Neumann KH420 vs Revel PerformaBe F228be or F328be

[echopraxia]

Well I think of upmixed stereo as more of a "value add" to a multi-channel system. That's why I have a combined film/tv and music setup. I agree the value is probably not quite there as a pure upmixing system. Especially when you consider the mounting/cabling requirements.

I’ve finally set up a basic (4.1) multichannel setup using my 8351B’s in the front and 8330A as the surrounds. Using my Denon AVR and Apple TV to stream music, both stereo and Dolby Atmos.

First of all, when playing actual multichannel music, I’m definitely impressed and I don’t know if I can really go back to only stereo now It was fun just browsing through some of the example songs on some of the default Spatial Audio playlists, for example:

https://music.apple.com/us/album/th...-no-3-in-f-major-rv-293/883897569?i=883897597

However other multichannel remixes are pretty bad. In some they decided to place only the vocals behind and only the instruments in front, which was really weird and IMO not really desirable.

Now when trying stereo upmixing to multichannel is where it gets interesting. The Denon AVR I use has a few upmixing modes, but interestingly all of them sound pretty bad except two modes: Pure stereo (obviously, ie nothing is played on the surrounds at all), and “Multichannel Stereo” which seems to play the exact same signal on the surrounds as on the fronts.

It’s not quite the same as the soundstage of the Salon2’s or course, but definitely very similar in all the good ways I’ve been wanting. In fact it’s quite a bit more enveloping, where you feel like the music is completely surrounding you. Sometimes too much so, since the “Multichannel Stereo” mode seems to play the surrounds just as loudly as the fronts (I assume it’s the exact same signal). I’d like to just turn down the volume of the rears in this mode ideally, but I can’t do that aside from adjusting the level calibrations which would degrade the results when playing actual Dolby Audio etc.

What’s interesting is how terrible any of the other upmixing modes are. All the subtle 3D info in the soundstage gets completely destroyed in any of these modes aside from pure “Stereo”, and “Multichannel Stereo”.

That said, I actually am quite impressed by how good it sounds with just the simple “Multichannel Stereo” upmixing. It’s too early to say, as I’m mostly distracted by all the Dolby Atmos music available on Apple Music right now

But from initial impressions, I do actually think a multichannel Genelec setup can match and probably exceed the enjoyment of wide pattern speakers like the Salon2’s when playing even stereo content, with the right upmixing.

There are caveats though. As I feared, even when the upmixing sounds really good, it does for the center area of the room, but not so much for the back. That said, the back of the room didn’t sound ideal even when playing stereo tracks on the Salon2’s, but it still sounded quite good and the sound is continuously similar as you transition between e.g. center and rear listening position. In contrast, with the 4.1 setup, the location of the rear speakers become like blinding suns of excessively loud noise, standing out versus blending in. It becomes impossible to ignore that you’re sitting a few feet away from a speaker. I’ll have to see in practice though how much of a problem this is, if any.

If it’s not a big problem, I could totally see a surround system consisting of Genelec coaxial to be quite the ideal ultimate no-compromises setup

 

[al2002]

In room I expect the 328s will likely go lower than 35 Hz. Elsewhere on this forum a 328 owner reported that he got output down to 23 Hz.

Just a general comment. Many ASR forum members may not realise how severe room size constraints can be for urban dwellers. Two big speakers plus subs in a typical city apartment may be difficult to manage.

I'm all for multiple systems and trying something new . You also seemed to enjoy the F328Be over the Salon2, and the Salon2 over the 8351b. My guess is that wider dispersion is to blame for that.

My problem with the F328Be(without subs) is the extension (-3dB 35Hz). I'd really love to see a dispersion width comparison between the Salon2 and the F328Be. The F328Be is certainly much smoother(measurement wise). Personally, I would have to have subs to complement the F328Be(similar to the 8351b)

I'm torn. On one hand, for true full range sound at ~4m, I might lean towards KH420 or D&D 8C. D&D 8C seems (imo) a bit better at equal volumes than KH420, but it sacrifices max output for LF directivity control. W371A fixes the max output problem, and does the LF directivity even better than the 8C, but at $30,000 is overpriced an almost 3x the cost. The KH420 is (imo) an amazing value(arguably the best) for true full range 2.0 sound, but based on your preferences for wide dispersion, I'd worry about the narrower dispersion. It looks ever so slightly narrower than the 8351b to my eyes(and MS paint), and the fidelity isn't as good, but it makes up for it with max output and extension.

