mentioned: 5 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 423 Post(s)
Liked: 179
Quote:
Originally Posted by Marc Alexander View Post
Is this insight or a conspiracy theory?

Lyngdorf's core competency is music reproduction and SQ, not bells & whistles. Bugs will be fixed.

Ain't no shame going with a Denon or Marantz as they are feature rich. On the higher end there is the Theta Casablanca IVa, Datasats, and Trinnov of course!
no ..its common sense. DTS-X is a standard mainstay feature of 4k uhd.

Beta testers work out bugs. DTS-X not working properly ..or at all constitutes a serious flaw/bug. For 10k i would not expect to be purchasing a popcorn hour media tank.

Thats not to say this machine is bad ... its simply incomplete ... a 10k nothingburger.

Hey .. please go ahead and purchase these amazing speakers for 20k... wait ..they will be amazing when we send you the tweeter, but we don't know when that will be. yeah no. nobody here would purchase the speakers.
love_that_sound is offline  
post #1544 of 3025 Old 11-05-2017, 07:25 AM
Advanced Member
 
netroamer's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2006
Location: In my own little world!
Posts: 769
Mentioned: 3 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 296 Post(s)
Liked: 94
Quote:
Originally Posted by love_that_sound View Post
no ..its common sense. DTS-X is a standard mainstay feature of 4k uhd.

Beta testers work out bugs. DTS-X not working properly ..or at all constitutes a serious flaw/bug. For 10k i would not expect to be purchasing a popcorn hour media tank.

Thats not to say this machine is bad ... its simply incomplete ... a 10k nothingburger.

Hey .. please go ahead and purchase these amazing speakers for 20k... wait ..they will be amazing when we send you the tweeter, but we don't know when that will be. yeah no. nobody here would purchase the speakers.
As a recent purchaser of the MP-50, I must admit my confidence is shaken. When Lyngdorf was queried about the DTX delay, their response was " we will not release it until it is right". Based on the result, this is a major faux pas.
normandia and HTPCat like this.

John


netroamer is offline  
post #1545 of 3025 Old 11-05-2017, 08:19 AM
Member
 
logdog333's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2012
Location: Moscow, Russia
Posts: 15
Mentioned: 1 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 10 Post(s)
Liked: 16
Send a message via Skype™ to logdog333
Unhappy

Quote:
Originally Posted by Marc Alexander View Post

Are you still seeing sub-optimal LFE response via RoomPerfect? Your post got lost a bit in the dts excitement. But, I vaguely remembered it and doubled back.
Hey Mark, thanks for bringing it back.
We had MP-50 only for several days and had to send it back to our distributor due to strange SNR problem. It was making quite noticable hissing sound when powered on.. Our speakers are 94 dB\1 m and it was very surprising to get that type of issue. No power problem - tried to run it after the UPS. No other Pre\Pro had such a problem. During the year we had Yamaha (our present AVP), McIntosh (D&M based) and StormAudio.
So yes, I still wonder if you guys are happy with the lower than 35 Hz octave bass?
Could anyone make a measurement of the LFE-channel with REW etc?

Last edited by logdog333; 11-05-2017 at 10:49 AM.
logdog333 is offline  
post #1546 of 3025 Old 11-05-2017, 09:01 AM
AVS Forum Addicted Member
 
Marc Alexander's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2001
Location: Inland Empire, CA
Posts: 13,648
Mentioned: 251 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 5596 Post(s)
Liked: 5189
Quote:
Originally Posted by netroamer View Post
As a recent purchaser of the MP-50, I must admit my confidence is shaken. When Lyngdorf was queried about the DTX delay, their response was " we will not release it until it is right". Based on the result, this is a major faux pas.
Yes, it is most disappointing. However, sometimes things get screwed up between beta and release. Two of the MX160 beta testers have not experienced the issues ARROW reported. I'm expecting a quick turnaround on a patch.
Marc Alexander is offline  
post #1547 of 3025 Old 11-05-2017, 09:22 AM
AVS Forum Addicted Member
 
Marc Alexander's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2001
Location: Inland Empire, CA
Posts: 13,648
Mentioned: 251 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 5596 Post(s)
Liked: 5189
Quote:
Originally Posted by love_that_sound View Post
Thats not to say this machine is bad ... its simply incomplete ... a 10k nothingburger.
It's a great machine without dts:X, so not a nothingburger. But I get your point.

