Upmixing - where are we at? Have people compared upmixers?

[krabapple]

OK, those are speakers, they wouldn't be doing the upmixing. Upmixing stereo to 4.0 should simply be a matter of speaker configuration in the AVR that has an upmixer.

Most AVRs offer more than one upmixer. Typically a Dolby upmixer and a DTS upmixer. Some offer an Auro upmixer.

Dolby upmixers come in two flavors: DPLII (Dolby Pro Logic II) and DSU (Dolby Surround Upmixer). DPLII is older and is now only available on lower-end AVRs, though some would say DPLII is the better of the two. There is an unfortunate tradeoff in Denon/Marantz AVRs of upmixer vs 'room correction'. The AVRs with the best version of Audyssey room correction all have only DSU. (I'm not aware of any AVRs that offer both DSU and DPLIIx)

I haven't kept up with DTS upmixers, since I've never liked their results. But I'm sure there are several sub-varieties by now.

I have no experience with Auro.

 

[Magnus]

One version of DSU (2.0) has Front Wides support, but it has an unfortunate leakage of center channel into the surrounds so most companies haven't used that version.

Frankly, the best thing about PLII/PLIIx is that like Logic 7, it had parameters to adjust front/back mix (probably based on phase correlation) so you could adjust the strength of the surround effect without playing with any volume settings, etc. Otherwise, I think DSU without overheads engaged sounds very similar to PLIIx, at least with movies. I never was crazy about PLIIx with music when I used it for 10 years whereas I find it difficult to listen to plain stereo now after hearing Logic 7, which sounds so natural.

 

[Chr1]

Apologies, I am not particularly knowledgeable about this stuff. I am under the assumption it's the steering algorithm that gives each codec it's particular character, and the channel volume/level are kind of arbitrary, (ie to the programmer/designers taste. The source being only two channel anyway). Having played around with many, I only really found them satisfactory after some channel level tweaking. Just curious if there is anything intrinsically wrong with this adjusting of the various channels when using these upmixing codecs? I guess that I thought that most folks would do this.

 

[Sal1950]

Just curious if there is anything intrinsically wrong with this adjusting of the various channels when using these upmixing codecs?

IMHO, NO, why should there be? Your already messing with the original stereo source so "no harm, no foul" tweaking it to please you futher.

I guess that I thought that most folks would do this,

Personally I don't, I may quickly click between Dolby, Auro, and DTS to hear the one that works best for me but
that's about as far as I go tweaking. I'm just to dang lazy.

 

[Magnus]

Apologies, I am not particularly knowledgeable about this stuff. I am under the assumption it's the steering algorithm that gives each codec it's particular character, and the channel volume/level are kind of arbitrary, (ie to the programmer/designers taste. The source being only two channel anyway). Having played around with many, I only really found them satisfactory after some channel level tweaking. Just curious if there is anything intrinsically wrong with this adjusting of the various channels when using these upmixing codecs? I guess that I thought that most folks would do this.

Phantom imaging is a combination of the sound input, the sound arrival time from the two speakers it's imaging between and the relative levels (The so-called Precedence Effect says time delays (or rather which correlated sound in both speakers arrives first affects imaging more than level, but it's level changes done in panning that makes them "move" so if you turn up a speaker above reference, it's going to affect positioning too, just at a reduced amount compared to the time delay).

 

[Chr1]

Thanks for the replies. I find this curious as the reason I adjusted the levels was to smooth out the panning/swirling effect to the expanded matrix channels used in DTS: NEO X. (Hope I am getting the terminology right here.) I experimented extensively over time and have arrived at channel volume settings that I prefer over the stock ones. It now seems more balanced and the transition/movement between channels appears smoother to me. Thankfully I can switch back to the stock channel levels quite easily, so happy to go with what I have arrived at for now.

My next plan is to do something similar with an alternative codec for more traditional rock, classical etc. As I mentioned previously, my DTS: NEO X setup is primarily aimed at upmixing electronic music. I'd like something less enveloping, with more bias towards the front channels, possibly more suited to other genres of music. Will most likely go back through earlier posts here to peruse other folks' codec preferences.
(Saying that, one of the Bach Cello Suites actually sounded very good via DTS Neo X, when thrown up by my random, shuffled track selection a while back.)

Incidentally, I found a useful review which briefly covers some of the workings of DTS: NEO X here.

Unable to do ATMOS, so seems the best option for me so far.

 

[krabapple]

I've adjusted channel levels when using Audyssey's Dynamic EQ (not an upmixer), but generally not to tweak DSU or DPLIIx, which I've used constantly for music listening for well over a decade. It is good to occasionally run a set of Dolby test tones though.

