# DTS Neo:X



## Owen Bartley (Oct 18, 2006)

Just wondering if anyone has had a chance to check this out in person yet. 

Link to release from DTS site

It sounds like it is essentially DTS' answer to DPLIIz, and can take source material all the way from lowly stereo to 5.1, 6.1, or 7.1 and output up to 11.1 playback including front height and width channels according to your setup. 

Right now I tend to flip back and forth between DPLII and NEO:6 for stereo material like TV and downloaded content, sometimes one just seems to "get it" better than the other. I think it will be valuable to have as another option for content that doesn't have a discrete multichannel mix available, and it's nice to see DTS bring something current to the party. 

_Edit:_ I guess one major difference is that Neo:X also has the option for content providers to actually ENCODE specifically for this format. So you can either have it matrixing 11.1 from basically any other format (say a stereo TV signal) or it can decode what would presumably be discrete 11.1 material if anyone actually chooses to encode their source material that way. Interesting.

I think the Onkyo 1009 is the only receiver I've noticed to include it so far, but I wanted to see if anyone has heard it in person, and how it might compare to PLIIz. A full 11.1 setup would be pretty interesting to hear, although I'm sure the chances of actually making things sound WORSE increase along with the complexity of the setup.

Here's a helpful image:


----------



## mechman (Feb 8, 2007)

Giving it a bump OJ. There's got to be someone out there who's demo'd this.


----------



## Owen Bartley (Oct 18, 2006)

Thanks Mechman. I've done some more reading on the subject, and it seems I was a little misinformed (in at least one place!). As far as I can tell, any specifically encoded Neo:X content still won't actually be fully discrete, but will be derived from signals in the main channels.

I've also been looking more into receivers, and there really aren't many at all that are capable of running 11 channels at once. Most ask you to sacrifice the surround back for the height and/or width, even when using all of the pre-outs instead of the internal amps.


----------



## erwinbel (Mar 23, 2010)

Owen Bartley said:


> Thanks Mechman. I've done some more reading on the subject, and it seems I was a little misinformed (in at least one place!). As far as I can tell, any specifically encoded Neo:X content still won't actually be fully discrete, but will be derived from signals in the main channels.
> 
> I've also been looking more into receivers, and there really aren't many at all that are capable of running 11 channels at once. Most ask you to sacrifice the surround back for the height and/or width, even when using all of the pre-outs instead of the internal amps.


I believe the Denon 4810 & 4311 (soon 4312) are about the only things that works with 11 channels simultaneously (and even then you have to add 2 amp-channels). Worse: there's still no processor: the Onkyo 5508/5509 is still only 9 channels. Pioneer hasa few AVR's now that are 9-channel. 

My hope is that D&M uses the processor of the 4311, loses the amps et voila: I present the Marantz AV8005. an even fainter hope is that Emotiva jumps on the wagon...



BTW, moderator: the buttons above the message and the emoticons below don't work today?


----------



## PT800 (Feb 19, 2008)

erwinbel said:


> My hope is that D&M uses the processor of the 4311, loses the amps et voila: I present the Marantz AV8005. an even fainter hope is that Emotiva jumps on the wagon...


I would not bet the farm on Emo getting anything right, as far as processors go. They certainly have not so far, putting out a unit loaded with bugs, and knew they were doing so.


----------



## erwinbel (Mar 23, 2010)

PT800 said:


> I would not bet the farm on Emo getting anything right, as far as processors go. They certainly have not so far, putting out a unit loaded with bugs, and knew they were doing so.


Well, they're not the only one struggling with processors. Parasound aborted their Halo C3 and Rotel, after one delay after another, recently declared their (first shown in 2009) RSP-1580 4x4 HDMI matrix processor "on hold"... But I think Emotiva learned their lesson now. The XMC-1 (one up on the UMC-1) is still not for sale, maybe that's a good thing. 

Other companies keep quit, but I can't help noticing some of their existing devices are getting old. Marantz, now introducing xx06 generation AVR's, has not replaced the 2008 AV8003. That big Yamaha AVR (Z11 or what's it called) is also 3 years old. 

I think if Marantz would introduce a 11.2 channel AV8006, with Audyssey MultEQ XT32, more audiophile parts than the AV7005 and Apple friendly (which Onkyo is not), I would get that, if it sells round the 2,500. I just don't think Emotiva will ever do a 11.2 pre-pro with DTS Neo:X. Shame.


----------



## PT800 (Feb 19, 2008)

erwinbel said:


> Well, they're not the only one struggling with processors. Parasound aborted their Halo C3 and Rotel, after one delay after another, recently declared their (first shown in 2009) RSP-1580 4x4 HDMI matrix processor "on hold"... But I think Emotiva learned their lesson now. The XMC-1 (one up on the UMC-1) is still not for sale, maybe that's a good thing.


I've made note many times about Parasound dropping their pre/pro last year. And the reason Richard decided to do so was b/c that platform had too many bugs they could not eliminate. It was that same platform that Emo decided to continue with with the umc1, knowing there were problems that could not be fixed.

I respect a company like Parasound for doing the right thing. Emo, I would not spend one dime on any of their products, b/c they have already shown their true colors.

I don't much care about a pre/pro being long in the tooth, if a design was good when introduced, it still is. 
I could really care less about things like ARC these newer AVRs have, I would never use it. I don't even use hdmi right now. Although a few years ago I was using hdmi/dvi to connect a Vizio panel to a cable box, until the Vizio crapped out after 39 months.