Are you stuck on 2.0? If not, based on your previous preferences, I'd be leaning F328Be + subs. For 2.0, I'm torn between Salon2 and F328Be.

 

[Doodski]

In room I expect the 328s will likely go lower than 35 Hz. Elsewhere on this forum a 328 owner reported that he got output down to 23 Hz.

Just a general comment. Many ASR forum members may not realise how severe room size constraints can be for urban dwellers. Two big speakers plus subs in a typical city apartment may be difficult to manage.

I would expect noise complaints with any sub being used in a condO or apartment.

 

[al2002]

Good to hear that you've discovered multi-channel stereo. I'd recommend adding a third 8551 for the front center. It will make a noticeable improvement in the stability of the the sound stage.
I don't know which Denon AVR you have, but the old Denon DSP A1 (pre-HDMI) integrated had some very fine synthesized surround modes.

Multi-channel music DVD-A discs are worth picking up too. I've even found several in my local thrift shop.

I’ve finally set up a basic (4.1) multichannel setup using my 8351B’s in the front and 8330A as the surrounds. Using my Denon AVR and Apple TV to stream music, both stereo and Dolby Atmos.

First of all, when playing actual multichannel music, I’m definitely impressed and I don’t know if I can really go back to only stereo now It was fun just browsing through some of the example songs on some of the default Spatial Audio playlists, for example:

https://music.apple.com/us/album/th...-no-3-in-f-major-rv-293/883897569?i=883897597

However other multichannel remixes are pretty bad. In some they decided to place only the vocals behind and only the instruments in front, which was really weird and IMO not really desirable.

Now when trying stereo upmixing to multichannel is where it gets interesting. The Denon AVR I use has a few upmixing modes, but interestingly all of them sound pretty bad except two modes: Pure stereo (obviously, ie nothing is played on the surrounds at all), and “Multichannel Stereo” which seems to play the exact same signal on the surrounds as on the fronts.

It’s not quite the same as the soundstage of the Salon2’s or course, but definitely very similar in all the good ways I’ve been wanting. In fact it’s quite a bit more enveloping, where you feel like the music is completely surrounding you. Sometimes too much so, since the “Multichannel Stereo” mode seems to play the surrounds just as loudly as the fronts (I assume it’s the exact same signal). I’d like to just turn down the volume of the rears in this mode ideally, but I can’t do that aside from adjusting the level calibrations which would degrade the results when playing actual Dolby Audio etc.

What’s interesting is how terrible any of the other upmixing modes are. All the subtle 3D info in the soundstage gets completely destroyed in any of these modes aside from pure “Stereo”, and “Multichannel Stereo”.

That said, I actually am quite impressed by how good it sounds with just the simple “Multichannel Stereo” upmixing. It’s too early to say, as I’m mostly distracted by all the Dolby Atmos music available on Apple Music right now

But from initial impressions, I do actually think a multichannel Genelec setup can match and probably exceed the enjoyment of wide pattern speakers like the Salon2’s when playing even stereo content, with the right upmixing.

There are caveats though. As I feared, even when the upmixing sounds really good, it does for the center area of the room, but not so much for the back. That said, the back of the room didn’t sound ideal even when playing stereo tracks on the Salon2’s, but it still sounded quite good and the sound is continuously similar as you transition between e.g. center and rear listening position. In contrast, with the 4.1 setup, the location of the rear speakers become like blinding suns of excessively loud noise, standing out versus blending in. It becomes impossible to ignore that you’re sitting a few feet away from a speaker. I’ll have to see in practice though how much of a problem this is, if any.

If it’s not a big problem, I could totally see a surround system consisting of Genelec coaxial to be quite the ideal ultimate no-compromises setup

 

[al2002]

Indeed. I used to get complaints (fists banging on the wall) even when I had Quad ESL-57 speakers.

An acquaintance who lived in an old apartment with high ceilings had to install a sub-floor in his living room to provide acoustical isolation for his piano and stereo system.

I would expect noise complaints with any sub being used in a condO or apartment.

 

[Doodski]

An acquaintance who lived in an old apartment with high ceilings had to install a sub-floor in his living room to provide acoustical isolation for his piano and stereo system.

Now that's devotion to the cause.

 

[dshreter]

It’s not been discussed much, but the room is going to have a massive impact and likely should influence your speaker selection. A wider directivity may not be desirable in a very live room with poorly treated first reflections, and a narrower directivity would help maintain a focused image. On the other hand with a kind room with a good mix of absorption and diffusion, the wider directivity might be just the thing.