I've never preferred the results of any of the DTS upmix options, for whatever reason.

 

[Magnus]

I've adjusted channel levels when using Audyssey's Dynamic EQ (not an upmixer), but generally not to tweak DSU or DPLIIx, which I've used constantly for music listening for well over a decade. It is good to occasionally run a set of circular test tones though.

I've never preferred the results of any of the DTS upmix options, for whatever reason.

PLIIx has options to change the decoding to favor front/back without altering levels for other modes. DSU has nothing (save center spread on some systems and it's just on/off whereas PLII/PLIIx had a control to set how much the mains versus center play (so you don't lose all separation, just enough to improve the sound mix on the center).

I find DSU rather disappointing in that regard. One of the best things about Logic 7 on my MC-1 and DC-1 units is they're very configurable to match your room and setup. But later versions on Harmon products ditched all that control so they either think we're too stupid to use it correctly or it costs a few pennies more to put in a control menu option to adjust it. Take your pick. I just know Logic 7 took some adjustments to make it sound truly awesome with two channel.

My home theater room layout and Carver AL-III music room layout are very different, but once tweaked, they both sound fantastic in Logic 7. I never thought I'd like 2-channel music in a surround mode with the Carver AL-III speakers as they are hard to match and Sonic Holography gives a huge soundstage already, but this is 360 degree sound and Sonic Holography works to expand the front still. It's pretty sweet.

 

[krabapple]

PLIIx has options to change the decoding to favor front/back without altering levels for other modes. DSU has nothing (save center spread on some systems and it's just on/off whereas PLII/PLIIx had a control to set how much the mains versus center play (so you don't lose all separation, just enough to improve the sound mix on the center).

I find DSU rather disappointing in that regard.

Yes, I do too. The lack of fully variable Center Width, the lack of Dimension, and the lack of Panorama options are all among the reasons DSU is inferior to DPLIIx. I was happy to find recently that DPLIIx is still available on some AVRs, albeit 'lower end' models.

 

[Magnus]

Yes, I do too. The lack of fully variable Center Width, the lack of Dimension, and the lack of Panorama options are all among the reasons DSU is inferior to DPLIIx. I was ahppy to find recently that DPLIIx is still available on some AVRs, albeit 'lower end' models.

I've been keeping an eye out for the Lexicon MC-8 V2 on eBay. It had full Logic 7 plus PLIIx on it (V1 only had PLII). It's short enough I think I could still fit it above my laserdisc player in my rack (running out of space) if I remove the laserdisc feet.

The only thing is I think I'd probably play with it to compare PLIIx to Logic 7 for a couple of weeks and then probably never use PLIIx again given I know I wasn't crazy about it for music when I had it in my 6.1 system for 11 years (whereas I totally dig Logic 7 for 2-channel). So I'm not in a big hurry. There's someone in England that has one who said he'd sell it to me from AVForum, but I'd probably need a voltage converter. I just don't think it's worth the hassle to confirm to myself Logic 7 is better.

 

[krabapple]

I've been keeping an eye out for the Lexicon MC-8 V2 on eBay. It had full Logic 7 plus PLIIx on it (V1 only had PLII). It's short enough I think I could still fit it above my laserdisc player in my rack (running out of space) if I remove the laserdisc feet.

But no HDMI, an instant deal killer for me. Also, any unit would be like, 20 years old?

 

[Magnus]

But no HDMI, an instant deal killer for me. Also, any unit would be like, 20 years old?

It doesn't really need HDMI. It plugs into the 5.1 or 7.1 input jacks (7.1 on my Marantz 7012 Atmos AVR) and uses its amps, etc. The 7012 handles the HDMI switching.

On my Carver system, it has tape loops, but I just used a regular 2-channel input and ran the surrounds from the Lexicon. It has an external HDMI switcher. It uses the optical outputs to plug into the Lexicon processor (it only uses DD/DTS anyway) and the TV gets the HDMI pass through.

If you really need HDMI (it'll be v1.1), the MC-12 had a digital version with HDMI. It seems to sell for more because it was $12k originally.

It still works great (the DC-1 is 26 years old). There's no power amps so it's unlikely there's any major electrolytic caps that would need changed. I certainly don't hear anything wrong with the sound).

 

[dlaloum]

I've been keeping an eye out for the Lexicon MC-8 V2 on eBay. It had full Logic 7 plus PLIIx on it (V1 only had PLII). It's short enough I think I could still fit it above my laserdisc player in my rack (running out of space) if I remove the laserdisc feet.

