Sanjay:

You made your point, my friend. Now let's go to our corners and enjoy the decoding algorithm of our choice.

Let's keep things non-combative in here. No sense in making this forum like every other forum.

Soundhound,

Sorry, didn't mean to make you resort to exclamation points.

As for details, I was curious what artifacts you were hearing. I'll use your example of the fully discrete 6.1 mixes you listen to on a film mixing stage. If you apply L7 to a 6.1 mix, the ONLY processing that occurs is the surround-back channel is gently moved between the two rear speaker. This "processing" is the equivalent of adjusting the volume balance between the two rear speakers (based on activity in the Left & Right surrounds). None of the other channels are touched. With that in mind, I guess what I 'don't understand' is how this could mess up front/surround integration or what matrix decoding artifacts (pumping? leakage? hesitation? etc) you hear from such a benign process.

Anyway, no need to respond to my questions if you don't want to; the answers are not worth getting you in a tizzy. However, I did want to respond to the questions in your last post. Heartbroken you don't seem to like it, but have a nice day nonetheless.

Best,
Sanjay

Edit: I guess you removed the term "6.1" from your post.

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

Fair enough Phil; I wasn't attempting to be combative, but I will end my participation in this thread.

Best,
Sanjay

Sanjay:

The processed activity in the rears is exactly what I hear and It sounds false, mechanical, and definately not what the mixing engineers had in mind. I know what the original elements sound like, and how they are mixed into the surrounds, and this is not what I hear with post processing. I don't know how else to explain it - it is a night and day comparison for me when I hear it, and every time I opt for the unaltered version. It messes up the integration with the fronts for me, and again, it's not something I can put a scientific scale to other than I don't like it.

I deleted the "6.1" because some films are mixed in 5.1 with the surrounds split left and right.

Personally, I think that Logic 7 is the pinaccle of DSP processing for movies. I like the DSP processing that Yamaha has (didn't like Sony's for example). I really liked the CES modes on the Outlaw. Logic 7? No competition.

As for music, I'm strictly a 2 ch guy, and the MC-8 does that very well too.

It's interesting in that I find myself finatical about not using any kind of processing for music, but for films I certainly finds that it can enhance the experience. Maybe because, 1) film soundtracks aren't "real" and are artifically recorded on a "Foley" stage, and, 2) DD/DTS are lossy compression schemes that have adequate at best fidelity in the 1st place. DSP IMO can help in both areas. You can't make a silk purse out of a sow's ear, but it can make the whole video/audio movie watching experience more engaging, IMHO.


Also, AFAIK, software upgrades from Lexicon are free. It's the hardware upgrades that cost money, just like most gear.


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

Soundhound,

I'm confused by the comparison you described as: "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."

How were you able to make such a comparison? Logic 7 (in its 5.1 variety) is designed to operate on a Dolby Digital or DTS source, both of which are compressed formats, and lossy ones at that. Are you saying that you played a source in one of these formats through Logic 7 and compared the result with an uncompressed master? In that case, you're also comparing the uncompressed master with a significantly compressed source before the Logic 7 processing was even applied to it. Since for 5.1 sources Logic 7 actually performs very little alteration (none to the front L-C-R), it’s more likely that the artifacts and degraded signal you report are due to the format compression.

But if you were somehow able to get an "uncompressed master" into the Lexicon for comparison purposes, would you please explain how you did that?

You also said something puzzling earlier: "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." The thing that confuses me is that the vast majority of the sound you hear in a film is not natural recording, it's heavily post-processed even on the master tape, using all kinds of professional tools to manipulate the perceived ambient space and steer content between channels. Engineers don't create each soundwave by hand, they use equipment--most of it by Lexicon, in fact--to manipulate the entire soundfield. So if such manipulation is "bad" when applied afterwards to the master tape, why is it any less bad when applied before it?

It's perfectly fine to have personal attachments to a way of doing something, and I can quite understand how given your professional involvement you would come to begrudge any processing after the recording had left the engineer's board. But when Logic 7 post-processing involves ambience extraction of information cues that were placed there by the engineer (using Lexicon Pro gear), it’s hard to see that as the violation you make it out to be. Your personal preference and respect for the sanctity of the recording engineer’s role is understandable. However, I question the lengths you go in defending it, by claiming there are problems with a surround processing mode that do not at all match the experience of anyone familiar with it--including respected members of your industry like Mi Casa’s Brant Biles, who has been using matrix-encoded Logic 7 to create the Dolby Surround mixes of some spectacular soundtracks. When played back through a Lexicon home pre/pro, Mi Casa’s L7-encoded tracks recreate the original 5.1 mix with often jaw-dropping fidelity (anyone with a Lexicon who catches a Dolby Surround broadcast of The Lord of the Rings is in for a happy surprise). Far from being “distracting” and “less desirable,” well-designed surround processing can honor and extend the sound engineer’s intent by extending it beyond the limitations of the delivery medium, as in extending the contents of one pair of surround channels into two, in a natural and believable way. For anyone who can get past the theoretical mindset of “well, it’s not what’s on the original master tape,” they may be surprised to find that it sounds better.

