I am really interested in the Outlaw 950, and the Cirrus Logic (along with everything else) feature seems pretty cool. Can someone tell me their thoughts on surround quality of the Cirrus Logic with 6.1 / 7.1 ?? Any info would be very helpful....

I'll tell you one thing: it ain't no Logic7!

Dan

No, it ain't no logic 7. For thousands less, it's pretty darn close. I've tried making this comparison on AVS, and get ganged up on by the Lex fanboys, but the main difference is that L7 has stereo surrounds, and Cirris uses a matrixed algorithm. So if you can't live without stereo surrounds, I would go for the Lex.
Lex MC12: $9000.00 MSRP
Lex MC8: $6000.00 MSRP
Outlaw 950: $899.00 MSRP

There actually is more to Logic 7 than just stereo rears, but it's the easiest difference to explain.

You could also throw in what a used MC-1 costs, about $1700 or so, but you'd be without 5.1 analog inputs too.

IMO, for the money and for what you get in return, the 950 is the best way to get to 7.1 with separates. There are tangible differences from 5.1.


[This message has been edited by Kevin C Brown (edited April 30, 2003).]

I continue to be surprised how effectively the Cirrus software places content in the rear speakers from 5.1 content. Not gimmicky, just very natural sounding, including some very pronounced directionality at appropriate times.

I almost always use it with 5.1 material in my 7.1 system.

To keep confusion from arising, let's get some nomenclature out of the way. "Cirrus Logic" is the name of the chip maker; "Cirrus Extra Surround" (CES) is the name of the processing.

One way to get a handle on CES processing is to understand how it works; the underlying concept is easy to grasp. Most processes that generate a surround-back channel work by grabbing info that is common to the left & right surround channels and sending that mono signal to the surround-back speaker(s). EX, ES and CES all work this way; the difference is that EX/ES decoding goes one step further by cancelling this mono signal from the left & right surround channels.

There are pros and cons to both approaches; rather than sticking with any one process, you'll be better off matching the decoding to the soundtrack. Since CES processing doesn't cancel the back-channel info from the side channels, sounds that are meant to be heard only from behind the listener will in fact be heard from the rear and sides. With EX/ES decoding, those sounds are only heard from behind.

While I haven't lived with a 950, I have listened to CES processing on a several occasions; most recently on a Fosgate FAP-T1 processor. For what it's worth, here are my suggestions:

On 5.1-channel movie soundtracks, I prefer EX/ES decoding. Sounds intended for the rear of the room should come from that direction, and not from sides also. If the surround channels are dual-mono or contain mostly mono content, then I'd use CES; the localization won't be great (tough with mono anyway), but at least the sounds will wrap around you and won't all be steered to the back wall.

On 5.1 music, I've almost always preferred CES decoding over EX/ES because CES seems to provide a more enveloping experience. Yes the rear content is duplicated in the sides, but personally I've never found it objectionable with music because that's a situation where surround ambience is more important to me than surround localization.

Hope this makes sense.

Best,
Sanjay

I want to upgrade (right now I have an old Fosgate Model 4 Processor (which I love!!) and a Parasound CSE 6.1 w/"circle surround" hooked up to get 6.1/7.1) My impression is that the CES is more sophisticated than Parasounds approach...especially if the new Fosgate FAP T1 uses it....which I would love to own!! But Outlaw seems like a much more reasonable choice when laying down the hard earned dollars.... So your impressions seem to imply that CES is a great choice for 6.1 /7.1 listening...with MUSIC and movies???? Lexicon obviously makes great products, Logic 7, etc....but man are they pricey!!! Thousands of dollars to invest...., can it be worth it for us average guys that can't spend thousands and thousands for equipment upgrades - usually we have to use regular rooms that aren't necessarily made for perfect sonic reproduction anyway.....Outlaw seems like a real winner unless you have 10's of thousands to spend on a complete,professional home theater!
What do ya think???????????

[This message has been edited by daddy_guy (edited April 30, 2003).]

