DTS Neo 6 vs. Dolby Pro Logic II (CONSOLIDATED THREAD) (1 Viewer)

[Michael Reuben]

Dolby Pro Logic II is designed to take a signal encoded in Pro Logic II and extract the extra channels from a 2-channel source, thus creating surround sound. Logic 7 is designed to take ANY 2-channel signal and produce 5 channels.

This is almost 100% inaccurate. Let's start over.

1. DPL2 is designed for any two-channel source. It does NOT require that the source be specially encoded. It produces 5 channels (plus a low frequency channel using the traditional crossover method).
2. Logic7 is a proprietary decoding mode developed by Lexicon and available for many years now on their excellent digital processors. Since Lexicon became a subsidiary of Harman, versions of Logic7 can also be found in some H-K receivers.
3. In its full implementation, Logic7 is designed to extract 7 channels (plus low frequency) from any 2-channel source and also from any 5.1 source (whether DD or DTS).
4. If you have a 7-speaker setup, Logic7 will almost always sound better than DPL2, because that's what Logic7 was designed for. In a 5-speaker setup (which Logic7 can also handle), it's a matter of personal preference.[/list=1]
   
   M.

 

[GregBe]

I don't know if this matters to you at all, but with DPLII you can utilze the midnight mode for late night listening. With Neo 6 you cannot. There are certain situations where I like this feature.

 

[RobD]

I always find DPL2 to have a more focussed sound than NEO6 and hence DPL2 to my ears sounds better with decent prologic encoded material. NEO6 however seems to do a better job with flatter older recordings and NEO6 music mode is better than the PL2 equivilant to my ear with music. Prologic 1 is still occasionally useful for old analogue laserdiscs. This is all IMHO of course.

Is logic 7 a bit like Pioneer's 7D-Theatre? I find 7D to be a little heavy handed but 7 channel stereo is great for Party/Dance music.

 

[Philip Brandes]

Just by way of technical clarifcation re: Logic 7

- L7 uses matrix-encoded information in a 2-channel Dolby Surround or Dolby Digital 2.0 source to refine its steering porocessing, just as PL II does.

- On 2-channel sources, L7 and PL II sound very different. There is much more surround content in L7, and it's very stable.

- Logic 7 is absolutely nothing like Pioneer's 7D Theatre. L7 employs Lexicon's proprietary content correlation processing to create much more natural steering and panning effects than generic matrix decoders.


While PL II is a terrific improvement over original Pro Logic (and is a must-have option in a pre-pro IMO), I don't know anyone with access to both PL II and Logic 7 in the same processor that doesn't prefer Logic 7.

I am also quite surprised by the amount of people who seem to like Neo:6. Its processing is by far the most primitive of all the matrix decoding algorithms (PL II, Circle Surround II, Logic 7, and Trifield are all much better IMO); yes, Neo:6 does pump a lot of content into the surrounds, but I can hear steering and phase artifacts galore and to me the mode is unlistenable, but to each his own.

Cheers,
Philip Brandes

 

[ChrisLazarko]

Well i've listened very carefully to Logic7 and PLII and I have to say IMO the Logic7 is alot better than PLII. On my HK AVR-225 it seperates all the channels much better. It makes everything sound like it is coming from the cetner channel unlike PLII that just seems to kind of pan it out across all three channels and around the rears.

Logic7 almost makes it sound like you are listening to a true digital source such as DD5.1 or DTS. The surrounds are utilized when they should be instead of with PLII how they usually send out everything including the voices.

I love Logic7 and I think HK did a great job with it, no more PLII for me.

Also, one last question is what do people mean by Dolby encoded material? Doesn't PLII and Logic7 just take plain stereo signals and use a processor to seperate everything into the certain channels? I am somewhat confused by what everyone is saying by Pro Logic encoded material and such.

 

[GregK]

There's two common types of two channel material:

Plain Stereo, meaning it was recorded with no intentional center or surround decoding.

Encoded (aka: matrixed) 2-channel, where additional channels were matrixed into the mix via amplitude or phase shifting. The most common matrix format is the Dolby Surround format.

Where things get tricky is when additional encoding matrixes come into play. Thankfully unlike the quad era, most of the alternate encoding options are designed to be Dolby Surround compatible. Alternate encoding schemes include:
.Ultra Stereo
.Circle Surround
.Logic 7
.Dolby ProLogic II (DPL-II)

DPL-II's left and right rear decoding points are for material positioned midway from the left or right and the surround channel, along with material positioned center back (the original Dolby surround encoding point). The reason DPL-II is able to pull convincing split surrounds out of DPL-material is that the midway points are still 'in the circle' so to speak, and merely fills in the holes where phantom imaging would have come into play.

Where DPL-II encoding comes into play is when mixers take advantage of the mid-surround encoding points. For example, let's say a mixer wants a sound to come from the left rear speaker, he would simply position the source midway between the surround channel and the left front channel. In standard DPL, the decoder would position the sound in both the left and surround channels, but in DPL-II, the sound would be in the left rear channel. Material positioned in the hard center back position would be reproduced the same in either DPL or DPL-II decoders.

 

[ChrisLazarko]

Ok your confusing me. Basically lets say you have a 2 channel-source, such as cableTV right. I guess it doesn't have any encoded material. Now the thing is that Logic7 to me seperates the channels better while PLII does not so good a job at it.

So everyone talkes about encoded material but I doubt everything is encoded in PLII, Logic7 almost sounds like Dolby Digital 5.1 that is how good it sounds to me.

