pro logic v. pro logic II - AVS Forum | Home Theater Discussions And Reviews
Forum Jump: 
 
Thread Tools
post #1 of 16 Old 01-11-2007, 02:46 PM - Thread Starter
Member
 
rachel1997's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2006
Location: Los Angeles, Ca
Posts: 60
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 10
I have an "old" pro logic receiver. I am setting up a home theater. I am by no means an audiophile. I am trying to decide if it is worth upgrading to a pro logic II or IIX receiver. I believe the main difference between pro logic and pro logic II is that in pro logic the rear/surround channel is mono, but in pro logic II is it stereo. Is this correct? Can someone who has compared both comment on whether an upgrade would be noticeable? thanks.
rachel1997 is offline  
Sponsored Links
Advertisement
 
post #2 of 16 Old 01-11-2007, 03:08 PM
ekb
AVS Forum Special Member
 
ekb's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2001
Location: Lawrenceville, NJ
Posts: 4,155
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 12
Yes the surrounds are stereo and full range - PL was limited I think to 7kHz.

There is a HUGE difference in sound between PL and PLII or IIx. Things don't callapse to the center channel either. I think it's well worth the upgrade.

Ed
ekb is offline  
post #3 of 16 Old 01-11-2007, 03:14 PM
AVS Forum Addicted Member
 
JOHNnDENVER's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2005
Posts: 13,326
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 2 Post(s)
Liked: 12
Go for the IIx for sure. I was never that high on DPLII in general, DPLIIx does seem great now that I have it.
JOHNnDENVER is offline  
Sponsored Links
Advertisement
 
post #4 of 16 Old 01-11-2007, 03:16 PM - Thread Starter
Member
 
rachel1997's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2006
Location: Los Angeles, Ca
Posts: 60
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 10
Thanks. Onkyo (which I have) seems to be the best choice in a "low budget" system?
rachel1997 is offline  
post #5 of 16 Old 01-11-2007, 08:07 PM
ekb
AVS Forum Special Member
 
ekb's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2001
Location: Lawrenceville, NJ
Posts: 4,155
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 12
Quote:
Originally Posted by JOHNnDENVER View Post

I was never that high on DPLII in general, DPLIIx does seem great now that I have it.

Have you listened to Dolby PL? DD PLII is a HUGE improvement over Dolby PL. The difference between DD PL II and PL IIx is only the addition of rear surrounds - and not to diminish that - but it's no where near as dramatic as getting decent 5.1 vs the lame PL surround - which is almost unlistenable.

Ed
ekb is offline  
post #6 of 16 Old 01-11-2007, 08:11 PM
ekb
AVS Forum Special Member
 
ekb's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2001
Location: Lawrenceville, NJ
Posts: 4,155
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 12
Quote:
Originally Posted by rachel1997 View Post

Thanks. Onkyo (which I have) seems to be the best choice in a "low budget" system?

I'm not up on the best choice for a low budget system - but at this point in time, all brands will have DD PL II or even DD PL IIx. I see a lot of threads talking about budget Panasonics. Shouldn't be too hard to poke thru this forum to see what people think is a good low budget system.

Ed
ekb is offline  
post #7 of 16 Old 01-11-2007, 08:48 PM - Thread Starter
Member
 
rachel1997's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2006
Location: Los Angeles, Ca
Posts: 60
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 10
Thanks. I have listened to my PL. To me is sound OK, but I have never heard PLII. I am going to upgrade and read the threads for receivers.
rachel1997 is offline  
post #8 of 16 Old 01-12-2007, 02:43 AM
AVS Forum Addicted Member
 
JOHNnDENVER's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2005
Posts: 13,326
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 2 Post(s)
Liked: 12
Quote:
Originally Posted by ekb View Post

Have you listened to Dolby PL? DD PLII is a HUGE improvement over Dolby PL. The difference between DD PL II and PL IIx is only the addition of rear surrounds - and not to diminish that - but it's no where near as dramatic as getting decent 5.1 vs the lame PL surround - which is almost unlistenable.

Ed


Might be the only addition on paper, but I don't agree. DPLIIx does things way differently than DPLII upon direct comparisons.
JOHNnDENVER is offline  
post #9 of 16 Old 01-12-2007, 03:42 AM
KMO
Advanced Member
 
KMO's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2006
Location: England
Posts: 938
Mentioned: 1 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 1 Post(s)
Liked: 12
Hang on, why are you only talking about Pro Logic? Is your receiver old enough to predate Dolby Digital? If so, then that's the biggest reason to upgrade. Dolby Digital will give you vastly better results from DVDs. Pro Logic II will only come in for stereo signals, eg from TV.

And John - most receivers don't let you select Pro Logic IIx in 5.1 mode. They just offer "Pro Logic II". Are you saying that the "Pro Logic II" these receivers offer is better than the "Pro Logic II" of non-IIx receivers?

And ekb - stop saying "DD PLII", it doesn't make sense, assuming you intend "DD" to stand for "Dolby Digital".
KMO is offline  
post #10 of 16 Old 01-12-2007, 05:56 AM
ekb
AVS Forum Special Member
 
ekb's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2001
Location: Lawrenceville, NJ
Posts: 4,155
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 12
Quote:
Originally Posted by KMO View Post

And ekb - stop saying "DD PLII", it doesn't make sense, assuming you intend "DD" to stand for "Dolby Digital".

You're right. I will correct myself.

Ed
ekb is offline  
post #11 of 16 Old 01-12-2007, 07:54 AM
AVS Forum Addicted Member
 
MichaelJHuman's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2006
Location: Colorado Springs, CO
Posts: 18,923
Mentioned: 1 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 266 Post(s)
Liked: 155
Dolby Digital was a major step up in sound.