You’re considering such accurate speakers that in my opinion the system needs to be considered in its totality to make an objective selection from here. The approach you will take to room correction as well, and if you intend to use that provided by Neumann or Genelec should factor in.

 

[Sancus]

First of all, when playing actual multichannel music, I’m definitely impressed and I don’t know if I can really go back to only stereo now

Yep, welcome to the dark side There's a reason Toole gives up on stereo in the middle of his book and spends the rest of it talking about multi-channel.

I don't know what all Apple has available, but if they have any of the 2L albums I highly recommend them. You can also get test tracks from here. Magnificat and Quiet Winter Night are some of the best recorded albums ever IMO. There's tons of 5-channel classical out there, but much less of other genres.

But from initial impressions, I do actually think a multichannel Genelec setup can match and probably exceed the enjoyment of wide pattern speakers like the Salon2’s when playing even stereo content, with the right upmixing.

I was never completely satisfied with upmixing until Auro3D. Dolby Surround is sometimes good enough, though.

 

[Pearljam5000]

Yep, welcome to the dark side There's a reason Toole gives up on stereo in the middle of his book and spends the rest of it talking about multi-channel.

I don't know what all Apple has available, but if they have any of the 2L albums I highly recommend them. You can also get test tracks from here. Magnificat and Quiet Winter Night are some of the best recorded albums ever IMO. There's tons of 5-channel classical out there, but much less of other genres.



I was never completely satisfied with upmixing until Auro3D. Dolby Surround is sometimes good enough, though.

2L uses Genelec in their studio so no wonder it sounds good

 

[Kal Rubinson]

I would expect noise complaints with any sub being used in a condO or apartment.

Indeed. I used to get complaints (fists banging on the wall) even when I had Quad ESL-57 speakers.
An acquaintance who lived in an old apartment with high ceilings had to install a sub-floor in his living room to provide acoustical isolation for his piano and stereo system.

It really depends on building construction. In the 30 years, I've been in my current apartment (in a building of 175 apartments), I have had only 2 complaints and those were completely justified. (I was "testing" something.) It is a relatively modern building of reinforced concrete construction with sound insulation (fiberglass batting) in the walls.

I have a multichannel system consisting of 5 floor-standing loudspeakers (with multiple amps to drive them) and 3 powered subwoofers. I do not play it early in the morning and I do not play it loud late into the evening. Also, fwiw, my immediate neighbors to one side have a similarly large system and I never hear it at all except, at time, in the common hallway.

Yep, welcome to the dark side There's a reason Toole gives up on stereo in the middle of his book and spends the rest of it talking about multi-channel.

Amen.

 

[mkt]

I don't know what all Apple has available, but if they have any of the 2L albums I highly recommend them. You can also get test tracks from here. Magnificat and Quiet Winter Night are some of the best recorded albums ever IMO. There's tons of 5-channel classical out there, but much less of other genres.

These two from 2Ls are in atmos
https://music.apple.com/us/album/ståle-kleiberg-concertos/1579403486
https://music.apple.com/us/album/solacium/1571764665
Also fun
https://music.apple.com/us/album/when-we-all-fall-asleep-where-do-we-go/1450695723

 

[echopraxia]

2L uses Genelec in their studio so no wonder it sounds good
View attachment 152041View attachment 152042View attachment 152043View attachment 152044View attachment 152045View attachment 152046View attachment 152047View attachment 152048

Wow, that’s a pretty incredible setup! Completely encircled by 8361’s and W371’s.

Makes my tentative plans to build out a Genelec coaxial multichannel setup seem quaint

So given what a great experience good multichannel recordings are, and given how close stereo->multichannel upmixing gets to that “enveloping soundstage” I was seeking, I think the next speaker purchase for me that makes the most sense is a set of two or three Genelec 8361A’s as fronts, where the Genelec 8351B’s will become the surrounds

I’m currently still in an apartment until we decide on where to buy (with all the recent moving around, I want to settle into an area for a while first), so I think Revel F328Be would be size overkill and a pain to move again (though I do appreciate that they include a hard case now). Neumann KH420 is I think too similar to Genelec 8361, and D&D 8C while a very intriguing option to explore is something I think I’ll save for a bit later after we’ve settled down into a forever home.