I'm not panicking because I have very few dts:X titles. My main interest is the Neural X upmixer.
Marc Alexander is offline  
post #1548 of 3025 Old 11-05-2017, 10:21 AM
Member
 
acidjazz1's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2005
Posts: 42
Mentioned: 3 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 27 Post(s)
Liked: 16
Quote:
Originally Posted by logdog333 View Post
Hey Mark, thanks for bringing it back.
We had MP-50 only for several days and had to send it back to our distributor due to strange SNR problem. It was making quite noticable hissing sound when powered on.. Our speakers are 94 dB\1 m and it was very surprising to get that type of issue. No power problem - tried to run it after the UPS. No other Pre\Pro had such a problem. During the year we had Yamaha (our present AVP), McIntosh (D&M based) and StormAudio.
So yes, I still wonder if you guys are happy with the lower than 35 Hz octave bass?
Could anyone make a measurement of the LFE-channel with REW etc?
Hi, will you give feedback around audiophile sq between mp-50 and stormaudio, as soon as you get the mp-50 back? would be very appreciated 😉 I'm still not vkear where to go and also waiting for the Trinnov 16...

Gesendet von meinem DUK-L09 mit Tapatalk
acidjazz1 is offline  
post #1549 of 3025 Old 11-05-2017, 10:31 AM
Member
 
logdog333's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2012
Location: Moscow, Russia
Posts: 15
Mentioned: 1 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 10 Post(s)
Liked: 16
Send a message via Skype™ to logdog333
Quote:
Originally Posted by acidjazz1 View Post
Hi, will you give feedback around audiophile sq between mp-50 and stormaudio, as soon as you get the mp-50 back? would be very appreciated 😉 I'm still not vkear where to go and also waiting for the Trinnov 16...

Gesendet von meinem DUK-L09 mit Tapatalk
Hi! I wish I could, but we had StormAudio only for a couple of hours. And there were no Dirac kit or a licence with it so.. The distributor rep Eqed only LCRs with PEQ and that's how we listened to it for a bit So I can't judge it's SQ. But what is for sure that it didn't have WIDES in it's patterns to choose from.
The same thing with Lyngdorf: due to anomaly in Signal to Noise Ratio I would wait for a normal unit to say anything about SQ. And be sure we'll get it. As well as Trinnov Al16 (hopely next week)!
logdog333 is offline  
post #1550 of 3025 Old 11-05-2017, 11:32 AM
Member
 
acidjazz1's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2005
Posts: 42
Mentioned: 3 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 27 Post(s)
Liked: 16
Quote:
Originally Posted by logdog333 View Post
Hi! I wish I could, but we had StormAudio only for a couple of hours. And there were no Dirac kit or a licence with it so.. The distributor rep Eqed only LCRs with PEQ and that's how we listened to it for a bit So I can't judge it's SQ. But what is for sure that it didn't have WIDES in it's patterns to choose from.
The same thing with Lyngdorf: due to anomaly in Signal to Noise Ratio I would wait for a normal unit to say anything about SQ. And be sure we'll get it. As well as Trinnov Al16 (hopely next week)!
Thanks a lot, looking forward to your feedback if everything works out i should get a mp-50 and a trinnov16 for a listening test, as soon my dealer get's the trinnov16

Gesendet von meinem DUK-L09 mit Tapatalk
acidjazz1 is offline  
post #1551 of 3025 Old 11-05-2017, 12:19 PM
AVS Forum Addicted Member
 
noah katz's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 1999
Location: Mountain View, CA USA
Posts: 23,082
Mentioned: 15 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 2144 Post(s)
Liked: 787
Quote:
Originally Posted by Marc Alexander View Post
I'm currently maintaining two configs... 5.1.4 + WIDES with a mono rear extracted by DPLII (Outlaw 950).

Why go to the trouble when you could do 7.1.4 + WIDES and have stereo rears?

