PL11z may allow use of 11 channels but most avr/avps only allow using seven channels at a time even if 11 are connected. Since there are no 11 channel amps out there you would need 2 amps to support 11 channels for separates. Although the AVRs support 11 channels they certainly don't have the power of separates. Check closely for the actual ratings. Most rate the output with only 2 channels driven yet state it as if all channels had the same output power. For the most part although there are 11 speaker channels there are only 7 amp channels.

I agree completely. I would never want to drive my speakers with a reciever that was built to drive 9 speakers. I plan on buying seperate amplifiers that are built for anything I put to them once I have a reason to upgrade (excellent processor). The only point I was making with the Denons is it is possible to use them as only processors with seperate amps to drive all 11 speakers but I wouldn't call that ideal or "excellent".

Trinnov is room correction, like Audyssey, which equalizes the sound to give you a smoother/flatter response by minimizing the room's unwanted contributions to the overall sound. However, unlike Audyssey, Trinnov uses a multi-capsule mic in order to map your speakers' locations (distance, elevation, azimuth). This allows Trinnov to do things that Audyssey cannot. For example: Audyssey can correct for varying distances by applying approprate delays to each speaker; Trinnov goes one step further by correcting for varying heights and varying angles. PLIIz tops out at 9 channels max.

Hi Sdurani. I was aware it did some EQ work but from what I hear it is only the low frequencies. And low frequencies are supposed to be excellent with Audyssey. Audyssey also can cover the entire audio spectrum which may be necessary in untreated rooms. I've seen the Trinnov mic and have read about the process it uses to 3d remap the speakers. All I was saying is if your speakers are placed at the appropriate heights and angles then Trinnov is an unnecessary asset and/or expense. It can easily create more problems for your other listeners as the system can only remap for the one listening location. It changes the phase and signal in such a way that it negatively affects the rest of the listeners from what I read. Multiple locations can not be calculated for because of this which which makes sense. However there are reasons that Trinnov is necessary or beneficial I should say. I will recommend it to my parents as they are moving into a house with an array of floor standing speakers and ceiling speakers. I don't believe it will sound great to have your L/R speakers play at ear level while having your center channel above your tv and fireplace on the ceiling. This is the only situation I believe you really need to have the Trinnov system. There are a lot of people who can't have the recommended speaker placements due to their room. I'm not one of those people though as I'm in a rectangular room that allows for correct heights and angles of the speakers so I'll want my money to go towards features that benefit me more.
I'm also aware that the PLIIz is only the height channels but what Xenonman was talking about are the DSX channels. I knew what he meant so I didn't feel the need to correct him but you're right. I don't think PLIIz will really benefit anyone anyways unless Dolby comes out with video games that are programmed with that discrete channel which is likely to happen way sooner than movies. I hear DSX is the way to go regardless with heights because PLIIz is too tame with these channels not allowing much material to play with the heights in fear of playing content not meant to be played above you. Audyssey DSX is more willing to take the chance that unintentional material can be sent to the height speakers so that they can play more material giving the channels a much more significant purpose and effect. And from what I hear it succeeds quite well. Again we don't even know if DSX will be offered on any Outlaw processor but considering the 978 will run Audyssey XT32 and have PLIIz decoding according to the spec sheet I will assume it also has the DSX decoding which is why 11 channels is even up for debate.

As far as the 978 goes 9 or 11 channels won't be part of the processor. An outboard setup might be a work around but the processor won't use more than 7 channels.

It will have a minimum of 9 channels processing capabilities because it must decode the standard back surround speakers and the PLIIz heights. I will assume it also has the wides making it capable of processing 11 channels with DSX. That does not mean I'm saying it processes more than 7 of these 11 channels simultaneously. I agree. It's probably only outputing a mere 7 channels like the av7005 which I believe is a very big mistake. This isn't really a big leap in technology for any cost conscientious buyers that had the previous gen features. I thought they would at least aim higher than what Marantz will probably make for it's successor to the av7005. It feels like they set the bar lower than I'd expect from all the great things I hear about outlaw.

