are there differences in AVR surround sound/dsp capability through better ,,logic/processing''?

[Goldhasmter916]

lets say you are you plaing a dolby atmos movie with two different avrs which have similar specs who support the same formats and same room correction software, do yous think there can be a difference in surround sound quality through better internal avr logic/dsp?

andrew robinson claims so in his sony AZ7000ES review:

form 4:30 onwards.
He specifically says that even when sonys 360 spatial mapping is disabled the 7000ES is better in creating believable surround sound compared to the marantz.

One possible explanation would be that the sony room correction process is thorough and you still benefit form it even if the 360 ,,upmixer'' is disabled.

but maybe not. I am really curious about his...what do yous think?

 

[TLS Guy]

lets say you are you plaing a dolby atmos movie with two different avrs which have similar specs who support the same formats and same room correction software, do yous think there can be a difference in surround sound quality through better internal avr logic/dsp?

andrew robinson claims so in his sony AZ7000ES review:

form 4:30 onwards.
He specifically says that even when sonys 360 spatial mapping is disabled the 7000ES is better in creating believable surround sound compared to the marantz.

One possible explanation would be that the sony room correction process is thorough and you still benefit form it even if the 360 ,,upmixer'' is disabled.

but maybe not. I am really curious about his...what do yous think?

When it comes to room correction all bets are off. It is a lousy idea and I don't use it. As far as decoders, I highly doubt you can hear a difference, but I suppose it is possible.

 

[lovinthehd]

I would say Sony and Marantz/Denon have very different room eq software; Audyssey (and the Dirac option) in current Marantz and Denon units is quite a bit different from Sony's DCAC (assume they still use that). DCAC by most all accounts is not nearly as capable as the Audyssey/Dirac options.

Sound modes are just different between the two manufacturers, and that's going to be personal taste/opinion for the most part. I have several Denons as well as that older Sony and don't use much of the specialized sound modes on either, but beyond the basic Dolby/DTS upmixers they are just different. Whether one is going to yield a preference for you, don't know.

Andrew R I just tend to ignore (gave him a chance at one point), and don't really care what his personal tastes/preferences are, which is about all he has to offer IMHO.

 

[isolar8001]

lets say you are you plaing a dolby atmos movie with two different avrs which have similar specs who support the same formats and same room correction software, do yous think there can be a difference in surround sound quality through better internal avr logic/dsp?

andrew robinson claims so in his sony AZ7000ES review:

form 4:30 onwards.
He specifically says that even when sonys 360 spatial mapping is disabled the 7000ES is better in creating believable surround sound compared to the marantz.

One possible explanation would be that the sony room correction process is thorough and you still benefit form it even if the 360 ,,upmixer'' is disabled.

but maybe not. I am really curious about his...what do yous think?

As far as the quality of the audio...not much difference.
As far as the "effects", those can vary.

Yamahas for instance, have a plethora of DSP modes...everything from Concert Hall to Chicken Coop.
Denon, Marantz and most others keep it much simpler.

From what I've read, the new Sonys are taking Yamahas approach by adding their own flavor to standard sound modes. Some say it's a nice addition.

 

[lovinthehd]

From what I've read, the new Sonys are taking Yamahas approach by adding their own flavor to standard sound modes. Some say it's a nice addition.

Was just looking at the manual for the ES7000 to see what the options were, seems less than my old Sony has. Seems to be primarily the Dolby/DTS options and a sound enhancer mode....

My old Sony (pre hdmi) has in the way of dsp sound mode thingies (outside of the usual Dolby/DTS upmixer/sound modes):
Cinema Studio A, B and C flavors of DCS
Hall
Jazz
Concert

 

[isolar8001]

Was just looking at the manual for the ES7000 to see what the options were, seems less than my old Sony has. Seems to be primarily the Dolby/DTS options and a sound enhancer mode....

My old Sony (pre hdmi) has in the way of dsp sound mode thingies (outside of the usual Dolby/DTS upmixer/sound modes):
Cinema Studio A, B and C flavors of DCS
Hall
Jazz
Concert

From what I remember, Sony has done their own take on the standard modes, DD5.1, DTS and such.
Supposedly their way gives a better depth of field to many of those modes.
Maybe they are using their own custom chip for processing ?
Wouldn't mind trying it out if I was in the market.
More Here...

Sony New ES 8K AV Receiver Lineup Offers Audio Features Others Don't!

Sony released five AV Receivers all with their new 360 Spatial Sound Mapping Technology. From the $900 STR-AN1000 to their $3,300 13.2CH 48lbs STR-AZ7000ES flagship, can Sony compete with Denon and Yamaha?

www.audioholics.com

 

[Goldhasmter916]

i rather mean if there are differences when both receivers use the exact same format/mode due to a better processor/algorithm or whatever

 

[AcuDefTechGuy]

i rather mean if there are differences when both receivers use the exact same format/mode due to a better processor/algorithm or whatever

Like when both are in Direct Mode without any kind of EQ/DSP? Likely not.

But if you want to EQ, whether manually or automatically, then there is a big difference.

 

[Goldhasmter916]

lets say you are playing a dolby atmos movie with auro matic upmixing and you have two different receivers that are calibrated exactly the same to the room with the same room correction software. would it be possible that you get a different result in sound stage/imaging/sound placement when they have the same power/dac specs?

 

[isolar8001]

lets say you are playing a dolby atmos movie with auro matic upmixing and you have two different receivers that are calibrated exactly the same to the room with the same room correction software. would it be possible that you get a different result in sound stage/imaging/sound placement when they have the same power/dac specs?

