Onkyo Home Theater Systems with ProLogic IIz

[admin]

Onkyo has really been establishing themselves as a market leader when it comes to features and price. The Onkyo HT-S7200 retails for just under $900 and the HT-S6200 for just under $800. The best part, in our opinion, is that they have a full fledged receiver at the heart of them. The HT-S7200 in particular is nice because of the dual subwoofer outputs and integral upconversion and scaling. While 7.1 systems and HDMI inputs aren't exactly new, many of Onkyo's competition don't have Dolby ProLogic IIz in their high end receivers. Onkyo is offering it in their newest entry level home theater-in-a-box systems!

Discuss "Onkyo Home Theater Systems with ProLogic IIz" here. Read the article.

 

[Lordoftherings]

Way to go Onkyo.

I agree, Onkyo is a leader in HTIB.

They do actually use full fledged receivers in most of their system,
with plenty of power, and very decent speakers too.

* Just as an example, look at their HT-S9100THX Integrated System ($1,099 'sans the sub'):
@ http://www.hometheatermag.com/hometheaterinabox/onkyo_ht-s9100thx_integrated_system/

Bravo to Onkyo!

 

[davidtwotrees]

Yep. I agree with LotR. So many friends and family that don't have the disease just want a simple solution to a difficult problem. So to hear a mfgr putting out a solid, affordable product marketed for the masses is very welcome. I always thought it was silly for people to buy a $1500 TV and pair it with a lousy $300 htib. Two thumbs up for Onkyo. I am a current fanboy as I just bought an Onkyo 706 and love it.

 

[gqmagic]

What exactly is 'Dolby ProLogic IIz' useful for?

 

[allargon]

What exactly is 'Dolby ProLogic IIz' useful for?

+1

Tom A. pretty much wondered the same thing about speaker height usefulness in an AVRant podcast, and he wrote the article for the above receivers.

 

[mtrycrafts]

What exactly is 'Dolby ProLogic IIz' useful for?

Isn't that the Zzzzzz mode to fall asleep?

 

[fredk]

What exactly is 'Dolby ProLogic IIz' useful for?

Selling more speakers...

 

[GlocksRock]

The ProLogic IIz adds height channels to the front, kinda like Yamaha's presence speakers.

 

[VinnyC]

It's just like how pro-logic currently works. It basically takes a stereo signal and emulates surround. So this just adds two more channels to that surround. The downside obviously is: why do you need 9.1 speakers for something that is stereo sound to begin with? And what exactly powers these two extra outputs? These receivers are listed as like 100x7, but you have 9 speakers? And why aren't they called 9.1? I wouldn't buy into this yet. Seems very gimmicky and non-standarized. Wait for real 9.1 to come out.

 

[GlocksRock]

It's just like how pro-logic currently works. It basically takes a stereo signal and emulates surround. So this just adds two more channels to that surround. The downside obviously is: why do you need 9.1 speakers for something that is stereo sound to begin with? And what exactly powers these two extra outputs? These receivers are listed as like 100x7, but you have 9 speakers? And why aren't they called 9.1? I wouldn't buy into this yet. Seems very gimmicky and non-standarized. Wait for real 9.1 to come out.

It's not for stereo only, it works with any source, 5.1, 7.1, whatever... but the main difference betweewn PLIIx and PLIIz is the height channels for the front.

 

[VinnyC]

It's not for stereo only, it works with any source, 5.1, 7.1, whatever... but the main difference betweewn PLIIx and PLIIz is the height channels for the front.

You are right. However I'm not sure who would want to purposely take a signal that's already setup for 5.1 or 7.1 and then have prologic re-interpret the signal so it can fake more channels. Would it even preserve the original 5.1 or 7.1 sound? It seems like a step backwards in my opinion. Hence why the Wii supports only ProLogic, and actual movies use true multichannel encoding for audio (dolby digital, dts, etc...)

