Best Demos for Dolby Pro-Logic IIx ... here is one (1 Viewer)

[Kevin C Brown]

Roger- Yup, those are the passages.

I'm guessing, that if it does that for application to 2 ch sources, that it would also for 5.1 channel. In fact, Logic 7 as applied to 5.1 channels would need *less* processing power than for 2.0. (By my simple math, 2.0 to 7.1 vs 5.1 to 7.1.) So there'd certainly be bandwidth for that kind of steering.

Daryl- Holy crap! There's a lot of info there...

 

[Roger Dressler]

>>I'm guessing, that if it does that for application to 2 ch sources, that it would also for 5.1 channel.

 

[Kevin C Brown]

Ahhh, I disagree.

For 2.0 to 5.1, bingo, we all know what DPL (II) does. (Out of phase goes to surrounds, in phase goes to center, what's "left over" goes to R & L). I also agree that for 2.0 to 5.1 to 7.1, there's no need to look at the fronts. Just some *tweaking* of the surrounds to get the rears. (Personally, not much interested in 2.0 to 5.1 to 7.1. I just use stereo anyway.)

But, from 5.1 to 7.1, I believe that there's a fairly significant benefit if you look at the fronts to the surrounds to decide what to put in the rears. A pan from front R to surround R is a perfect example. If that pan is continued to the right rear, to me, that is ideal. After all, the ideal setup for 5.1 is surrounds 110 deg from the front, right? But for 7.1, the surrounds are recommended to be 90 deg from the front, and the rears are recommended to be about 150 deg from the front. Hence, if that pan is steering through the R surround to the R rear, the effect is much more enveloping.

 

[Mike Up]

With both DTS: Neo 6 and DPL 2x both set up to a "6.1" not 7.1, speaker configuration, how do they compare?

Having DPL 2 and Neo 6 both in 5.1 sounds similar, with a few minor differences in steering, but the fidelity is similar. Neo 6 takes the mono information from the L and R surrounds and puts it into the center. How's DPL 2x on this?

I originally liked DPL 2 much better than DTS Neo, but I then started comparing with a 5.1 channel setup on both, and was surprised just how similar the 2 were. Being Neo 6 distributes the mono signal from the L & R surrounds to the center back channel, that sound is more diffused since it's firing overhead and away from the ears. While L & R cues are distinct, the more common mono information is less focused, not drawing as much attention to it.

I'm actually now starting to prefer DTS Neo 6 over DPL 2. I was just curious what benefits are offered to DPL 2x other than "2" back surround channels opposed to Neo 6.

Have a good one.

 

[MaxMenon]

In response to: "I was just curious what benefits are offered to DPL 2x other than "2" back surround channels opposed to Neo 6."

http://www.hometheaterhifi.com/volum...ix-3-2004.html

Max

 

[Mike Up]

I read the reviewer's 'opinion' on the differences long ago. In a 5.1 setup, I found little differences as the steering was accurate in both formats on a variety of programming. I'm more curious in how the back surround channels are created. Also if a "6.1" channel setup is used, will the rear center channel be similar to Neo 6 which seems to steer surround mono signals to the center back channel?

As I said, I'm fairly impressed with Neo 6. I read the reviewer's format comparison and perhaps that lead to a bias against Neo 6 earlier. I'm using a Denon AVR-3803 which tends to have a lower volume on Neo 6 than on DPL 2. It's about 2db overall. Adding that lower volume with a more diffused mono information, the DPL 2 seemed to have more impact in the rear effects and a front soundstage that was further away. That further soundstage was an illusion from the lower volume that I should had paid more careful attention to, when doing straight format switching which gave the edge to DPL 2. The more dramatic rear effect was because the mono information wasn't as diffused in DPL 2. Neo was sending that same information to the mono back surround speakers which were firing to the back of my head. The same information from DPL 2 was firing to the side of my head, more in-line with my ears from the side surrounds. This created a more focused dispersion from the side firing speakers. In an overall explanation, the mono information did retain it's level output in Neo 6, but was in a more enveloping pattern with Neo's 6.1 configuration opposed to DPL 2's 5.1 configuration.

I don't doubt that DPL 2x will be better than Neo 6, but what I don't know is to what extent. While having 7.1 opposed to 6.1 is an advantage, it may not be more than a minimal difference at best with most material. As far as steering, I found that DPL 2 seems to emphasize some sound effects more, but not in a very notable difference. To say which is better would be more of an opinion, and the difference was so minor, it did not change the soundfield.

What I would like to see in Neo 6 is a bit more of the mono information in the back surround channel stay in the side surrounds. This leaving only the high level mono signals in the back surround channel. Since this is a 2.0 channel signal being split into 6 processed channels, the rear channel information in Neo 6 might already be optimal. I'm sure that the Neo 6 uses the same rear center channel processing as DTS ES 'matrix' does. The difference being that DTS ES' side surround channels are discrete having a very high channel separation opposed to a much lower separation in a matrixed format as Neo 6 or DPL.