So I am really liking the idea of building out a 5.2 or 7.2 Genelec system for now as a one-system-does-it-all setup! I will probably buy F328Be’s (or whatever Revel’s latest flagship is) at some point in the future when I have a house again to appreciate them fully, as a dedicated pure stereo listening setup which is still appealing to me maybe if only for nostalgia and to play older music (There is still something you get from a stereo wide beam system that I haven’t been able to exactly match with multichannel medium beam, although so far it’s close enough for me to be happy.) But I do see how multichannel mid-beam speakers definitely could be the future of ultimate music enjoyment, aside from the even more extreme amount of room space and setup complexity versus a simple set of stereo towers + subs.

 

[richard12511]

I’ve finally set up a basic (4.1) multichannel setup using my 8351B’s in the front and 8330A as the surrounds. Using my Denon AVR and Apple TV to stream music, both stereo and Dolby Atmos.

First of all, when playing actual multichannel music, I’m definitely impressed and I don’t know if I can really go back to only stereo now It was fun just browsing through some of the example songs on some of the default Spatial Audio playlists, for example:

https://music.apple.com/us/album/th...-no-3-in-f-major-rv-293/883897569?i=883897597

However other multichannel remixes are pretty bad. In some they decided to place only the vocals behind and only the instruments in front, which was really weird and IMO not really desirable.

Now when trying stereo upmixing to multichannel is where it gets interesting. The Denon AVR I use has a few upmixing modes, but interestingly all of them sound pretty bad except two modes: Pure stereo (obviously, ie nothing is played on the surrounds at all), and “Multichannel Stereo” which seems to play the exact same signal on the surrounds as on the fronts.

It’s not quite the same as the soundstage of the Salon2’s or course, but definitely very similar in all the good ways I’ve been wanting. In fact it’s quite a bit more enveloping, where you feel like the music is completely surrounding you. Sometimes too much so, since the “Multichannel Stereo” mode seems to play the surrounds just as loudly as the fronts (I assume it’s the exact same signal). I’d like to just turn down the volume of the rears in this mode ideally, but I can’t do that aside from adjusting the level calibrations which would degrade the results when playing actual Dolby Audio etc.

What’s interesting is how terrible any of the other upmixing modes are. All the subtle 3D info in the soundstage gets completely destroyed in any of these modes aside from pure “Stereo”, and “Multichannel Stereo”.

That said, I actually am quite impressed by how good it sounds with just the simple “Multichannel Stereo” upmixing. It’s too early to say, as I’m mostly distracted by all the Dolby Atmos music available on Apple Music right now

But from initial impressions, I do actually think a multichannel Genelec setup can match and probably exceed the enjoyment of wide pattern speakers like the Salon2’s when playing even stereo content, with the right upmixing.

There are caveats though. As I feared, even when the upmixing sounds really good, it does for the center area of the room, but not so much for the back. That said, the back of the room didn’t sound ideal even when playing stereo tracks on the Salon2’s, but it still sounded quite good and the sound is continuously similar as you transition between e.g. center and rear listening position. In contrast, with the 4.1 setup, the location of the rear speakers become like blinding suns of excessively loud noise, standing out versus blending in. It becomes impossible to ignore that you’re sitting a few feet away from a speaker. I’ll have to see in practice though how much of a problem this is, if any.

If it’s not a big problem, I could totally see a surround system consisting of Genelec coaxial to be quite the ideal ultimate no-compromises setup

I think I still prefer stereo over most upmixers I've tried(Auro2D, All Dolby, All DTS), except Auro3D. My problem with most of them is that they put actual direct sounds in the surrounds that were never mixed to be there, and the surrounds in general sound too loud to me. It's especially noticeable for me when moving about the room(as you mentioned). I hear way too much of what ever surround I'm closest to. Auro3D doesn't have that issue. With a strength of 6, I can put my ear a few cm away from the right surround, and the center image is still there, but pulled to the right by the front right(not the surround right). In fact, with your ear just a few inches away from the surround R/L, you can just barely hear them. To my ears, it mostly leaves the center image untouched, but stabilizes it against movement, and it adds soundstage width. I like that you can customize both the strength and the amount of delay(to simulate different room sizes). I usually do 6-8 on strength, with size depending on content. I like large(biggest delay) for symphonies, small for pop/rock, medium for live jazz/other classical.

Before I had Auro3D, I did have some success with the Dolby music upmixer, but "center spread" had to be on, and I had to turn the surrounds down by 5dB or so. It did sound arguably better than stereo to my ears, but it was annoying having to go and turn center spread off and add 5dB to all the surrounds every time I watched a movie or played a game .

 

[richard12511]

In room I expect the 328s will likely go lower than 35 Hz. Elsewhere on this forum a 328 owner reported that he got output down to 23 Hz.