Noah
noah katz is online now  
post #1552 of 3025 Old 11-05-2017, 12:46 PM
AVS Forum Addicted Member
 
Marc Alexander's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2001
Location: Inland Empire, CA
Posts: 13,648
Mentioned: 251 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 5596 Post(s)
Liked: 5189
Quote:
Originally Posted by noah katz View Post
Why go to the trouble when you could do 7.1.4 + WIDES and have stereo rears?
I have never been overly impressed with REARS after moving to 6.1 and ultimately 7.1. It's just a subtle improvement over 5.1 to me. Maybe I just don't directionalize sounds from behind me well. Also, my surrounds are not at 90° anymore after getting an OLED and moving seating closer (100-110° now). Most importantly, I underestimated the effectiveness of rendered WIDES w/Atmos.
Marc Alexander is offline  
post #1553 of 3025 Old 11-05-2017, 01:21 PM
AVS Forum Addicted Member
 
noah katz's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 1999
Location: Mountain View, CA USA
Posts: 23,082
Mentioned: 15 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 2144 Post(s)
Liked: 787
Quote:
Originally Posted by Marc Alexander View Post
I have never been overly impressed with REARS after moving to 6.1 and ultimately 7.1.
I agree on rears; I only hear mine on the rarest of occasions.

So do you get more w/the external matrixing?


Quote:
Originally Posted by Marc Alexander View Post
Most importantly, I underestimated the effectiveness of rendered WIDES w/Atmos.
Does that have anything to do with the rears?

Noah
noah katz is online now  
post #1554 of 3025 Old 11-05-2017, 01:38 PM
AVS Forum Addicted Member
 
Marc Alexander's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2001
Location: Inland Empire, CA
Posts: 13,648
Mentioned: 251 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 5596 Post(s)
Liked: 5189
Quote:
Originally Posted by noah katz View Post
I agree on rears; I only hear mine on the rarest of occasions.

So do you get more w/the external matrixing?

Does that have anything to do with the rears?
The external matrixing gives me an extracted, mono signal to feed the REARS.

I had to sacrifice the REARS in order to get rendered WIDES instead of matrixed.
7.1.4 + WIDES results in matrixed/summed WIDES instead of rendered.
Marc Alexander is offline  
post #1555 of 3025 Old 11-05-2017, 03:35 PM
AVS Forum Addicted Member
 
noah katz's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 1999
Location: Mountain View, CA USA
Posts: 23,082
Mentioned: 15 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 2144 Post(s)
Liked: 787
Quote:
Originally Posted by Marc Alexander View Post
The external matrixing gives me an extracted, mono signal to feed the REARS.
Yes, understood.


Quote:
Originally Posted by Marc Alexander View Post
I had to sacrifice the REARS in order to get rendered WIDES instead of matrixed.
7.1.4 + WIDES results in matrixed/summed WIDES instead of rendered.

OK I think I've got it now that I read it right - I at first misread "I underestimated the effectiveness of rendered WIDES w/Atmos" as "overestimated".

So contrary to my earlier (mis)understanding that Atmos soundtracks underutilized the Wides, you've found otherwise.

Could you elaborate on the comparison w/matrixed, in particular as regards expanding the front soundfield and soundfield continuity between fronts and side surrounds?

Thanks

Noah
noah katz is online now  
post #1556 of 3025 Old 11-05-2017, 09:20 PM
AVS Forum Addicted Member
 
Marc Alexander's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2001
Location: Inland Empire, CA
Posts: 13,648
Mentioned: 251 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 5596 Post(s)
Liked: 5189
Quote:
Originally Posted by netroamer View Post
As a recent purchaser of the MP-50, I must admit my confidence is shaken. When Lyngdorf was queried about the DTX delay, their response was " we will not release it until it is right". Based on the result, this is a major faux pas.
Looks like you aren't the only one who's confidence is shaken. I just noticed this pre-owned MP-50 up on ebay:

https://rover.ebay.com/rover/0/0/0?m...2F132386288262
acidjazz1 likes this.
Marc Alexander is offline  
post #1557 of 3025 Old 11-05-2017, 10:31 PM
We're Nuts About AV
 
ARROW-AV's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2016
Posts: 4,489
Mentioned: 260 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 4117 Post(s)
Liked: 6655
Quote:
Originally Posted by Marc Alexander View Post
I'm expecting a quick turnaround on a patch.
They've already fixed Auro-2D such that the audio emanates from the back surrounds, wherein the fix will be implemented via a future firmware update, and they are already working on the rest... so it's not a case of 'IF' these issues will be fixed but 'WHEN' where suffice to say they won't be sitting on their hands regards doing so...