To add to the confusion, my taste in surround playback is almost diametrically opposed to Sanjay's.

ES/EX are great when the DVD's are encoded to support it; but in my speaker layout I find them unsatisfactory in a way that Sanjay apparently prefers: that is, they collapse the surround to the back of the room. CES does not do that.

Also, a proper 5.1 system is supposed to have the surround speakers at the listener's sides, not at their rear, which would suggest that the intention is to create surround sounds to the sides of the listener. (Though the recommended use of di-poles actually creates a non-directional "cloud" of sound to the sides of the listener.)

What I like about CES decoding of 5.1 is that it creates a more credible SURROUND soundfield rather than a front/back soundfield. This is what Sanjay prefers in his music playback.

In short, the combination of all options in one 950 crosses the preference lines of even two highly-opinionated, sometimes eccentric audiophiles like Sanjay and myself.

And FWIW I do think that the 950 is an excellent choice in reconciling budget, features and performance for both movie and music, particularly the current Blue Dot units (I have an older Red Dot unit.)

[This message has been edited by boblinds (edited April 30, 2003).]

Actually, to extract a surround-back channel your Parasound unit uses classic Circle Surround decoding, which is quite a bit more sophisticated than CES. Keep in mind that there is nothing sophisticated going on with CES; it just sends common surround content to the rear speakers, and does nothing more. No, that's not my impression at all. With CES decoding on movies, you'll hear the same surround content from multiple directions. That's problematic, and I'd much prefer to use EX/ES decoding to generate a surround-back channel (even on movies that aren't EX/ES encoded). The ONLY time I would use CES with 5.1 movies is if the surround channels were mono or had mostly mono content. And while I do prefer the sound of CES more than EX/ES decoding with 5.1 music, it doesn't mean that "CES is a great choice" by any means. But you have to work with what is available on the 950, and that was what I was comparing. If you really want to hear "great" surround processing, especially for music, take a listen to Meridian or Lexicon gear. "Thousands and thousands"? The entry fee isn't that high. I've seen used Lexicon DC-1s (which have identical processing to the MC-1) sell for a little over $1000. Whether it's "worth it" to buy a Lexicon over the Outlaw will depend on your priorities. IMHO, the 950 is probably the best value in processors today; you get a helluva lot for your $899. However, when it comes just to surround processing, the 950 doesn't even come close to the capabilities of a DC-1. Still, the DC-1 was discontinued a few years ago and predates component video and 5.1 analog inputs; in comparison, the 950 is up-to-date with most current features.

You don't need a room designed for "perfect sonic reproduction" to hear differences in surround processing. Keep in mind that different surround processes will each send different content to the various speakers. This isn't a differences in sonics (sound quality) but rather a case of different sounds being steered to certain speakers, which can easily be heard in "regular rooms".

Best,
Sanjay

Hi Bob, Just to re-clarify my position, I don't prefer to "collapse the surround to the back of the room". In fact, if you re-read the passage from my post that you quoted, you'll notice that I advocate the use of CES to specifically keep the surrounds from collapsing to the rear (which happens with EX/ES decoding only when the surround channels are mono or contain mostly mono info). Besides, collapse to the rear is not the same wanting surround-back content (and only that content) to emanate appropriately from behind the listener and not from anywhere else. Though you are correct about proper 5.1 systems, keep in mind that the original poster asked about 6.1/7.1 systems, where some sounds will necessarily have to be localized behind the listener. The differences lie in how each processing technology handles rear vs side surround imaging.

BTW, while di-pole speakers themselves might create a "cloud" of sound, it doesn't mean that the overall effect will be "non-directional". Even on a system using di-pole surrounds, listeners will be able to tell surround content coming from their left side vs sounds coming from their right side. This is similar to my experiences in EX/ES equipped commercial movie theatres: while I couldn't locate individual speakers (especially in the dark), I could readily tell if a certain sounds was coming from my left or my right or behind me. A diffuse surround field may lack in clarity, but that doesn't have to mean non-directional.

Best,
Sanjay