 

[MDS]

PLIIZ apparently takes non-directional audio, the kind that would be played through the front speakers and not routed to the surrounds or mixed into the center, and directs it to the 'height' speakers.

I've read that the signal is -20 dB below the mains so the effect is going to be subtle and probably vary quite a bit depending on the source being played.

 

[GlocksRock]

PLIIx does not alter the original signal, it just steers the sound, it doesn't create extra channels, but MDS is correct about the non-directional audio. Like if it were raining, you would hear the rain coming from the height channels to give a more realistic sounding experience.

 

[MDS]

Like if it were raining, you would hear the rain coming from the height channels to give a more realistic sounding experience.

I'm wondering what the effect might be if your 'height' speakers were directly over your head in the ceiling instead of high above the front speakers on the front wall as they recommend.

I won't get to it any time soon, but my house is already wired for in-ceiling speakers and it might be an interesting experiment to buy in-ceiling speakers and see how they sound as the height channel.

 

[GlocksRock]

That would be a good thing to try... let us know how it sounds if you ever decide to try it.

 

[Hicks]

That would be a good thing to try... let us know how it sounds if you ever decide to try it.

Yes I too would be interested to hear anyone's comments on the PLIIz feature if they get a chance to hear it in action.

 

[3db]

Geeze, Yamaha has been doing that for at least 3 years if not more and not much was said about that. I wonder what all teh fuss is about.

 

[MatthewB.]

I have been reading alot on this issue and from those that have tested these height channels, the majority of reviewers were quite surprised at how "large" it made the sound from the front appear. But as mentioned this depends on the source material. It should also be noted that most who did review this, immediately wanted to add this nifty feature to their home systems but also noted that although it gave a much larger sound effect (during rain scenes for example) that it was not needed in a properly set up theater, but was just a "cool effect". As mentioned this does require two more speakers.

About eight years ago I read an article written by Tomlinson Holman (of THX fame) who was at that time trying to sell the concept of 11.2 surround sound (four height channels - two in front and two in back added) but all the places he gave a demonstration to where quite impressed but not interested because they felt at the time the general public had a hard time going from stereo to 5.1 sound and they surely wouldn't be ready for 11.2 sound.

3db, yes Yamaha has had this feature for years, but Dolby managed to "perfect" the sound from the height channels better than Yamaha could, which yamaha has admitted is more of a "simulated" height channel whereas the PLIIz does a much better job of retreiving the sound and outputting it out those extra cchannels.

 

[3db]

I have been reading alot on this issue and from those that have tested these height channels, the majority of reviewers were quite surprised at how "large" it made the sound from the front appear. But as mentioned this depends on the source material. It should also be noted that most who did review this, immediately wanted to add this nifty feature to their home systems but also noted that although it gave a much larger sound effect (during rain scenes for example) that it was not needed in a properly set up theater, but was just a "cool effect". As mentioned this does require two more speakers.

About eight years ago I read an article written by Tomlinson Holman (of THX fame) who was at that time trying to sell the concept of 11.2 surround sound (four height channels - two in front and two in back added) but all the places he gave a demonstration to where quite impressed but not interested because they felt at the time the general public had a hard time going from stereo to 5.1 sound and they surely wouldn't be ready for 11.2 sound.

3db, yes Yamaha has had this feature for years, but Dolby managed to "perfect" the sound from the height channels better than Yamaha could, which yamaha has admitted is more of a "simulated" height channel whereas the PLIIz does a much better job of retreiving the sound and outputting it out those extra cchannels.

I can understand consumer reluctance combined with spousal acceptance factor that 11.2 wouldn't fly very far. Thats alot of scracth for speakers.

Yamaha has the best DSP sound fields in industry out of all the commericlaly available receivers out there. They do their homework and do it well. It would be an interesting comparison between Yamaha's simulated version and Dolby's version. I wonder too if Dolby took the idea from Yamaha and had evolved it to what it is now.