Cheers,
Philip Brandes

The Lexicon processor (professional) had inputs to accept an AES/EBU bitstream from a digital audio workstation for the demo I heard.

Sorry to disagree with you, but I just think that post processing sounds bad to me and spoils the engineer's intent in a film mix. Sometimes I am a music engineer on a film mix and I know what my intent was better than Lexicon or other silicon device. There are no "hidden cues" put into the music mix just waiting to be unlocked by Logic 7. Considering how much a film's mix is agonized over, don't you think that if something were missing that Logic 7 could "fix", that this would be done during the mix by less arbitrary means? And if Logic 7 processing is as you say, added during a film's mix, wouldn't using Logic 7 at home constitute double processing of the same material? The music's soundfield is definately not created artifically - I know this because I am at the orchestra recording sessions and know how it's recorded and mixed. Everything possible is done to make sure the music is not changed.

If you and Mi Casa like Logic 7, great. Just please don't try to trample my opinion because I question somebody's "sacred cow". To me, a properly set up system sounds better without modifications to the sound. For me, it's a question of why bother trying to get the best sound equipment possible, the best cables, the best amplifiers and speakers if i'm going to filter it through some process that changes it?



[This message has been edited by soundhound (edited July 30, 2003).]

Why would any bother with the Accuphase/Meridian/Linn/Classe/Madrigal/Theta models if the superiority of L7's decoding algorithm over all other choices can not be denied either by professionals or aficionados of AV? Don’t forget to cut some slack (and credit validity) all the way from the bottom into the top tier of expertise for preferences in audio implementation, user interface, DAC brands and post processing.
I have decided that it is past due to instruct all of you in the superiority of ‘CHICK FLICS” over all other possible genres of film.
I am highly qualified which should rate respect for the definitive and uncontestable validity of my arguments as regards ‘chic flics’. It’s one-half the family business throughout history; I come from a long line of ‘chicks’ my family is well represented by chics with a lifetime of professional and specialized chic industry behind them.
On the other side of the coin, a further basis for the irrefutable evidence my arguments are based upon. I have known many models of ‘chics’ over the years and have expertise in the current street value (new and used) as produced by the various manufactories. I have extensive opportunity to compare in controlled conditions in my own system all versions of software and hardware including most recent models of ‘chic’s launched.

Since I trump all expertise levels in this forum, both as a professional (in the industry) and through a massive amount of demo’s and models both in-home and at professionally installed demo locations (teas, charity functions, showers, weddings, funerals and La Bare).

I will now explain to you why my opinion as regards ‘chic’ flicks is superior (and Final) to all other categories, (Action-adventure, Sci-Fi, Horror). I will require you to bias rate my instruction due to the fact that I was in the neophyte sub-minority of females who had never acknowledged the superiority of ‘chic flicks’ in my past. However the sheer preponderance of professional and highly trained experts in this field have forced me to capitulate.

Who can refute massive numbers of professional females dragging dates to a 3rd viewing of “Titanic” and informing a spouse they are constructing a ‘hat’ for the “Ya Ya Sisterhood” themed monthly meeting of their Stock Portfolio Club.

Now while you all retrieve or purchase your latest studio-version, professional grade female equipped with box of Kleenex. for sealing leaky outputs, and high-end tonearm with diamond stylus, low pass home accessory filter and high-pass WAF AV filter - your homework assignment is to review a less demanding topic.

Amps on Top or Bottom, or, The care and feeding of Electrons.
here
RAF nice review! Good to hear from you and happy you got your Runco in the system finally...

I guess you can't diss Mom, Apple Pie, the U.S of A., and Logic 7 here. How sad!

SH,

Sure you can. Because Philip, Sanjay, and myself value Logic 7, we want to be able to tell if you don't like Logic 7 because you "just don't like it" or because there's something wrong with Logic 7 that we should get on the horn with Lexicon about.

You and I frequently disagree about things (such as tubes vs. solid state) but I respect you a lot, and I'm sure that both Philip and Sanjay respect you, too. I know them both personally, and I can tell you that they're not attacking you: just trying to dig for information.

Also, you have to understand that we at the SMR Forums often see people coming in and bashing Lexicon without ever having heard one of their products. It's almost a habit of course to start digging for clarification the moment we hear a disparging remark about Logic 7 because until we can get clarification, we never know if it's a valid complaint or not.

I don't think you're a "basher", but then, I know you better than Philip and Sanjay do.


Jeff