how is 3803 different from 3802 (1 Viewer)

I know it now has the Dolby EX logo on it, and I believe the component video switching bandwidth is greater.

1. does the 3803 actually do something different and better than the 3802 as far as the EX is concerned, or would the latter's 6.1 dolby decoding mode sound the same as the 3803's EX mode?

2. what else does the 3803 do that would make my 3802 feel lacking?

1. It's my understanding that the 2 modes are pretty much the same. If memory serves, at the time the 3802 came out, THX had not yet negotiated with Dolby on the use of the "EX" name for anything other than THX rated units.

2. The 3803 has several enhancements. The 3803 has 2 DACs per channel and they are 24 bit/192 kHz rated. The SHARC processor is the latest 32 bit floating version. The 3803 uses Denon's AL24 digital processing for PCM digital signals. The 3803 can adjust volume to the nearest half decibel. The 3803's volume is displayed on-screen when adjusted. The 3803 can remember the sound mode last used when receiving up to 3 different types of digital signals on the same input. The 3803 can delay DD sound up to 200 milliseconds to help prevent lip sync problems. The 3803 has video up-conversion available (composite to S-Video and even up to component.) The 3803 treats DPL II Music separate from DPL II Cinema mode. (Handy if you want to use each one on different inputs.) The 3803 has 2 more bass management crossover points, 40 and 60 Hz. The remote has been revised. The 3803 supports DTS 96/24. The subwoofer can be turned off separately for each mode, not just Direct.

There are more differences but these are the ones coming to memory at the moment...

As for EX, official 'EX' uses a variant of the prologic II centre channel decoder, the various '6.1' decoders use variants of the original prologic centre channel. Which is also fine, as this is what's used in cinemas for EX/ES decoding.
The only side issue, is that there's no standard for which varitaion they use - which is a concern I read in the Q & A at hometheaterhifi.com So, hypothetically, you could get a bad implementation.
I can vouch for the 3802 having a fine implementation. But, that said, I'd pick the 3803 if all things were even. Assuming that the sound quality is as good, it not being out yet when I got mine.

What about the sound in direct 2 channel mode. Has anyone compared the 3802 with the 3803? I think in the end its all that matters at least to me. So dont forget to do that comparison before you go for either.

The 3803 will up convert everything to Component video. 1 set of component cables from your 3803 is all you need. pretty cool. Also the new remote on the 03's are way better if you ask me. later

Can you all talk about the remote on the 3803?

How do the macros work? Can you have seperate macros for the different modes of the remote?

I have the 3802, and the only thing (besides money) holding me back was if the 3803 remote had enough macro capability. Reading the manual online it seemed to be limited in macros. It appeared that there were only 2 global macros available, and that was it.

Bryan

Bryan, The manual is correct 2 system wide macros. I used the 3803 remote for a while and it was ok kind of grew on me but I picked up the MX-500 and rock on this remote IMO kicks booty. I guess my advice is I would never solely base a component purchase on a remote I would purchase a good remote of your liking and base the component purchase on sound and features.
Jeff

It also has 12v trigger,nice if you ever add a big fat amp.

I don't consider the 3803 remote usable, but I have had a Pronto Neo for several months. I don't even like to pick it up to learn codes from it. Perhaps it isn't that bad, but it is limiting compared to 3rd party remotes. The Neo is great if you want a touch screen for a reasonable price, but it takes some work to get it where you want. The MX-500 is great if you don't like the touch-screen and prefer hard buttons.

thanks guys! I was out of town so couldn't respond sooner, but thanks for all the input!