Do I need Pro Logic IIx?

Bruce - you hit the nail on the head, but unfortunately Rad's not interested. Not sure if its space issues or what, but if he ever got a taste of 7.1 or 7.2 done rights, he'd never come back to 5.1. I agree with you whole heartedly.

Even though there is no media formated in 7.1, just the soundfield variations of 7.1 are remarkable. Whats even more remarkable is that so many "audiophile" discredit surround for Music and only limit it to movie. But thats another thread in itself.

Rad - what have you experienced in 7.1?

Hello again,

I have to disagree with Cdwallace and Bruce because the only time 7.1 is clearly better are for other reasons.

1. 7.1 can only better 5.1 as long as quality is not cut to pay for 7.1.

2. 7.1 only images better if the speakers chosen for 5.1 were not wide dispersion.

3. 7.1 is better when you have 2 rows of seating to cover.

4. 5.1 in most rooms need to be dipole and a model that doesn't run the woofers out of phase.

5. With dipoles, DON'T sit in the null of the speaker. You should have the speakers slightly behind you. (Lucas is deaf)

I know everyone has an opinion but my qualifications as an audio engineer and a high end system designer for several famous people makes me more opinionated. LOL

Thanks,
Duane

I realize we each have our own preferences and priorities. I've also noticed Audiogon is very 2 channel focused, while sites like AVS Forum have more interest in multichannel listening, independent of whether that is a movie or music.

For those interested, below is a posting from sdurani at www.avsforum.com, which I think provides a very good explanation of 7.1 versus 5.1. This also correlates very closely with my own listening experiences of 5.1 compared to 7.1:

"7.1 set-ups have a few noticeable advantages in the surround field over 5.1 layouts: more precise directionality (4 hard points vs only 2), better envelopment (4 speakers can literally 'surround' you better than 2 speakers ever could), and greater imaging stability (no matter where you sit, sounds at your sides and sounds from behind you stay locked at those locations because there are speakers there).

It is difficult, if not impossible, to get all that from only 2 surround speakers. Doesn't matter how good they are, one pair of surrounds can't be in two places at once (at your sides and behind you simultaneously). The best and easiest way to get stable rear-vs-side imaging in the surround field is to simply place a pair of surrounds at your sides and another pair spread out behind you. Of course, this assumes you can tell when sounds are coming from your sides vs coming from behind you. If you can't, then stick to a 5.1 set-up.

To deal with a couple of myths in this thread:

Room size or space is not a determining factor for 7.1 layouts. What's more important is seating location. If you're in a large room but your seating is against the back wall, then you're a poor candidate for a 7.1 set-up (no room behind you for the rear speakers). But if you're in a small room and your couch is away from the back wall, then you could probably do a nice 7.1 set-up (where surround-back information really sounds like it's coming from behind you).

Consumer level 7.1 surround processors have been around for almost 20 years, pre-dating 5.1 soundtracks by a solid 8 years. People using those processors haven't been waiting 2 decades for material that takes advantage of the extra speakers. They've been using all 7 speakers since day one. ANY source, no matter how many channels, can take advantage of a 7.1-speaker layout. Surround information contains sounds that will image at your left side, at your right side, and behind you. By sending these specific sounds to their respective speakers (which is what PLIIx does) you get imaging stability, wrap-around envelopment and surround directionality that a 5.1 set-up cannot deliver.

Since you already have a 5.1 set-up, I would move the RS-3 surrounds directly to the sides of the primary listening spot. This will give you stable lateral imaging, which is also important when listening to music in surround. For the rear speakers, I would get a pair of RB-3 bookshelf speakers (which match the sound of your other speakers) and spread them out at least 60 degrees apart on the back wall. The separation will provide you better envelopment and allow you to hear the rears in stereo (sound over your left shoulder vs sound over your right shoulder).

Use the attached 7.1 placement diagram as a starting point for your layout."

Note- the attachment referenced above was the Dolby recommendation for 7.1 speaker placement from their web site.

Thanks
Bruce

Thanks for all the responses. Great discussion. What do you all think about a Rotel 1068 for future 7.1 upgradeability. I do like to listen to multi-speaker music and ProLogic II is a strong preference. I would like to keep it to less than $1500 - second hand is OK.

Radu

Hello Again,

We will agree to disagree, plus I don't feel like typing 30 pages and boring everyone including myself.

I am chiming in again to say that the Rotel is pretty good, the 1068 sounds as good if not better than the 1098. I still think Arcam is a little better and Classe allot better. It is not price related either because the Classe is much better than Lexicon, Theta, Krell, and Levinson which are many times the price.

Thanks,
Duane