I was never impressed with surround sound back in the Dolby Pro Logic days. After all, the most common source for it was VHS! I did not have a laser disk, so I don't know how much better that sounded. I skipped upgrading to Dolby Pro Logic.

Then DVD players came out with Dolby Digital. At that point upgrading your system to surround sound made a lot of sense. The price of DVD players came down below $200 very early on. And DD receivers were quite reasonable.

Dolby Pro Logic II might be ok if you still watch movies on VHS.

Dolby Pro LogicIIx can apparently create a rear surround channel from 5.1. Most receivers provide some way to do this. On my Yamaha, I simply hit the extended surround button on the remote. To be honest I don't know what process it uses to give me a rear surround channel when I hit that button. Most likely it uses the IIx decoder.

I use a two speaker rear surround setup. But I can't promote it personally as its not obvious to me that it's an improvement. I would tend to think it smooths out your surround field. There are only a few disks with actual 6.1 soundtracks. And they did not blow me away to be honest. I hooked it up because it was available and I had the speakers and room setup for it.

"But this one goes up to 11"
MichaelJHuman is offline  
post #12 of 16 Old 01-12-2007, 07:55 AM
AVS Forum Addicted Member
 
JOHNnDENVER's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2005
Posts: 13,326
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 2 Post(s)
Liked: 12
Quote:
Originally Posted by KMO View Post

Hang on, why are you only talking about Pro Logic? Is your receiver old enough to predate Dolby Digital? If so, then that's the biggest reason to upgrade. Dolby Digital will give you vastly better results from DVDs. Pro Logic II will only come in for stereo signals, eg from TV.

And John - most receivers don't let you select Pro Logic IIx in 5.1 mode. They just offer "Pro Logic II". Are you saying that the "Pro Logic II" these receivers offer is better than the "Pro Logic II" of non-IIx receivers?

And ekb - stop saying "DD PLII", it doesn't make sense, assuming you intend "DD" to stand for "Dolby Digital".


All I can say is I had a Denon 4802 and never really cared much for the DPLII on it for anything, now I have the Marantz with DPLIIx and I am using it a ton, for 2 channel LD, 5.1 source, and even Lossless PCM sources. And maybe for music now too, it does seem better all around, I don't think it is just the addition of the rear channel use either, music never sounded very good to me with DPLII, but now I have actually even prefered DPLIIx a few times when expirementing.
JOHNnDENVER is offline  
post #13 of 16 Old 01-12-2007, 02:06 PM - Thread Starter
Member
 
rachel1997's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2006
Location: Los Angeles, Ca
Posts: 60
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 10
http://www.dolby.com/consumer/techno...ologic_II.html

There are three dolby pro logics: Pro Logic, Pro Logic II, and Pro Logic IIx.
Dolby digital replaced dolby surround.
This seems confusing. It appears there is a pro logic which is dobly digital, and a pro logic which is dolby surround. (unless the first pro logic with dolby digital was pro logic II.) I believe my pro logic is dolby surround. I will check when I get home. Thanks.
rachel1997 is offline  
post #14 of 16 Old 01-12-2007, 02:17 PM
axs
AVS Forum Special Member
 
axs's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2006
Posts: 2,058
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 10
Quote:
Originally Posted by MichaelJHuman View Post

Dolby Pro Logic II might be ok if you still watch movies on VHS.

It works great for TV programming (not all programs are in dolby digital) and also for CDs (stereo sources) too. Games (PS2/xbox) also sound much better with PLII.
axs is offline  
post #15 of 16 Old 01-12-2007, 02:23 PM
axs
AVS Forum Special Member
 
axs's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2006
Posts: 2,058
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 10
Quote:
Originally Posted by JOHNnDENVER View Post

All I can say is I had a Denon 4802 and never really cared much for the DPLII on it for anything, now I have the Marantz with DPLIIx and I am using it a ton, for 2 channel LD, 5.1 source, and even Lossless PCM sources. And maybe for music now too, it does seem better all around, I don't think it is just the addition of the rear channel use either, music never sounded very good to me with DPLII, but now I have actually even prefered DPLIIx a few times when expirementing.

May be you are liking sound of Marantz more than Denon's. Marantz are considered by many to be more musical.

BTW, KMO is right, if you have setup your Marantz properly it should not let you switch to PLIIx as you don't have 6.1 or 7.1 setup. Check your setup, if by chance the surround back speakers are active (small/large).
axs is offline  
post #16 of 16 Old 01-12-2007, 03:03 PM - Thread Starter
Member
 
rachel1997's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2006
Location: Los Angeles, Ca
Posts: 60
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 10
I was close to getting the HK 235-Z refurb, but saw on the Marantz site the SR3001 for about $100 more than the HK. (I know that the original price of the 235 was more than the SR3001. As with most electronics, I assume that with receivers in time price goes down and quality goes up.) I will use the receiver for about 2/3 HT, 1/3 music. I read that the HK and Marantz's are more "musical." I posted a question about the SR3001, but so far no answers. I am not sure if I will notice any benefit from the extra $100.
Not being an audiophile, I am not sure I could tell the difference between a "musical" receiver and a non-musical receiver. (does more musical mean more mid tone and less treble and less base?) Just curious: can't a "non-musical" receiver like an Onkyo be adjusted to sound more musical?
All this help from experts is great. Thanks.
rachel1997 is offline  
Sponsored Links
Advertisement
 
Reply Receivers, Amps, and Processors

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