One other item I forgot to mention:

Someone asked me to compare the MC-8 to the 950 in terms of locking onto a digital signal from my DISH network receiver. While this was very annoying with the 950 in this mode I find that the MC-8 locks on so much faster that it is a non-issue. It's not instantaneous, but it is so quick that I don't lose any dialogue when channel surfing.

I'm very satisfied with this aspect of the MC-8's performance. It was my biggest complaint with the 950.

Also, if you haven't in a while, check out my HT website. It's redesigned with a lot of new items.

------------------
RAF

My HT (latest update 07/27/03) Now includes Runco CL-710 DLP FP and Lexicon MC-8

[This message has been edited by Robert A Fowkes (edited July 29, 2003).]

Mi Casa Studios, by any chance? If so, I'd be even more curious if you could answer to my original question about whether you were listening to 5.1 or 2-channel material when you demo'd LOGIC7. I'd really appreciate an answer. With all due respect to your professional experience and ability to "pick up on differences", I don't understand how the soundstaging could have been varied by LOGIC7 processing. When L7 is applied to a 5.1 soundtrack, the front channels are left untouched: 3 channels, 3 speakers; what's there to process? The only processing that occurs is the extraction of surround-back content, the difference being that L7 creates stereo rears rather than the more common mono surround-back channel extraction. Is that ONE difference what you were able to "spot instantly" and was it so "distracting" compared to EX/ES decoding or even the 950's CES back channel extraction? What, in your experience, was LOGIC7 doing to hinder "integration with the mains"? I ask because you obviously have a personal dislike of LOGIC7 but have yet to give any reasons why.

Soundhound, because I've read your posts and know your experience in the industry, I'm reluctant to dismiss your comments. However, had I read those same comments from anyone else, I'd conclude that they came from someone who'd never heard LOGIC7. Seriously, if someone told you that they didn't like to use the 950's CES mode because the additional processing made the vocals harder to hear and made the bass too bloaty, wouldn't those comments leave you wondering if they'd actually heard CES processing?

Best,
Sanjay

Sanjay:

It was not Mi Casa, but one of the major film studios in Hollywood.

I really don't want to get into a debate on this subject - I simply prefer the sound of the film the way it was mixed. I can hear the artifacts of signal processing like Logic 7 (and I'm not singling out this process - it applies to all of them) and this creates a disconnect for me with the mains. Fake stereo is fake stereo, no matter who wrote the programming, and I simply don't care for it.

Personally, I have a live-end/dead-end type of room which creates all the diffusion in the surounds I could care for.



[This message has been edited by soundhound (edited July 29, 2003).]

I'm with SH on this one. I don't think Soundhound is comparing Logic 7 to any other matrixed soundfield as much as he's saying that none of them take the place of, or in any way enhance a discrete multichannel mix.

I especially, personally, do not get the idea of a matrixed surround version of a
stereo mix. The very idea is illogical (pun intended).

Once I've heard any discrete multichannel source on any given setup, then any matrixed soundfield is easily and instantly apparent.

Some like it, some do not. Playing re-mix engineer with a remote control makes little sense to me. DD-EX, Neo 6, DPLII, Logic 7, Bass Enhance, etc. Who's implementation is better is a non-issue to me...notwithstanding all argument to the contrary.

Not looking for a debate either, especially one having to do with personal preference (I can't tell you what to enjoy). However, if are going to make claims about a process that I am very familiar with, then I'm going to ask you to back up your claims with details. To that end, it's unfortunate that you chose not to answer a single one of the questions I asked you.

If you don't like post-processing (L7, THX, CES, etc) of a discrete multi-channel signal, then so be it. No argument here. However, the reasons you gave for your dislike of the process contain descriptions that no one familiar with LOGIC7 would recognize.

Best,
Sanjay

Sanjay:

Just what details do you want!? I said I hear steering artifacts, as in I hear steering artifacts. It makes the mains not integrate as well as without post procesing. What part of that don't you understand! Simply put, every post processing process I've heard (including Logic 7) sounds cheesy and artificial compared to what I hear (and prefer) on the actual film mixing stage, which of course is full discrete. My Logic 7 comparisons were "this is the uncompressed master unaltered" and "this is the uncompressed master with Logic 7 processing" I liked the unaltered presentation.

I'm happy you seem to like Logic 7. Have a good day.




[This message has been edited by soundhound (edited July 29, 2003).]

Are you sure that's what he was doing; i.e., comparing a 2-channel soundtrack via LOGIC7 decoding vs playing back a discrete multi-channel version of the same soundtrack? If so then that completely misses the point of matrix decoders. For example: Dolby didn't create PL II to "take the place of, or in any way enhance" DD 5.1 soundtracks; PL II is supposed to be used when you don't have a discrete multi-channel mix available.

Best,
Sanjay

Sorry...I believe 2 channel IS a 'discrete multichannel mix'.

I agree with SH. I immediately understood the point of his post. I should try to be more adept at expressing myself in print, but this time I really think it's not necessary.

'Cheesy' pretty much says it.

So you're going to evade the same question? I'll repeat my question to you in a way that will avoid the term "discrete multichannel": Are you sure that's what Soundhound was doing; i.e., comparing a 2-channel soundtrack via LOGIC7 decoding vs playing back a 5.1/6.1 channel version of the same soundtrack?

Best,
Sanjay

Sanjay,

Sorry about my error re the CP-3+ and LOGIC 7. Funny because I usually never make misteaks.

Regards.

Jeff Mackwood