Integra DRX-8.4

[polmuaddib]

I am currently hunting for another pair of the same Gallo reference speakers as my mains, to deploy for surround - that would give me 4 full range speakers with 24Hz capabilities - potentially rendering subs redundant in my space (if the processing can properly integrate the LFE).

I agree that it woould be great, but I don't think that any AVR on the market today (can't say for Trinnov) could route the LFE channel to all speakers. When you select NO SUB, LFE is routed only to two front channels (there is a discussion on that here on ASR). And that is a shame, because I have five big tower speakers in bed channel that extend to 30 Hz, which would be enough for me.
But, unfortunately, we still have to use subs. At least, two.

 

[dlaloum]

I agree that it woould be great, but I don't think that any AVR on the market today (can't say for Trinnov) could route the LFE channel to all speakers. When you select NO SUB, LFE is routed only to two front channels (there is a discussion on that here on ASR). And that is a shame, because I have five big tower speakers in bed channel that extend to 30 Hz, which would be enough for me.
But, unfortunately, we still have to use subs. At least, two.

There is talk about the LFE channel on the various ART and Storm/ART threads...

I think this is something that will be resolved soon - the gap is obvious and has been particularly exposed by the release of ART...

And it isn't something particularly complex!

 

[ban25]

I agree that it woould be great, but I don't think that any AVR on the market today (can't say for Trinnov) could route the LFE channel to all speakers. When you select NO SUB, LFE is routed only to two front channels (there is a discussion on that here on ASR). And that is a shame, because I have five big tower speakers in bed channel that extend to 30 Hz, which would be enough for me.
But, unfortunately, we still have to use subs. At least, two.

Actually the new line from Denon and Marantz do exactly that, from the AV10/A1H all the way down to the X3800H:

 

[pseudoid]

I agree that it woould be great, but I don't think that any AVR on the market today (can't say for Trinnov) could route the LFE channel to all speakers. When you select NO SUB, LFE is routed only to two front channels (there is a discussion on that here on ASR). And that is a shame, because I have five big tower speakers in bed channel that extend to 30 Hz, which would be enough for me.

Excellent detective work!

But, unfortunately, we still have to use subs. At least, two.

No, 'we' don't!
I am sure someone has designed their flooring for such duties. << The WHOLE floor; as a (passive or active) radiator.: hmmmm...

 

[Pudik]

Not much room.

True, not much room, but afaict, the receiver can't even breathe. Never place electronics into cabinets, but onto cabinets. P.

 

[pseudoid]

True, not much room, but afaict, the receiver can't even breathe. Never place electronics into cabinets, but onto cabinets. P.

I am from the camp of "Music should be heard but NOT seen" camp!

At a current ASR thread ("beautiful speakers"); members are discussing the prettiest lipstick-on-a-pig.
My contrarian view did not go over well when I replied that I don't even want speakers in my living quarters but I accept they are a fugly necessity.
I hide all my gear but mindful that heat is electronics' #1 enemy.

 

[dlaloum]

Excellent detective work!

No, 'we' don't!
I am sure someone has designed their flooring for such duties. << The WHOLE floor; as a (passive or active) radiator.: hmmmm...

If you have a suspended wooden floor - then it has always been acting as a passive radiator!!! (the problem is controlling / damping / stopping it!!!)

 

[dlaloum]

I am from the camp of "Music should be heard but NOT seen" camp!

At a current ASR thread ("beautiful speakers"); members are discussing the prettiest lipstick-on-a-pig.
My contrarian view did not go over well when I replied that I don't even want speakers in my living quarters but I accept they are a fugly necessity.
I hide all my gear but mindful that heat is electronics' #1 enemy.

My view of perfection would have acoustically transparent "curtains" with enough space behind them to have all the speakers do their thing, with enough space to achieve optimal results...

The real / physical room would be almost double the size of the "room" but it would be a nice minimalist space - all the complexities would be hidden behind the acoustically transparent fabric "walls"...

And while I am fantasizing - all my ear level speaker would be Quad ESL2912's - not sure what to use for the height speakers - but at least a couple of very low distortion, probably sealed, subs would also be required.

 

[Pudik]

I am from the camp of "Music should be heard but NOT seen" camp!