There has been no indication at any time that the Model 978 will process more than 7.1 channels (with the ability to time align and level match dual subs), nor that it will be DSX capable. I remain hopeful however that the shipping version will include 5.1 plus Audyssey wides or heights capability.

If you want to use PLIIz heights with the 978, you will have to forego using the surround back channels.

Edit: Sorry... I see that this issue has already been dealt with in the other thread. I must admit that I don't stop by here nearly as often as I used to.

Hi Logan. I think you might be confusing Trinnov room correction with one of its features (speaker re-mapping). Imagine someone told you that they don't plan on using wide or height speakers, so Audyssey is unnecessary for them. You'd have to explain that Audyssey is more than DSX. Likewise, Trinnov is more than speaker re-mapping. In fact, until someone does a head to head comparison, there's no reason to believe that Audyssey's room correction capability is superior to Trinnov's room correction capabilities. They're well regarded in professional mixing studios for their automated room-EQ. PLIIz is matrix surround processing. If video games come out with discrete height channels, then you won't need matrix processing to extract them. It's like a discrete 7.1 soundtrack: you don't need PLIIx processing to extract rear channels, because they're there in discrete form. That's not quite how they compare.

PLIIz extracts decorrelated (out of phase) info from the surround channels and sends them to the height speakers. Those sounds typically don't image at specific locations in the surround field anyway, sounding instead like they're all around/above you. If PLIIz sounds too subtle, you can always raise their level until you get the right effect.

Unlike PLIIz, which extracts info from the recording itself, DSX generates early reflections that weren't in the original recording and adds them to the overall sound. When the wides and/or heights are activated, the main L/R speakers are reduced by 3dB and all the surround speakers are also reduced by 3dB (the surround channels are also decorrelated, to slightly blur directionality). The net effect of all of this is that the wides and heights are much more noticable.

Having heard both, I can't say I prefer DSX. Besides, I'd rather hear ambience that is in the recording (PLIIz) than generated reflections (DSX). YMMV. I suppose they could do it with 7 speakers. After configuring the basic 5.1 set-up, the remaining 2 speakers can be used for heights, wides or rears (depending on personal preference).

You're correct about the Trinnov but I didn't say that it doesn't provide other features such as equalization. It is more predominant in the low frequency which Audyssey is terrific at and I was just saying I'd rather have Outlaw spend less time for the 998 creating more channels for the rest of the DSX channels rather than a lot more time integrating Trinnov into their system. Trinnov will happen, I'm just saying adding channels and the hardware necessary to read all DSX channels would hit our shelves a lot sooner than Trinnov or Trinnov would have been pursued till the end. Trinnov is a nice option to have but it's going to take longer from what I gather. And I do repect your point about not needing the DSX channels which is why you would want them to jump on that right away. I just need these 11 channels and I REALLY don't want a Denon.
PLIIZ is also capable of being discrete if Dolby created the content from what I've read. Only when it's not presented with discrete content is it then processing using matrix. And yes early reflections are a part of DSX like you say but what I stated about PLIIz is also true. It is a little more tame in my opinion from what I've heard at my stereo shop and the reviewers agree. I happen to like th early reflections also. We can have treated ceilings and walls and still hear the reflections we should hear.
I was not actually informed about the 3db change and how DSX decorrelates the rear speakers. That's very interesting.

I was responding to your previous comments: "Trinnov would be great for some consumers but a little unnecessary for those of us with proper speaker placement" and "if your speakers are placed at the appropriate heights and angles then Trinnov is an unnecessary asset and/or expense"; which make it quite clear that you didn't think Trinnov was anything more than speaker remapping, "unnecessary" if the speakers are placed properly.

As for it's room correction capabilities, see if you can get a listen to a properly set up Sherwood. It might change your mind about whether Audyssey is superior to Trinnov. The comparison makes it obvious which one equalizes the speakers to a more consistent timbre between the fronts and surrounds. I didn't say anything about not needing DSX, just said that my personal preference isn't for any processing that adds things to the soundtrack that were never there to begin with. PLIIz is matrix processing. Discrete channels aren't a result of processing. For example: a soundtrack with 4 surround channels is not a discrete version of PLIIx. Likewise, a soundtrack with 2 discrete height channels is not a discrete version of PLIIz.