The only thing is I think I'd probably play with it to compare PLIIx to Logic 7 for a couple of weeks and then probably never use PLIIx again given I know I wasn't crazy about it for music when I had it in my 6.1 system for 11 years (whereas I totally dig Logic 7 for 2-channel). So I'm not in a big hurry. There's someone in England that has one who said he'd sell it to me from AVForum, but I'd probably need a voltage converter. I just don't think it's worth the hassle to confirm to myself Logic 7 is better.

I don't know about the MC8, but the DC1 and MC1 both hand multi-voltage power supplies, and as a result travelled well between USA and 240V Australia... It is worth checking.

 

[Magnus]

I don't know about the MC8, but the DC1 and MC1 both hand multi-voltage power supplies, and as a result travelled well between USA and 240V Australia... It is worth checking.

I've got US versions of those already. But I could see about the MC-8.

 

[krabapple]

It doesn't really need HDMI. It plugs into the 5.1 or 7.1 input jacks (7.1 on my Marantz 7012 Atmos AVR) and uses its amps, etc. The 7012 handles the HDMI switching.

My music listening is all HDMI out from laptop---> HDMI in to preamp (of an AVR), no coax/optical output options.
So I'd have to revert to RCA, I guess.
But my playlists mix stereo and multichannel sources, which would be another issue.

 

[Magnus]

My music listening is all HDMI out from laptop---> HDMI in to preamp (of an AVR), no coax/optical output options.
So I'd have to revert to RCA, I guess.
But my playlists mix stereo and multichannel sources, which would be another issue.

All you need is an HDMI breakout box. Something like this (has analog and optical output while passing through HDMI audio to a modern processor. I use one with my NVidia Shield. The 7012 Atmos AVR gets the HDMI while the Lexicon gets the optical output. The analog can be handy too since the Lexicon wants 44.1kHz for some DSP modes and unfortunately, a lot of modern box players don't do 44.1 anymore. They upmix to 48). It's on a Black Friday sale right now too.

Amazon.com

 

[Sam Ash]

It doesn't really need HDMI. It plugs into the 5.1 or 7.1 input jacks (7.1 on my Marantz 7012 Atmos AVR) and uses its amps, etc. The 7012 handles the HDMI switching.

On my Carver system, it has tape loops, but I just used a regular 2-channel input and ran the surrounds from the Lexicon. It has an external HDMI switcher. It uses the optical outputs to plug into the Lexicon processor (it only uses DD/DTS anyway) and the TV gets the HDMI pass through.

If you really need HDMI (it'll be v1.1), the MC-12 had a digital version with HDMI. It seems to sell for more because it was $12k originally.

It still works great (the DC-1 is 26 years old). There's no power amps so it's unlikely there's any major electrolytic caps that would need changed. I certainly don't hear anything wrong with the sound).

@Magnus - That is interesting, since I have 7.1 analogue inputs (RCA) on my preamp, I could use these to connect to the 7.1 analogue outputs on an MC-12. My source is the Wiim Ultra which would connect to the MC-12 with via toslink.

In such a configuration, would the volume have to be controlled from both the MC-12 and my preamp? I'd rather the volume be controlled using the remote of my preamp.

Also, I'm not sure if I can bypass the DAC in my preamp, I'm sure it's possible via a pass-through or pure direct mode.

 

[antcollinet]

@Magnus - That is interesting, since I have 7.1 analogue inputs (RCA) on my preamp, I could use these to connect to the 7.1 analogue outputs on an MC-12. My source is the Wiim Ultra which would connect to the MC-12 with via toslink.

In such a configuration, would the volume have to be controlled from both the MC-12 and my preamp? I'd rather the volume be controlled using the remote of my preamp.

Also, I'm not sure if I can bypass the DAC in my preamp, I'm sure it's possible via a pass-through or pure direct mode.

Pretty sure toslink can only do up to 5.1, and then only compressed.

 

[Sam Ash]

Pretty sure toslink can only do up to 5.1, and then only compressed.

Thanks for pointing that out @antcollinet. Actually, my Wiim Ultra music streamer will be connected directly to the MC-12 via toslink to feed it a stereo signal. The MC-12 will then process and convert the signal to L7. The processed signal will be fed to my preamp as it has 7.1 RCA inputs. I am under the assumption that volume will have to be controlled from both the MC-12 and my preamp.

What I could do is set the startup volume on the MC-12 to be high and set up the startup volume on my preamp to be low. That way I can then control the volume from my preamp.

 

[Andysu]

if ones can make fusion reactor , why is it dolby labs wasting my listening time with their junk atmos ? why is that ? no support for discrete below surround , yes ? huh ? why are they pretending its 3d audio when it ain't , atmos is snake oil , i hardly if not now ever use it , last had it playing many no months ago , its back to Dolby Stereo 04 40 42 43 or 10 , atmos no longer care for it