At a current ASR thread ("beautiful speakers"); members are discussing the prettiest lipstick-on-a-pig.
My contrarian view did not go over well when I replied that I don't even want speakers in my living quarters but I accept they are a fugly necessity.
I hide all my gear but mindful that heat is electronics' #1 enemy.

Yeah, i hear you clearly. I am a techy with strong engineering background, seeing everything from a thermodynamics point of view (efficiency, that is). This in NOT to brag about background, it's just so you know where i am coming from. I like it when looking at my large, complex HT + MUSIC system. But, then, i respect your point of view. I just hate it when electronics quit because they are not taken care of for purely aesthetical considerations. But, i reiterate, i respect your point of view. Sincerely, P.

 

[Pudik]

Interesting... I've seen "lorem ipsum" used before but never knew its origin.

Lorem Ipsum - All the facts - Lipsum generator

Reference site about Lorem Ipsum, giving information on its origins, as well as a random Lipsum generator.

www.lipsum.com

Martin

This was the fake text used by the professor for putting text on the first page i created when i took the first web design class. Never forgotten Lorem ipsum

 

[pseudoid]

This was the fake text used by the professor for putting text on the first page i created when i took the first web design class. Never forgotten Lorem ipsum

I've used LoremIpsum both professionally and personally.
Last use was about 4 years ago when Drupal became rocket-science and I just stopped my web-presence. It had started consuming so much time, like putting the cart-before-the-horse...
My original reply here, was because of a reply I read which sounded gibberish (imo)... similar to posting some Ipsum of Lorem
... but could not remember the exact Latin words. First thought was "Ipem Lorsum"... google to the rescue!
It has been said: "That's the second thing that goes!"

 

[Pudik]

I've used LoremIpsum both professionally and personally.
Last use was about 4 years ago when Drupal became rocket-science and I just stopped my web-presence. It had started consuming so much time, like putting the cart-before-the-horse...
My original reply here, was because of a reply I read which sounded gibberish (imo)... similar to posting some Ipsum of Lorem
... but could not remember the exact Latin words. First thought was "Ipem Lorsum"... google to the rescue!
It has been said: "That's the second thing that goes!"

Ha, ha, yeah. I never worked in Drupal and it's really amazing how languages come and go. Anyway, long live Lorem Ipsum for the next generations wrestling with the ever more complicated life of the web programmer/designer. P.

 

[pseudoid]

This is where we can go back OnTopic, while discussing the complexities of software as related to audio systems. Maybe!
I hate my current Rotel RSP-1576 A/V Pre/Proc solely because its software makes its operations "slow". Unresponsive!
And if that is not bad enough, it also has a delay of about 500mS (between audio IN and OUT).
"That's a feature, Dummy, not a bug!"

Ditto of my previous Integra A/V Pre/Proc.
My next system will compartmentalize audio from video processing... and using dedicated hardware for each, w/o going AIO!

 

[dlaloum]

This is where we can go back OnTopic, while discussing the complexities of software as related to audio systems. Maybe!
I hate my current Rotel RSP-1576 A/V Pre/Proc solely because its software makes its operations "slow". Unresponsive!
And if that is not bad enough, it also has a delay of about 500mS (between audio IN and OUT).
"That's a feature, Dummy, not a bug!"

Ditto of my previous Integra A/V Pre/Proc.
My next system will compartmentalize audio from video processing... and using dedicated hardware for each, w/o going AIO!

Most current software is written in high level interpreters/compilers with heaps of layers of error catching, etc...

To give a couple of examples... in days of yore, I was in the Apple-II camp at the time, and IBM launched the IBM PC, and then the IBM XT, while I was running a Z80 board with CPM2.2 in my Apple II. - The XT (MS Dos 2.1?) was a 4.77Mhz processor, the Z80 was 1.6MHz from memory (and had to contend with everything passing through the bus to the Apple II processor to access the floppy drives. - so that lays out the hardware picture - a friend of mine working for a bank, had a "luggable" IBM XT, which he brought over to my place, for us to do some comparisons - I had access to DB-2 database software on CPM, and also the later DB3 version on MSDos - so we wrote some quick and dirty benchmarking code and ran a few tests to see how they compared.
The later DB3 (or was it DB-IV?) software had a "intelligent" code generator, with lots of helpful interfaces, prompts and menus, which then generated underlying code that was run.
DB2 you had to write your own code.
The CPM DB2 version absolutely wiped the floor with the MSDOS DB3/4 version - it was at least 4 or 5 times faster.... even though it was running on a slower processor, through slower drives (the test involved some sorts, searches and calculations, which were done on the floppy drives) etc...