Just a general comment. Many ASR forum members may not realise how severe room size constraints can be for urban dwellers. Two big speakers plus subs in a typical city apartment may be difficult to manage.

To be clear, I was just quoting the anechoic -3dB figures for each speaker. In room extension will definitely depend on the room.

 

[Chromatischism]

Just as an audiophile looking around at high quality speaker options, the “dynamics” element is very interesting to me. Kind of like how you described some horn speakers having some “dynamic” ability even beyond the Salon2’s. I’ve heard this as well, from the e.g. JBL SRX835P, although it had other downsides of course. It does seem like this “dynamics” thing is something that nobody really knows how to measure yet (aside from maybe hypotheses about peak SPL levels, or sensitivity, etc.) But I suppose the only way to try to figure it out is to make lots of measurements that might be related, and then try to correlate those to what reliable ears are hearing

So what standmount speaker can I bring in here to test against my current set that has this "dynamic" capability, to see if it's an upgrade? I've thought about the Arendals and the JBL 708P since they can play loud, though on the latter I worry about the tweeter distortion and potential for hiss.

 

[echopraxia]

I think I still prefer stereo over most upmixers I've tried(Auro2D, All Dolby, All DTS, except Aur3D. My problem with most of them is that they put actual direct sounds in the surrounds, and the surrounds in general sound too loud to me. It's especially noticeable for me when moving about the room(as you mentioned). I hear way too much of what ever surround I'm closest to. Auro3D doesn't have that issue. With a strength of 6, I can put my ear a few cm away from the right surround, and the center image is still there, but pulled to the right by the front right(not the surround right). In fact, with your ear just a few inches away from the surround R/L, you can just barely hear them. To my ears, it mostly leaves the center image untouched, but stabilizes it against movement, and it adds soundstage width.

Before I had Auro3D, I did have some success with the Dolby music upmixer, but "center spread" had to be on, and I had to turn the surrounds down by 5dB or so. It did sound arguably better than stereo to my ears, but it was annoying having to go and turn center spread off and add 5dB to all the surrounds every time I watched a movie or played a game .

That makes sense… aside from maybe optimizing for a single “sweet spot”, only a lot of point sources combined can really start to approximate the fully diffused rear reflections you’d get from wide fronts or a real live performance in the front of a room reflecting off all the walls.

This experiment with multichannel upmixing from stereo versus wide beam stereo speakers is really interesting, and IMO does bring merit to the dispersion beam width argument. Because, if more and more medium beam surrounds does bring the soundstage closer to the way wide beam stereo speakers sound, I’m not sure what other hypothesis but beam width could possibly explain the soundstage differences heard and described here.

 

[Chromatischism]

I think I still prefer stereo over most upmixers I've tried(Auro2D, All Dolby, All DTS), except Auro3D. My problem with most of them is that they put actual direct sounds in the surrounds that were never mixed to be there, and the surrounds in general sound too loud to me. It's especially noticeable for me when moving about the room(as you mentioned). I hear way too much of what ever surround I'm closest to. Auro3D doesn't have that issue. With a strength of 6, I can put my ear a few cm away from the right surround, and the center image is still there, but pulled to the right by the front right(not the surround right). In fact, with your ear just a few inches away from the surround R/L, you can just barely hear them. To my ears, it mostly leaves the center image untouched, but stabilizes it against movement, and it adds soundstage width. I like that you can customize both the strength and the amount of delay(to simulate different room sizes). I usually do 6-8 on strength, with size depending on content. I like large(biggest delay) for symphonies, small for pop/rock, medium for live jazz/other classical.

Before I had Auro3D, I did have some success with the Dolby music upmixer, but "center spread" had to be on, and I had to turn the surrounds down by 5dB or so. It did sound arguably better than stereo to my ears, but it was annoying having to go and turn center spread off and add 5dB to all the surrounds every time I watched a movie or played a game .

In my testing of the 3 modes, I find it depends on content.

Dolby tended to do weird phasey things with the overhead speakers when listening to content with vocals. That kept distracting me. Without any vocals though the algorithm behaves differently and produces a decent experience. It adds a little effect for spaciousness.

The Neural:X upmixer is the most "direct" and is the loudest. It doesn't seem to add reverb so it has the most clarity, similar to stereo. It is the most aggressive with the overhead speakers. It however also does some weird stuff with vocals mixed into the overheads, so it sounds best with non-vocal content.