You are placing a lot of faith in what Andrew Robinson is saying....if the Sonys 360 function is turned off, the Atmos is done per spec.
You would have to have various systems all set up at the same time with switching capability, to even begin to "hear a difference in spatial characteristics"
There's just no way he can make an assessment of this type without this setup.
Even then, there would be differences due to different settings on different equipment.

Are you looking to buy one of those Sonys ??
By the way...Auro3D went under.

Auro 3D Downmixes into Bankruptcy, Still Keeping Height Channels Up

Auro 3D has recently declared bankruptcy. But is the the end for this immersive surround format? Can it survive on upmixing only? Don't count the audio company from Antwerp, Belgium out just yet.

www.audioholics.com

 

[Goldhasmter916]

he said even with 360 mapping turned of the dolby atmos movie sounded better surround wise on the sony. however this could be because the sony has a different room calibration software than the marantz he switched to.

my question is if there could be differnces when both receivers use the same room calibration software?

i know auro went bancrupt but they reorganzied the company and are still running. their upmixer really enhances bad dolby atmos mixes (what are most imo)

 

[lovinthehd]

From what I remember, Sony has done their own take on the standard modes, DD5.1, DTS and such.
Supposedly their way gives a better depth of field to many of those modes.
Maybe they are using their own custom chip for processing ?
Wouldn't mind trying it out if I was in the market.
More Here...

Sony New ES 8K AV Receiver Lineup Offers Audio Features Others Don't!

Sony released five AV Receivers all with their new 360 Spatial Sound Mapping Technology. From the $900 STR-AN1000 to their $3,300 13.2CH 48lbs STR-AZ7000ES flagship, can Sony compete with Denon and Yamaha?

www.audioholics.com

DCS was that take afaik, a Sony movie soundtrack technology originally IIRC. Still, sounds like they just tweaked DCAC (or gave it a different description), which as I suspected, is still being used.

 

[Hobbit]

lets say you are you plaing a dolby atmos movie with two different avrs which have similar specs who support the same formats and same room correction software, do yous think there can be a difference in surround sound quality through better internal avr logic/dsp?

andrew robinson claims so in his sony AZ7000ES review:

form 4:30 onwards.
He specifically says that even when sonys 360 spatial mapping is disabled the 7000ES is better in creating believable surround sound compared to the marantz.

One possible explanation would be that the sony room correction process is thorough and you still benefit form it even if the 360 ,,upmixer'' is disabled.

but maybe not. I am really curious about his...what do yous think?

*Note, I didn't look at the review, nor do I care to.

Dolby Atmos is a licensed/contracted technology with Dolby. It is a native audio codec. As such, it is the same regardless of the DSP/AVR. My bet is both AVRs have the same capabilities when converting this codec to pcm.

Now, if you're not decoding Atmos you can use the DSP to create an upmixed simulation. These are like Dolby Surround and DTS: Neural X. Being the OEM still needs a license for these algorithms, I'd suggest they're very similar between manufacturers.

One could also argue that different amps and DACs sound different. Do a search on this site for a lot more on that. I'll contend again for this argument that similar AVRs are going to more alike than different.

So, the biggest protagonist is room correction. It's not just a simple plug and play. Unless you get very lucky. But it would be hard to get the exact same result with two of the exact same AVRs. It could be luck of the draw, or all in his head, or wallet.

 

[William Lemmerhirt]

*Note, I didn't look at the review, nor do I care to.

Dolby Atmos is a licensed/contracted technology with Dolby. It is a native audio codec. As such, it is the same regardless of the DSP/AVR. My bet is both AVRs have the same capabilities when converting this codec to pcm.

Now, if you're not decoding Atmos you can use the DSP to create an upmixed simulation. These are like Dolby Surround and DTS: Neural X. Being the OEM still needs a license for these algorithms, I'd suggest they're very similar between manufacturers.

One could also argue that different amps and DACs sound different. Do a search on this site for more a lot more on that. I'll contend again for this argument that similar AVRs are going to more alike than different.

So, the biggest protagonist is room correction. It's not just a simple plug and play. Unless you get very lucky. But it would be hard to get the exact same result with two of the exact same AVRs. It could be luck of the draw, or all in his head, or wallet.

This is much of what I was thinking. AFAIK, almost all the decoders are the same, or at least have to meet the Dolby spec. So imaging and such would be the same from AVR to AVR. As said, the room correction would likely be responsible for any differences. The weird sound modes that Yamaha and apparently Sony use, would obviously change that too.


As far as using auromatic on Atmos tracks, I’m not personally a fan of that. IMO, it’s like listening to two channel recordings in all channel stereo. I do agree that many Atmos tracks are not stunners, but there are a lot of really good ones, and imo people’s setups are the problem more than the track. Some people just want to be hit over the head with overhead sound. But Atmos is much more than that. Ymmv

 

[AcuDefTechGuy]

lets say you are playing a dolby atmos movie with auro matic upmixing and you have two different receivers that are calibrated exactly the same to the room with the same room correction software. would it be possible that you get a different result in sound stage/imaging/sound placement when they have the same power/dac specs?

The ONLY time you can be sure is when you compare them in Direct Mode and if it is volume level matched.

Even if you use the same Room Correction, it depends on exactly where you place the microphone and exactly how to run the RC.

If you are asking if a Sony AVR actually sounds better than Marantz or Denon or Yamaha, then the answer is NO.