DB2 required knowing the commands at a much lower level, where the later DB3/4 could be run with basic knowledge and reasonably "english-ish" writing (and lots of following menu prompts - this is pre-GUI).

Ease of use for programmers was gained at the cost of efficiency and performance.

Another example from the mid to late 1980's - working for a security company, our lead engineer/programmer was an absolute genius, what we needed was a way to encrypt a hard drive safely at a very very low level, so it couldn't be hacked (easily) and was then saleable to the "spooks" (government security establishment - the sort of people who ask you to drop off the latest encryption software to them, and when you arrive, look at you with suspicion and ask - how did you know where to find me.?... duh - you told me the address?!)
After various discussions and various efforts which failed - all the results were just too slow, and would impact performance so much as to make the PC pretty much unusable.... This engineer pulled an all-nighter, writing direct assembly language/machine code, fitted the entire program into a single hard drive block - and made it sufficiently efficient that it was not noticeable that it was in place when the PC was in use...

Old style low level direct hardware programming...

Most of the kit we use today, is programmed with high level languages - it is highly inefficient - but can be run by pretty much anyone with some idea of programming concepts, and transfers easily between different hardware platforms.
Cost savings are mostly in "FTE-Hours".

"in the old days" - many programmers grew up writing direct assembly language or machine code.... (later generations got close to that with C compilers, but even those could not match code writen directly on/for the hardware) - they had to be efficient.... major enterprises had their accouting for multi-million dollar businesses running within 4k RAM.... (look at what things like the Apollo landers had for processing power!).

Could the software in current AVR's be made vastly more efficient - heck yes!! - But you would need an old style programmer to do it.... and most of that generation have already retired. Current mainstream programmers have probably done one unit of machine language at college/university - to get an understanding of the underlying system, and then moved on to high level languages.

So we now depend on moors law, to provide ever more powerful processors, which compensate for ever less efficient programming.

Trouble is - AVR's are typically a generation or two behind PC's - so slower, less powerful - whereas the software and software tools, is all done on PC's.

That's our world today...

 

[pseudoid]

Most current software is written in high level interpreters/compilers with heaps of layers of error catching, etc...

I think there was a real lean pre-release of Windows10 that but I could not readily verify... but...

Let's put some rough numbers/figures behind "lines-of-codes" (circa 2021):
The 1982 Space Shuttle required somewhere in the region of 400,000 lines-of-code to make it work.
A mouse's genome, comes in at around 120Million lines-of-code.
A million lines would be about 18,000 pages of text if printed out — that's 14 times longer than Tolstoy's War and Peace.
On the other end of the spectrum, a simple iPhone game app generally contains some tens of thousands of lines-of-code.
There are some rumors that the Human Genome Project amounts to over 3Billion lines-of-code. If true, this would make it the largest software program in existence. However, we could not find any reliable source to back up this claim.
If we were to take all of [Google] services as a whole, by some estimates, the code behind them constitutes somewhere in the region of several billion lines-of-code. Not only that, but Google is constantly adding new services and upgrades to older programs, further bloating the amount of code as time goes by.
Of those programs, the Google Chrome browser is thought to require something like 6-7 million lines-of-code alone.
High-end car software is estimated to have roughly 100Million lines-of-code (# goes up with Car$$) High-end BMWs, Mercedes, or even Tesla vehicles have some of the most complex software behind the scenes.
The Windows XP Operating System contained 40-50Million lines-of-code.
Apple's Mac OS X 10.4 Tiger is another of the world's largest software programs. Consisting of well over 80Million lines-of-code, this operating system is one of the largest ever written. BigSur release will dwarf Tiger in #s.
Debian5.0 @roughly 67Million lines-of-code
Facebook @roughly 61Million lines-of-code. [<<Figure] includes code written in a variety of languages, ranging from PHP, C++, Python, Hack, Java, Erlang, XHP, to Facebook's own Thrift, and others.
Microsoft Office @roughly 50Million lines-of-code(mostly C++)
WinXP/7 @ 40Million lines-of-code
Android @ 15Million lines-of-code
F-35 @8-24Million lines-of-code
Hubble @ 2Million lines-of-code
Pacemaker @80,000 lines-of-code

My Rotel will spank a pacemaker any day!