----------



## Roger Dressler (Aug 1, 2009)

PT800 said:


> I've made note many times about Parasound dropping their pre/pro last year. And the reason Richard decided to do so was b/c that platform had too many bugs they could not eliminate. It was that same platform that Emo decided to continue with with the umc1, knowing there were problems that could not be fixed.


Different units. The Emo product is from China. The Parasound and Outlaw prepros were going to be from Korea, with Trinnov.


----------



## PT800 (Feb 19, 2008)

Roger Dressler said:


> Different units. The Emo product is from China. The Parasound and Outlaw prepros were going to be from Korea, with Trinnov.


That's not the way I heard it. But either way, Parasound did the right thing and scraped a bad product. Emo, did not.


----------



## Owen Bartley (Oct 18, 2006)

Erwin, the Denon 4311 was the one I had been looking at. It doesn't have Neo:X, but I assume the 4312 will. Since the 11 lists for just over $2k, I'll just hope that this capability will trickle down into the next generation of receivers priced a little lower. 

From what I've read elsewhere, Neo:X isn't anything revolutionary, but I still like the idea of being able to use ALL 11 channels if you're so inclined.


----------



## erwinbel (Mar 23, 2010)

Owen Bartley said:


> Erwin, the Denon 4311 was the one I had been looking at. It doesn't have Neo:X, but I assume the 4312 will. Since the 11 lists for just over $2k, I'll just hope that this capability will trickle down into the next generation of receivers priced a little lower.
> 
> From what I've read elsewhere, Neo:X isn't anything revolutionary, but I still like the idea of being able to use ALL 11 channels if you're so inclined.


I would settle for 9.2 without back surround if there's no other option. The Onkyo 5508/5509 does this, so this would be my choice today. But I'm not sure Onkyo is my kinda sound. And I believe Marantz is friendlier with Apple? Hoping for a AV8006 then, around 2,500 euro, based on the internals minus the amps of the 4312.


----------



## Owen Bartley (Oct 18, 2006)

Erwin, at least with 9.2 you would be able to experiment and see whether you preferred front height + front width, or front height + rear surrond, or front width + rear surround. This is probably the way I will end up going, and if possible I'll just wire all the channels and speakers, then have the ability select what I'm in the mood for at the time... I hope.


----------



## erwinbel (Mar 23, 2010)

*Re: Emotiva & Parasound Processors*



PT800 said:


> That's not the way I heard it. But either way, Parasound did the right thing and scraped a bad product. Emo, did not.


Rereading this thread, I hope you don't mind me tackling you here. The way I see it, as an owner of Emotiva XPA/XDA/ERC's, no UMC and a fan of Parasound, fanboy of both brands: 

Parasound encountered problems they couldn't solve or weren't certain they could solve, hence abbandoned the project. Kudo's to Parasound, but not only did they loose the investment in the C3 platform, but missed a bunch of amp sales also. Folks who buy the new processor would upgrade their amps in many cases. That's why Emotiva gives a "50%-off next gen processor voucher" with each processor!

Emotiva encountered problems but must have thought these were not more difficult than anything before and were solvable, hence went ahead with the project. And you have to realise that the Emotiva Lounge is also a factor to reccon with, meaning that if they aborted the UMC-1 after it being discussed to a great extend by the forum members would mean very bad news and would have been a stone in a frog pool, if you know this fraze. There was no perfect sollution here. We can differ from opinion wheter it would have been better in the long run to have abandoned the UMC-1 instead of producing it with flaws. In the end, I hope they learnt a lot from it, so good stuff comes out of the mistakes they made.


----------



## PT800 (Feb 19, 2008)

*Re: Emotiva & Parasound Processors*



erwinbel said:


> Rereading this thread, I hope you don't mind me tackling you here. The way I see it, as an owner of Emotiva XPA/XDA/ERC's, no UMC and a fan of Parasound, fanboy of both brands:
> 
> Parasound encountered problems they couldn't solve or weren't certain they could solve, hence abbandoned the project. Kudo's to Parasound, but not only did they loose the investment in the C3 platform, but missed a bunch of amp sales also. Folks who buy the new processor would upgrade their amps in many cases. That's why Emotiva gives a "50%-off next gen processor voucher" with each processor!
> 
> Emotiva encountered problems but must have thought these were not more difficult than anything before and were solvable, hence went ahead with the project. And you have to realise that the Emotiva Lounge is also a factor to reccon with, meaning that if they aborted the UMC-1 after it being discussed to a great extend by the forum members would mean very bad news and would have been a stone in a frog pool, if you know this fraze. There was no perfect sollution here. We can differ from opinion wheter it would have been better in the long run to have abandoned the UMC-1 instead of producing it with flaws. In the end, I hope they learnt a lot from it, so good stuff comes out of the mistakes they made.


I equate Emo's "we will put it out anyway" attitude as being similar to Ford putting out the Edsel in '58~'60. A total piece of . People might call the Edsel a "classic" now, but it certainly was not back then when they continually broke down and most parts were not available.

As to if Parasound is working on another pre/pro, Richard and company are not saying, this time around.
We will not know that until its available for sale.


----------



## erwinbel (Mar 23, 2010)

*Re: Emotiva & Parasound Processors*



PT800 said:


> As to if Parasound is working on another pre/pro, Richard and company are not saying, this time around.
> We will not know that until its available for sale.


That's wise. But I cannot imagine they're not working on one, even if it was another device they used for themselves (such as the Oppo BDP is used all over the business).


----------

