about 7.1

[AcuDefTechGuy]

The BP10s are directly behind me right now, and facing front to back, so I wonder how they would sound if they were turned to face toward the side walls.

No, I don't think that will work. I thought they were your side surrounds. Since they are already Back Surrounds, I think you should just keep them like that.

 

[GlocksRock]

Yeah, that probably wouldn't work to well... I like how they sound now so I'll keep them that way.

 

[GlocksRock]

Oh, geez, I totally forgot about that Neo 6!

Well, actually my Denon DVD-3910 only has plain DTS & Dolby Digital decoders. The DVD-3800BD has decoders for DTS, DD, DD+, DTS-HR, & DTS-MA. Neither one has DD EX, or DTS ES, or DTS Neo, etc.

I guess it's up for interpretation, but to me a "Decoder" just decodes the original recorded data, not adding any more channels (matrix). So by this definition, DPL-IIx is not a decoder. It is a processor that takes the decoded 5.1 data from DD, DTS, DD+, TrueHD, & DTS-HD and matrix the data into 7.1.

It's kind of like un-zipping a computer file. When you unzip a 50 MB file, you are not adding any more information. You get exactly a 50 MB file.

When studios produce the 5.1 soundtrack, decoding it should still produce exactly the 5.1 soundtrack, not 7.1.

But you're saying that DPL-IIx and DTS Neo are actually decoders?

Yes, for instance, the Star Wars movies are encoded in DD EX, but the flag isn't there for some reason that turns on the DD EX decoder, so you have to manually turn it on, otherwise you will only get 5.1. So you need the DD EX decoder to get the extra back channel that was encoded into the soundtrack. DD EX is a decoder, PLIIx and DTS Neo:6 are also decoders, but when you use them on material that isn't encoded in that format it still uses advanced algorithms to determine what sounds should go to what speakers.

They aren't DSP's in that they don't add anything to the material that is there, like the Yamaha Cinema DSPs do, the only thing they do is redirect certian sounds to where they should be in relation to what is being displayed on the screen for a more realistic surround sound effect. Just like the Dolby Digital decoder tells the sound to go to specific speakers, this is basically the same thing, expect it takes into account the extra channel or channels you have.

From the DolbyDigital website

quote

Dolby Digital EX

Dolby Digital EX takes the Dolby Digital 5.1-channel setup one step further with an additional center surround channel (reproduced through one or two speakers) for extra dimensional detail and an enveloping surround sound effect.

Feature films originally released in Dolby Digital Surround EX (the cinema version) carry the encoded extra surround channel in their subsequent DVD releases, as well as onto 5.1-channel digital satellite and TV broadcasts. If your home theater system has a receiver or preamp/processor with Dolby Digital EX decoding and speakers to support 6.1 or 7.1 playback, you can hear Surround EX soundtracks as they were meant to be heard, with the increased realism created by the extra surround channel. As in the cinema, with regular 5.1-channel Dolby Digital playback no sonic information is lost (although you'll miss out on the heightened realism).

Current Dolby Digital Surround EX soundtracks contain a digital flag that can automatically activate the EX decoding in a receiver or preamp/processor. For titles released prior to late 2001, however, you need to turn on the EX decoding manually.

unquote

PLIIx is basically the same thing as DD EX, except it creates a stereo surround back when you have 7.1 instead of a mono surround back.

 

[AcuDefTechGuy]

As you can see here:
http://www.analog.com/UploadedFiles/Technical_Articles/33636400164919534263333535870eet_planalog4067_final.pdf

The Decoders are DD, DTS, & DTS 6.1. These are the original discrete recorded data.

The "Post Processing" Algorithms (another step) are the DPL-II & IIx, DD EX, DTS ES & Neo.

Does that sound right?

Another example:
http://www.embeddedstar.com/press/content/2003/10/embedded10737.html

"Texas Instruments Incorporated (TI) announced that Dolby Laboratories developed the new Pro Logic IIx enhanced surround sound technology utilizing TI´s AureusTM audio digital signal processor (DSP)."

So DPL IIx is a DSP???

 

[GlocksRock]

As you can see here:
http://www.analog.com/UploadedFiles/Technical_Articles/33636400164919534263333535870eet_planalog4067_final.pdf

The Decoders are DD, DTS, & DTS 6.1. These are the original discrete recorded data.

The "Post Processing" Algorithms (another step) are the DPL-II & IIx, DD EX, DTS ES & Neo.

Does that sound right?

When using the DD EX decoder, there are only 5.1 discrete channels, but the EX decoder doesn't have an extra processing step, it just redirects the data that was originally encoded into the 5.1 track and directs it to where it should go. That's how I see it, although I could be wrong.