Auro3D mixes the sound into all channels with a little reverb, but in a more accurate way like you're in a big hall. Listening to an individual speaker is like the music is coming from down the hall. Neat. It does change the sound a little though so I find that like Dolby, it's a tradeoff of clarity and neutrality for spaciousness. I actually can't perceive the effect until I use a strength of 10 with the "small" size setting, which I preferred. I feel any larger gets me away from the clarity I like.

If you want the best of both, Neural:X probably has it. But it really is content dependent.

I think all of them add a bass boost which is really annoying for a sub bass perfectionist like me. I go to great lengths to dial that in and these upmixers upset the balance, which is one reason stereo sounds better from a quality perspective, in addition to the clarity of stereo without any added effects.

One thing I'll say with these Denon AVRs, if you are using Dynamic EQ, make sure you check your channel levels with Dolby's test tones in their Atmos clips. DEQ really throws the surround and rear height channel levels out of whack. Every time I do a new Audyssey run I find I have to reduce those speakers by up to 4-6 in the Levels menu. That is a huge amount to be boosted. Things are much more balanced after that, helping you achieve that bubble of sound. I physically turn off my subs for the tones but keep them enabled in the AVR. Measure the SPL and set these tones at the level you tend to listen at most often since they will shift with DEQ. Audyssey is such a love/hate relationship

 

[echopraxia]

So what standmount speaker can I bring in here to test against my current set that has this "dynamic" capability, to see if it's an upgrade? I've thought about the Arendals and the JBL 708P since they can play loud, though on the latter I worry about the tweeter distortion and potential for hiss.

Why does it have to be standmount?

I suppose the JBL SRX 835P are technically capable of being stand mounted, though they are bulkier than many towers

With the JBL SRX 835P, the overall sound quality was not as good as other hifi speakers (though still quite good), but there was something distinctly interesting about how it sounded at louder levels: you could keep turning it up louder and louder, and it would mostly just keep sounding better and better, without any of the usual painful loudness sensation you’re used to with most speakers when they’re played near the upper end of their abilities. You easier ger to the point where a SPL meter reads 120db and you are shocked your ears aren’t hurting, yet somehow they aren’t (in a way, it’s almost dangerous). It’s hard to describe other than that, but it’s definitely a real effect and has been described consistently by many.

 

[Alice of Old Vincennes]

Exotic materials in speakers is almost always just “for show”. They may have some advantages, but all that really matters is the measurable performance achieved in the end.

In terms of max SPL, it’s harder to say. Neumann shows measurements where the KH420 achieves 110db with 3% THD at 10khz. I don’t know if there is any similar measurement for the Revel tweeters.

3% with a tweeter? Must be what Cuba used on diplomats.

 

[Alice of Old Vincennes]

In my testing of the 3 modes, I find it depends on content.

Dolby tended to do weird phasey things with the overhead speakers when listening to content with vocals. That kept distracting me. Without any vocals though the algorithm behaves differently and produces a decent experience. It adds a little effect for spaciousness.

The Neural:X upmixer is the most "direct" and is the loudest. It doesn't seem to add reverb so it has the most clarity, similar to stereo. It is the most aggressive with the overhead speakers. It however also does some weird stuff with vocals mixed into the overheads, so it sounds best with non-vocal content.

Auro3D mixes the sound into all channels with a little reverb, but in a more accurate way like you're in a big hall. Listening to an individual speaker is like the music is coming from down the hall. Neat. It does change the sound a little though so I find that like Dolby, it's a tradeoff of clarity and neutrality for spaciousness. I actually can't perceive the effect until I use a strength of 10 with the "small" size setting, which I preferred. I feel any larger gets me away from the clarity I like.

If you want the best of both, Neural:X probably has it. But it really is content dependent.

I think all of them add a bass boost which is really annoying for a sub bass perfectionist like me. I go to great lengths to dial that in and these upmixers upset the balance, which is one reason stereo sounds better from a quality perspective, in addition to the clarity of stereo without any added effects.

One thing I'll say with these Denon AVRs, if you are using Dynamic EQ, make sure you check your channel levels with Dolby's test tones in their Atmos clips. DEQ really throws the surround and rear height channel levels out of whack. Every time I do a new Audyssey run I find I have to reduce those speakers by up to 4-6 in the Levels menu. That is a huge amount to be boosted. Things are much more balanced after that, helping you achieve that bubble of sound. I physically turn off my subs for the tones but keep them enabled in the AVR. Measure the SPL and set these tones at the level you tend to listen at most often since they will shift with DEQ. Audyssey is such a love/hate relationship

That is why I walked away from Audessey years ago.