I'm just curious in how DPL 2x does the back surround channels and how it would sound in both a 7.1 and a 6.1 setup opposed to Neo 6's 6.1 setup.

Have a good one.

 

[Roger Dressler]

Kevin wrote:

>>But, from 5.1 to 7.1, I believe that there's a fairly significant benefit if you look at the fronts to the surrounds to decide what to put in the rears. A pan from front R to surround R is a perfect example. If that pan is continued to the right rear, to me, that is ideal.>After all, the ideal setup for 5.1 is surrounds 110 deg from the front, right? But for 7.1, the surrounds are recommended to be 90 deg from the front, and the rears are recommended to be about 150 deg from the front. Hence, if that pan is steering through the R surround to the R rear, the effect is much more enveloping.

 

[Fernando Saa]

I agree with Roger, the difference I notice between my old 5.1 receiver and my new one was not only more envelopment but also directionality, (specificity). Now I hear sounds coming from the ceiling behind me, my sides where the surrounds are, back sides, etc. When I was watching LOTR FOTR, the part where Cate Blanchett is about to touch the ring as her face changes in appereance, sounds where coming from everywhere behind me like never before after setting my receiver to 5.1 + DPL2x. I felt scared men! That's why I always try to keep in touch with the HTF. You read very knowledgeable and informative posts everytime.

 

[Kevin C Brown]

Roger- That's just it. I believe that Logic 7 *does* look at the front L & R speakers to decide what to do with the signals in the surrounds and rears. I like your analogy of a "motion vector". But for a sound that originates and ends in the right surround and right rear, since there is no beginning or ending activity associated with the front right speaker in terms of similar amplitude and freq distribution, bingo, you only get output in the surround and rear. But for a pan that originates or ends in the right front, the decoder can certainly use that information to change what's happening in the right surround or rear speaker.


Ahh, this is a different issue entirely, and goes along with why I like Logic 7 so much. If a director still wants sounds to eminate from a point about 110 deg from the front, he uses amplitude and phase *between* the surround and rear speaker to create an image at 110 deg. This is the very cool thing about discrete info being able to be reproduced by 4 vs 2 (or for a side, 2 vs 1) speakers. Unfortunately, for right now, there are no discrete 7.1 formats. But this certainly can be done to some effect with DD EX and DTS-ES formats. The advanced steering in Logic 7 is an attempt to get some of this effect for "std" DD/DTS soundtracks.

 

[Marty Neudel]

The L7 in my Lexicon MC-12 does indeed separate Br from Sr (and Bl from Sl) thus panning fly-overs, etc. I don't remember ever having seen an official explanation of how it does this.

The L7 in HK equipment is different from the Lex's so I can't speak to its performance.

Marty

 

[Roger Dressler]

Kevin wrote:
>>Roger- That's just it. I believe that Logic 7 *does* look at the front L & R speakers to decide what to do with the signals in the surrounds and rears.>But for a sound that originates and ends in the right surround and right rear...you only get output in the surround and rear.>If a director still wants sounds to eminate from a point about 110 deg from the front, he uses amplitude and phase *between* the surround and rear speaker to create an image at 110 deg.

 

[Roger Dressler]

Marty wrote:

>>The L7 in my Lexicon MC-12 does indeed separate Br from Sr (and Bl from Sl) thus panning fly-overs, etc.

 

[Kevin C Brown]

The two quotes from the Theory and Design document you quoted above. That's how I interpreted it anyway. Plus Marty's and other users' comments regarding how Logic 7 steers information to the surrounds and rears.

 

[Roger Dressler]

Kevin wrote:
>>The two quotes from the Theory and Design document you quoted above. That's how I interpreted it anyway.>Plus Marty's and other users' comments regarding how Logic 7 steers information to the surrounds and rears.

 

[Kevin C Brown]

I will check with Lexicon.

 

[Jason Brent]

Yep, Momento is cool.

But....Amada Peet is HOT!!

 

[Kevin C Brown]

Roger- The answer is: not yet, but it's coming.

 

[Jerome Grate]

As anyone tested Dragonheart with PLIIx. When we first stepped into 6.1, this was one of the movies that tested the functionality of the rear center speaker. Would be interesting to see what DPLIIx does with it.

 

[Roger Dressler]

Kevin wrote:

>>Roger- The answer is: not yet, but it's coming.

 

[Kevin C Brown]

Seems to me, since this is in response to my direct question about the use of the fronts for generation of the surrounds and rears, that David is strongly implying that a future version of Logic 7 will feature this.

Does DPL IIx have anything like this coming?