So DPL IIx is a DSP???

Not according to this article.

http://www.5dot1.com/articles/pro_logic_vs_pro_logic_2.html

Even if it is another layer of "processing" I highly doubt that the processing would introduce anything negative that you can actually hear, as it doesn't alter the sound, it just redirects it.

 

[GlocksRock]

Another good article..

http://www.hometheaterhifi.com/volume_11_1/feature-prologic-iix-3-2004.html

 

[AcuDefTechGuy]

Even if it is another layer of "processing" I highly doubt that the processing would introduce anything negative that you can actually hear, as it doesn't alter the sound, it just redirects it.

We're probably beating this horse to death, but look at this example:
http://hometheatermag.com/receivers/23/index1.html

First, it's most likely purely academic and probably doesn't degrade anything at all.

But you can see that the pure analog frequency response is 20Hz-20kHz +/-0.1dB. But then you add Dolby Digital, which I assume is A LOT CLEANER than DPL-II, and the frequency response is now +/-0.5dB.

Again, it's probably purely academic, but you can see that even the clean discrete DD adversely changes the frequency response. Now imagine adding DPLIIx to the DD, and I can see it getting even worse. How much worse? We don't know. Maybe not enough to worry about.

Another example:
http://www.soundandvisionmag.com/receivers/2676/test-bench-denon-avr-4308ci-av-receiver.html

With Analog, the THD is 0.004%. But when you add Dolby Digital, the THD goes up to 0.02%. Again, that's still excellent so there is nothing to worry about. But throw in PLIIX on top of the DD and I can see THD getting worse. How much worse? Perhaps not enough to worry about.

 

[GlocksRock]

I think we can safely say that using PLIIx with Dolby Digital 5.1 isn't going to introduce any audible degradation of sound quality or noticeable frequency response, but will allow you to enjoy 7.1 surround sound.

And from the article you linked, how do you know that the frequency response changes aren't just from the particular receiver they used?

I'm sure the folks at Dolby Labratories know what they are doing, and they intended for it to be used with DD 5.1 and they designed it to work without causing a loss in sound quality and/or frequency response.

Maybe we should go straight to Dolby and ask them?

 

[AcuDefTechGuy]

I think we can safely say that using PLIIx with Dolby Digital 5.1 isn't going to introduce any audible degradation of sound quality or noticeable frequency response, but will allow you to enjoy 7.1 surround sound.

I can agree with that.

And from the article you linked, how do you know that the frequency response changes aren't just from the particular receiver they used?

Because I notice this "adverse effect" on every single receiver they reviewed. So it's not just this one receiver, it's all of them.

I'm sure the folks at Dolby Labratories know what they are doing, and they intended for it to be used with DD 5.1 and they designed it to work without causing a loss in sound quality and/or frequency response.

Maybe we should go straight to Dolby and ask them?

Are you kidding?

They will not be very objective about it. They will swear that nothing they make will degrade any sound. I know I would if I were Dolby.

But the bottom line is, if DPLIIx sounds great, that's all the proof you need. You don't need numbers to tell you if it sounds good.

So 7.1 is good -- very good.

There! Are you happy now?

 

[GlocksRock]

So let's just for arguments sake say if adding PLIIx makes THD go from .02% to .01% (still inaudible) and the frequency responce go down by another inaudible amount... is there still any good reason to not use it to enjoy 7.1 over 5.1 other than just wanting to be a purist? I say by all means use the PLIIx decoder and get 7.1 if it's an option. I want to get the most out of my gear, and won't limit myself to only having 7.1 when it's in a discrete format, that is all I'm saying. I'm not trying to bash anyone for not wanting to use it if they choose not to, as was said previously, there is no right or wrong when it comes to this, it's all personal preference.

 

[tomd51]

Holy off-topic, Batman...

You guys may want to open a separate thread, I'll bet lots of folks would like to put in their two cent on this. I know it's something I've wondered about myself in the past, but never put much time into considering it... -TD

 

[enoch]

yes it has got off topic alittle but i have learned so much. All my questions have been answered. This has been very helpful. I personally cant hear all the little subtle details that alot of you guys can. I guess ignorance is bliss in that sense!

 

[tomd51]

You could if you had some of their gear, but that's yet another topic!

 

[GlocksRock]

yes it has got off topic alittle but i have learned so much. All my questions have been answered. This has been very helpful. I personally cant hear all the little subtle details that alot of you guys can. I guess ignorance is bliss in that sense!

That's what we are here for. I too have learned so much from this forum, and it has also resulted in me spending a whole lot of money on what seems like constant equipment upgrades, but I don't regret any of it.

