Prologic IIz

cheapskate

Hey Guys,

What do you think of this 9.1 setup, will it take off, will the movie houses go for it, sounds exciting (pun)
Maybe it would be worth putting off on purchasing a AV receiver, Onkyo are the first out with support for it with the soon to be launched TX-SR607

Any thoughts?

CS

OK-Cancel-Apply

Anything over 5.1 is pointless IMO. 5.1 will always be supported. 9.1 is the same level of use as having 5 channels in front of you, instead of just 2 - they won't convey any new information.

5.1 is more than enough to bring a 3D sound field to life. In fact 4.1 would do it - the only reason for the centre channel (as I'm sure you know) is that in theatres, people sit at the extreme left and right, and would therefore have unbalanced sound.

cheapskate

Ok Cancel Apply,

Cool name btw, but I would have to disagree, I think the ideal system however unrealistic/improbable/inconceivable would be to replicate the human senses - we have the ability to locate sounds all about us but predominately from the front as that is how our sensors (ears) are facing, so therefore the more channels of sound located around us would be altogether more realistic.

I think it (9.1) is a very clever idea, as noted by reviewers the sound of rain hitting the roof or a helicopter coming into land or for gamers.

But it's all down to personal opinion afterall.

CS

akaSol

Going to have to say : total over kill
I have heard every surround from 2.1 to 22.4
For me 7.1 works well enough to be enveloping, besides it only front presence which is like dual stereo and some what distracting.

>Sol

cheapskate

Sol,

I think your missing the point a little its not like two sets of stereo at all - most of the sound will still come from the 3 front (left, centre, right) speakers the left and right 'height' speakers will have very little involvement except when the movie producer (sound man) wants you to hear the extra detail they are afterall two seperate channels!

CS

akaSol

Sorry cheapskate.
I like my sound.
I like my picture.
Christ I even own a pair of X10's.
But their is no way am I going to think about mounting two Modus cubes or embedding a pair of speakers over my Iq7's Just to hear a door slam, key turn or another few "Smiths" say "Inevitable".
7.1 is a nice idea but 9.1. Not my cup of coffee, if I really wanted to "Feel" the sound then I would bite the bullet and suck up the DSP-Z11

>Sol

OK-Cancel-Apply

Dude, if you're using 5.1 and you're still not entertained, the movie is just crap!

Not even theatres use more than 5.1 - all those speakers on the walls just play the RL and RR channels! If you listen to 9.1 and 5.1 systems back to back, I swear you won't notice the kind of difference that your wallet will. There's nothing a 5.1 mix can't achieve by panning the sound back and forth, left, right and (psychoacoustically) up and down.

cheapskate

Again, maybe it's me but I think you're missing the point too!

My understanding of the new system is that the film will have to be recorded with these two extra channels in mind, I don't believe that you will be able to get the 'new' sound from old or existing movies that were recorded prior to the availability of prologic IIz (or maybe they can in a studio for a re-release)

If you think it's a waste of time then it is for you, if I like the idea of being able to hear the details, maybe as you say you won't be able to hear any difference but I don't think it is merely a rehash of the rear left and right channels!

CS

The Ritz

cheapskate,

My understanding of the new system is that the film will have to be recorded with these two extra channels in mind, I don't believe that you will be able to get the 'new' sound from old or existing movies that were recorded prior to the availability of prologic IIz

I think your understanding as described above is incorrect - have a look at this from Dolby themselves: http://www.dolby.com/consumer/technology/prologic-IIz.html

Note the part where it says

Enables greater flexibility in expanding a 5.1 playback system to 7.1, or a 7.1 system to 9.1

Processing 5.1 or 7.1 to add two additional front "effect" channels has been around for some time, particularly implemented by Yamaha, see this review from 1999.

I'm not a great fan of DSP processing, but if this approach appeals to you, that's your choice.


Ritz.

cheapskate

All,

I stand corrected! (I feel like I'm back up in the principal's office)

However, As Ritz directed me to the dolby site I found this

Because it processes only nondirectional sounds for the height channels, Dolby Pro Logic IIz maintains the integrity of the source mix and the effects are always appropriate to the material

Drop it Cheapskate! Yes sir, it won't happen again (fingers crossed)

CS

Idleater

There is one thing not yet discussed so I want to side with cheapskate on one point at least.

Mainly because the already existing 7.1 speaker configuration is not fixed in design.

The "standard" and "rear surround" 7.1 speaker layouts have rear L+R channels at different degrees offset from the listening location but as can be seen here there are other configurations containing Height options.

Having gone with 7.1 myself, but mounted the 4 rear channels using ceiling speakers, I am obvioulsy not doing justice to exact reproduction of low lying sounds (eg vehicles passing, or close bullets) but it does work nicely for high lying sounds (eg aeroplanes or spaceships).

Not sure if I'd go for 9.1, and I have not yet got a full 7.1 soundtrack (6.1 is all I have managed thus far) so I am not sure if I'd be upgrading to many more speakers.

A second centre channel might be an option I'd consider but other than that there is not enough space to differentiate.

The Ritz

@nereid,

That's an interesting link, but I noted that the options set out for various 7.1 locations include the heading "For Use only with DTS-HD only".


I'm not suggesting that there aren't lots of options or compromises to be made in speaker location, another example is the THX standard, see this for example: http://www.thx.com/home/setup/speakers/71.html and the associated link for HD. Dolby themselves adopt a slightly different aproach IIRC.

My room is quite narrow so I'm limited in terms of options of rear placement of speakers so the issue is more of academic interest than practical implementation. I have the 4 rears about a metre above ear height wall mounted.


Ritz.

Idleater

The Ritz wrote: »

That's an interesting link, but I noted that the options set out for various 7.1 locations include the heading "For Use only with DTS-HD only".

Yeah, I know that is DTS only, but the problem with saying "7.1" or "9.1" is that no governing body determines what the actual lay out is.

Studios that master discs have 8 discrete channels to mess about with as they wish, and if abbey road want to push all the sound out of the LSurround positioned directly above and to the left of the ideal* listening location then so be it.

Dolby, DTS, THX, are all big companies that implement technologies in similar ways, with each adding features that use the available bandwidth to entice customers (hollywood producers) to use their technologies instead of the other.

I'm not saying it is right, or that I agree with it, but it is like UPC adding internet to the cable television service or Eircom adding DSL frequencies to the phone network. Nobody says the internet has to be delivered *this* way.

At the end of the day, it will only be cinema's and people with dedicated rooms that can benefit from these extra channels anyway.

OK-Cancel-Apply

Well, it's sort of irrelevant to my point - what I'm saying is that whether a film is encoded with 9.1 or 9.1 is just an upmixed or matrixed 5.1, it still won't sound much different. I think 5.1 is enough to create the illusion of sound coming from anywhere. In a film environment, I don't think one's brain will clock the different between, say, a sound coming from a discrete channel directly to the left of the head, and the same sound coming from the FL+RL channels.