Quote:
Originally Posted by duckymomo View Post
What about having the wides active for music. I'm really curious to see what they add to 2.1, but I imagine it will be good. I hate using DSU for music, Neural:X probably uses the center channel in the same horrible way. It just sounds so awful/wrong compared to 2.1.
Personally I love what the matrixed WIDES do with respect to widening the front soundstage. So far there's a 100% approval where every single person who has auditioned the audio system prefers music with the WIDES as compared with without

Quote:
Originally Posted by Marc Alexander View Post
Filmmixer explained this properly... However, dts created this issue (yes, it's an issue) by following Dolby's nomenclature of HEIGHT and TOP for positioning, but mucking up the angles and screwing up manufacturers attempt for finding a proper universal placement... [snip] ...The solution is easy (in my mind), always report to the dts decoder that HEIGHTS are deployed and not TOPS. No one [in their right minds, at least] is building around dts:X primarily and placing speakers at 60° & 120°

Until then, two separate configs have to be maintained and switched between (easy on Yamahas). This may end up the case if Lyngdorf does not address it...

Quote:
Originally Posted by sdurani View Post
Atmos Tops fall close to DTS:X Heights. Problem is, if you designate that location as Tops in your AVR, it will be correct for Atmos but incorrect for DTS:X (which calls those same locations "Heights"). If you designate that location as Heights in your AVR, it will be correct for DTS:X but incorrect for Atmos (which calls those same locations "Tops"). Hence the compromise of one of the formats.
I absolutely agree with you Marc! This is stupid. Pure and simple. And just because it's 'how it is supposed to operate' doesn't make it any less stupid!

So, in short, I've asked Lyngdorf to program via firmware update the ability to disable this DTS:X related/specific remapping via an ON/OFF toggle to be added to the MP-50’s Setup --> Audio Setup --> Audio Processing Menu… Such that the effect when this is set to OFF with DTS:X would be that the audio emanates solely from the TOP FRONTS and TOP REARS and not also the FRONT L/R and BACK SURROUNDS additionally… As per with respect to DOLBY ATMOS and DSU. Where you will note that there is already a “DISABLE REMAPPING” option contained within the respective menu on the MP-50; however, this only affects regular DTS audio and currently has no effect with respect to DTS:X audio. So I have asked Lyngdorf to simply update this accordingly. No question that what everyone wants is to be able to have the one singular speaker configuration with the front and rear immersive audio channels being treated the same way by both Dolby Atmos and DTS:X. Having to set up and switch between two different configurations as a workaround is a royal pain in the arse. I am hoping that this solution is feasible for Lyngdorf to implement and simply via firmware update... So there's a silver lining here, in that whilst fixing the other issues they can fix this one too, which would be seriously cool if they do. Last time I checked the likes of Denon etc. don't take special requests...


.

Last edited by ARROW-AV; 11-06-2017 at 03:05 AM.
ARROW-AV is offline  
post #1558 of 3025 Old 11-05-2017, 10:48 PM
AVS Forum Addicted Member
 
noah katz's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 1999
Location: Mountain View, CA USA
Posts: 23,082
Mentioned: 15 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 2144 Post(s)
Liked: 787
Quote:
Originally Posted by ARROW-AV View Post
… Such that the effect when this is set to OFF with DTS:X would be that the audio emanates solely from the TOP FRONTS and TOP REARS and not also the FRONT L/R and BACK SURROUNDS additionally…

What would happen when sound *should* come from more than one speaker, like half way through an overhead-to-rear pan?

Noah
noah katz is online now  
post #1559 of 3025 Old 11-05-2017, 11:04 PM
We're Nuts About AV
 
ARROW-AV's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2016
Posts: 4,489
Mentioned: 260 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 4117 Post(s)
Liked: 6655
Quote:
Originally Posted by noah katz View Post
What would happen when sound *should* come from more than one speaker, like half way through an overhead-to-rear pan?
It will do precisely that... But audio channel TOP/HEIGHT FRONT LEFT only would only emanate from that speaker, whereas with DTS:X currently it would also emanate from your FRONT LEFT speaker as well if you have your speakers configured as TOPS and not HEIGHTS...

ARROW-AV is offline  
post #1560 of 3025 Old 11-05-2017, 11:07 PM
AVS Forum Addicted Member
 
noah katz's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 1999
Location: Mountain View, CA USA
Posts: 23,082
Mentioned: 15 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 2144 Post(s)
Liked: 787
OK, good, thanks

Noah
noah katz is online now  
Sponsored Links
Advertisement
 
Reply Receivers, Amps, and Processors

Tags
lyngdorf , mp-50 , owner's , processor , surround

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