 

[AcuDefTechGuy]

You could if you had some of their gear, but that's yet another topic!

Well......maybe not.

I've listened to 2Ch CD music from a $100 Sony DVD player, $600 Panasonic BD player, $800 Toshiba HDDVD player, and $1,500 Denon SACD/DVD-A player.

I can honest say that if there are differences, they are very insignificant. The fact is, modern DACs and CD/DVD players are so good that the sound quality is practically indistinguishable.

 

[AcuDefTechGuy]

... is there still any good reason to not use it to enjoy 7.1 over 5.1 other than just wanting to be a purist? I say by all means use the PLIIx decoder and get 7.1 if it's an option. I want to get the most out of my gear, and won't limit myself to only having 7.1 when it's in a discrete format, that is all I'm saying. I'm not trying to bash anyone for not wanting to use it if they choose not to, as was said previously, there is no right or wrong when it comes to this, it's all personal preference.

I cannot say it any better than that.

I have to agree completely.

All those numbers are absolutely insignificant in the real world.

I think DPL-IIx just takes the DISCRETE 5.1's Surround Channels and distribute them into the Matrixed Back Surround Channels WITHOUT Degrading the Original 5.1 Discrete Sound. The important thing is that the Front Three Channels are NOT Affected at all.

So if you have the space, speakers, and budget, just try out 7.1 (Discrete or Matrixed) and enjoy the sound!

With my Kick A$$ Definitive BP7001SCs firing Front and Back, I'm practically gettting a Matrixed 7.1 even when I am watching 5.1.

 

[AcuDefTechGuy]

...and it has also resulted in me spending a whole lot of money on what seems like constant equipment upgrades, but I don't regret any of it.

You and me both, buddy!

You and me both.

The only difference is that you seem to be more practical than I am.

I'm more in the "Purist" and "foolish" camp.

I just ordered the $2K Denon blu-ray player that has the internal DTS-MA decoders. I will surely let everyone know what I think when I finally compare DTS-MA from the $2K Denon DVD-3800BD vs DTS-Core from my $600 Panasonic BD10A player (now serving back-up duty).

 

[tomd51]

Well......maybe not.

I've listened to 2Ch CD music from a $100 Sony DVD player, $600 Panasonic BD player, $800 Toshiba HDDVD player, and $1,500 Denon SACD/DVD-A player.

I can honest say that if there are differences, they are very insignificant. The fact is, modern DACs and CD/DVD players are so good that the sound quality is practically indistinguishable.

I was referring more so yours and Glock's speakers than source players. I'm gonna go out on a limb but I'd say the OP (and yourself) would likely distinguish a difference between his Infinitys and your DefTechs... -TD

 

[Pyrrho]

I say this in regards to using PLIIx for a Dolby Digital or dts 5.1 signal, neither choice is right or wrong, as it's a personal preference wether or not to overlay a PLIIx or ES/EX decoder on top of the original track. What the PLIIx does is direct the sounds to where they should be in relation to what is being displayed. For instance if an airplane is flying over from front to back, the sound should be coming from front to rear, not front to sides, what the PLIIx decoder does is redirect (or misdirect as you say) the sound from the side to the rears where they should be, even if it was intended by the director/producer to be coming from the sides.

What you are doing (and it is fine to do it if you like it) is generating new channels that do not exist in the soundtrack itself. It is exactly like applying a DSP to a 2 channel recording and generating more channels. It is directing sound to a place where it wasn't in the recording studio where they mixed it. That is misdirecting the sound. But if you like it, by all means, do it.

 

[Pyrrho]

Oh, geez, I totally forgot about that Neo 6!

Well, actually my Denon DVD-3910 only has plain DTS & Dolby Digital decoders. The DVD-3800BD has decoders for DTS, DD, DD+, DTS-HR, & DTS-MA. Neither one has DD EX, or DTS ES, or DTS Neo, etc.

I guess it's up for interpretation, but to me a "Decoder" just decodes the original recorded data, not adding any more channels (matrix). So by this definition, DPL-IIx is not a decoder. It is a processor that takes the decoded 5.1 data from DD, DTS, DD+, TrueHD, & DTS-HD and matrix the data into 7.1.

It's kind of like un-zipping a computer file. When you unzip a 50 MB file, you are not adding any more information. You get exactly a 50 MB file.

When studios produce the 5.1 soundtrack, decoding it should still produce exactly the 5.1 soundtrack, not 7.1.

But you're saying that DPL-IIx and DTS Neo are actually decoders?

I agree with you completely. One can only decode something that was originally encoded. Anything else is altering the original to something else. Whether that alteration is "good" or "bad" is a matter of opinion, but it is an alteration regardless of whether it is good or bad.