 

[GregK]

So far the majority of 'true' Dolby Pro-logic II encoded material are video games, notably the non 5.1 real time games made for systems like the Playstation II or GameCube. But again because of the decoding vector points, DPL-II also does an excellent job deriving split surrounds from Dolby Surround material as well.
A quick side note: The Lord of the Rings DVD 2-channel mix is L7 encoded. So if you have a Logic7 decoder you can decode true matrix 5.1 audio. The catch here is if you have a DVD player and Logic7 decoding, you will probably opt for the true discrete 5.1 Dolby Digital or DTS.

 

[Philip Brandes]

Greg:

"Where things get tricky is when additional encoding matrixes come into play. .."

Careful - in the context of home system playback, it's less confusing to think of these as DEcoding matrix algorithms. Technically, they can also be used for encoding but rarely are--while there are a few movies using Logic 7 encoding for their 2-channel soundtrack, the vast majority of matrixed sources use good old Dolby Surround. What we don't want to do is give the impression that L7, PL II, etc. only work with material encoded in their own formats--quite the contrary, the strength of these formats is how well they do with 2-channel and basic Dolby Surround-encoded material.

Chris,

"Ok your confusing me. Basically lets say you have a 2 channel-source, such as cableTV right. I guess it doesn't have any encoded material. "

No, that's not correct. Much of the content on cable--including all new network programming--is Dolby Surround encoded (the format that the original Dolby Pro Logic was developed to decode). Processing such as Logic 7 and PL II will do an even better job with it.

Cheers,
Philip Brandes

 

[GregK]

Careful - in the context of home system playback, it's less confusing to think of these as DEcoding matrix algorithms. Technically, they can also be used for encoding but rarely are--

I agree. I mentioned the ENcoding formats, as there was some mention of DPL-II encoded material (Rouge squadron II). I agree that the newer matrix designs (DPL-II, Logic7 etc) were designed primarily for "enhanced" Dolby Surround and stereo decoding. The modified encoding options are an added extra that is rarely used for DVD, but IS used for many video games.

 

[Albert M]

Here is a review of DPL2, Neo:6, Logic 7 and Circle Surround.

 

[Kevin Alexander]

That artical was one person's opinion. They wrote it like they were paid by Dolby.

 

[SvenS]

I prefer DTS Neo-6 for films and DPL-II for Music because Neo-6 (Music)does not let you use your sub for music which is a must for me!

 

[ChrisWiggles]

What's sorta wacky about Logic 7, is that it can be used on discrete 5.1 mixes. I'm not sure if this can be done on the HK recievers, or if that is only limited to L7 on 2-channel, but from what I understand, a Lexicon processor can take a 5.1 track, and on the fly downmix-encode it as a two-channel Logic 7-encoded mix, and THEN decode that with L7 for 7 channels, or 5 or whatever setup you have. That's my understanding, unfortunately I can't find much info about what all sorta features and such lexicon processors and Logic 7 provide online. The SMR site has a lexicon forum i believe.

 

[Lewis Besze]

That artical was one person's opinion. They wrote it like they were paid by Dolby.

I agree with Philip, DPL II is class above Neo-6 for both music and cinema,at least IOO.

 

[ChrisLazarko]

Is Logic7 above PL II then?

 

[Craig_Kg]

What's sorta wacky about Logic 7, is that it can be used on discrete 5.1 mixes. I'm not sure if this can be done on the HK recievers, or if that is only limited to L7 on 2-channel, but from what I understand, a Lexicon processor can take a 5.1 track, and on the fly downmix-encode it as a two-channel Logic 7-encoded mix, and THEN decode that with L7 for 7 channels, or 5 or whatever setup you have.

That IS wacky. What's the point of processing discrete sound like that???

 

[Daryl L]

Yes Logic 7 is better than DPL2.

a Lexicon processor can take a 5.1 track, and on the fly downmix-encode it as a two-channel Logic 7-encoded mix, and THEN decode that with L7 for 7 channels, or 5 or whatever setup you have.

The Lexicon can do it thhis way but thats not the best way to let a Lexicon do it. A Lexicon can also let the 3 front channel tracks and the .1 LFE track pass without downmixing of a 5.1 audio source and take only the 2 surround tracks and spread them out kinda discretely accross 4 surround speakers.

The H/K AVR8000 only gives the options to either apply L7 to a 2 channel source or apply L7 to a 5.1 source by downnmixing the source and decode it to 5 or 7 channels.

All other H/K's can only apply L7 to 2 channel sources.

 

[Steve_AS]

AWESOME SOUND!!!!!
Dolby Pro Logic II is designed to take a signal encoded in Pro Logic II and extract the extra channels from a 2-channel source, thus creating surround sound. Logic 7 is designed to take ANY 2-channel signal and produce 5 channels.

No, PL II is *also* designed to take *any* stereo signal and synthesize 5.1 sound from it.

Perhaps you are thinking of PL I.

Whether you choose PL II or Logic 7 or DTS Neo is really jsut a matter of taste; they will *all* synthesize 5.1 channels from stereo material.
(MY HK receivers has 'em all; I tend to stick with DPL II.)

 

[chris_clem]

Treads about DD vs DTS have been discussed over and over and while everyone seems to have a strong opinion on the matter (including me, but THIS is not about that! ) nothing really gets resolved. I am curious though, does anyone have a strong opinion over which of their two "multi-channel processors(?)" are "better"?
I realize that "better" is subjective but it can be qualified by proper explanations so please explain why you prefer one over the other. Perhaps, you can also comment on what sources you use either for (TV,CD's old VHS tapes etc.).
My take on this is that I have only listened casually to both of these and so far, I have not noticed a significant difference between the two. I use them interchangeably for TV and sometimes for CD's.