 

[dlaloum]

I think there was a real lean pre-release of Windows10 that but I could not readily verify... but...

Let's put some rough numbers/figures behind "lines-of-codes" (circa 2021):
The 1982 Space Shuttle required somewhere in the region of 400,000 lines-of-code to make it work.
A mouse's genome, comes in at around 120Million lines-of-code.
A million lines would be about 18,000 pages of text if printed out — that's 14 times longer than Tolstoy's War and Peace.
On the other end of the spectrum, a simple iPhone game app generally contains some tens of thousands of lines-of-code.
There are some rumors that the Human Genome Project amounts to over 3Billion lines-of-code. If true, this would make it the largest software program in existence. However, we could not find any reliable source to back up this claim.
If we were to take all of [Google] services as a whole, by some estimates, the code behind them constitutes somewhere in the region of several billion lines-of-code. Not only that, but Google is constantly adding new services and upgrades to older programs, further bloating the amount of code as time goes by.
Of those programs, the Google Chrome browser is thought to require something like 6-7 million lines-of-code alone.
High-end car software is estimated to have roughly 100Million lines-of-code (# goes up with Car$$) High-end BMWs, Mercedes, or even Tesla vehicles have some of the most complex software behind the scenes.
The Windows XP Operating System contained 40-50Million lines-of-code.
Apple's Mac OS X 10.4 Tiger is another of the world's largest software programs. Consisting of well over 80Million lines-of-code, this operating system is one of the largest ever written. BigSur release will dwarf Tiger in #s.
Debian5.0 @roughly 67Million lines-of-code
Facebook @roughly 61Million lines-of-code. [<<Figure] includes code written in a variety of languages, ranging from PHP, C++, Python, Hack, Java, Erlang, XHP, to Facebook's own Thrift, and others.
Microsoft Office @roughly 50Million lines-of-code(mostly C++)
WinXP/7 @ 40Million lines-of-code
Android @ 15Million lines-of-code
F-35 @8-24Million lines-of-code
Hubble @ 2Million lines-of-code
Pacemaker @80,000 lines-of-code

My Rotel will spank a pacemaker any day!

It's not about lines of code... a single line of code - which passes through multiple layers of gui, error checking, translation/interpretation/compilation - can chew up quite a lot of memory and processing.
Do the exact same function directly a the machine level - at the register, stores, etc... level of the CPU - and the same thing can be achieved at least 100x faster (perhaps substantially more).

At the performance level there is NO comparison.

At the FTE-hours level - having to write and maintain thousands of lines of code, can be done efficiently with minimum employee costs.... as long as you have the umpteen layers of GUI code, syntax checking, error handling etc... which make up todays development environments - will the result be slower less efficient running code - yes, by several orders of magnitude - but you don't have to hire Seymour Cray, to reboot your supercomputer by typing in the boot code using switch toggles on the CPU from memory (this legendary feat, may be an "urban myth"... but having worked with people who could do that sort of stuff, I keep an open mind)

 

[Ssmokeyy]

How does any of this have to do with the integra drx 8.4?

 

[pseudoid]

Q:

How does any of this have to do with the integra drx 8.4?

A:

...Unresponsive!...

Not hard to connect the 2 dots but relevant.

 

[dlaloum]

Q:

A:

Not hard to connect the 2 dots but relevant.

Yes... but it was getting a bit tangential....

 

[pseudoid]

Lardy audio/video equipment with full of potential avenues for processing-latencies should worry every potential AVR owner.
It is less of a worry now, then in the past decade but I actually gave you a like for your 'tangentiality'!
Remembering that there was little lip-sync features (crude, if any) in the older AVRs and AVPre/Procs.
Yet, they also did not have to 'process' as much video, EQ, network, etc. without the luxury of having the current quad+ processor power...