Do I need Pro Logic IIx?


I have a 5.1 system and am upgrading my Marantz SR7000 to separate components. I've already picked up an amplifier and am looking around for a second hand processor. Systems with Pro Logic IIx are newer and second hand units harder to find and more expensive than those with Pro Logic II. From what I've read, Pro Logic II supports five speakers and Pro Logic IIx supports seven speakers. As my speaker set-up is 5.1 and I'm not interested in 7.1, would I be losing anything if I pass on the Pro Logic IIx and go with Pro Logic II?
raduray

Showing 5 responses by cdwallace

Duane - Bore us...Please bore us. Being the system designer to the stars, please enlighten us DIYers.

Bruce only provided the very basics of surround setup, be it 5.1 or 7.1. He hasn't even touched the calibration of the system, which would further establish the fact that 7.1 can outperform 5.1.

Duane - Since you've complete many systems for famous people, can you walk us through your calibration process for these systems?
Duane...Duane Duane Duane...I'm waiting for you to get to the calibration process. Yes you are boring me...with pamphlet rhetoric. To be perfectly honest, you sound like a Rives Audio brochure. Nothing against Rives...great knowledgeable people. But you have completely and totally tap danced around the question. You've only mentioned the following (put in a nutshell):

1)"After calculating room nodes and finding out how many people will be in the room most often and correcting construction material issues, (mismatched density issues in walls and ceilings), I find out listening levels and habits." "I then match a speaker to the room based on the rooms ability to present frequency extremes and sustained pressure level taking into account the speakers dispersion and the performance limitations it will have in relation to placement."

You've visited one of the many web sites that will calculate possible room modes, nodes, spikes, and dips for you. Then you consult various audio magazines, website reviews and write-ups for products that will "best suite" your clients tastes and wallets.

2)"When I find a speaker that has the right balance of trade offs, I determine the speaker’s character and weaknesses and I choose electronics that will boost up the weaknesses while leaving the strengths alone making the overall performance well balanced."

More audio reviews to consult.

3)"B & W speakers need solid state amps that have a lot of decay in the bass but are clean, have tube like highs above 8 KHz. and have a fast and foreword midrange. (BAT, Symphonic Line, Electrocompenet, Classe, to name a few.) Bad matches would be Krell, Levinson, Bryston, and Conrad Johnson."

You approach surround like 2Ch. Name dropping and such. So, you only recommend the products that you sell. The others are just bad matches. Besides, who needs to know electronics, when all you need to know is the product you wanna sell.

4)"After that is chosen, if there are any characteristics that the client loves the most, (Bass power, 3 dimensionality, airy or sparkle), I fine tune that part with the pre-pro and cables."

Another 2Ch approach.

Before you get up in arms, I am not anti-2Ch. However, let me point out this is surround sound.

The rest is just too much to copy and paste so I won't bother. In so many words, you move speakers for the next 4 of the 5 hours until you "lock in" the "sweet spot."

MC 101 - MC done properly...every spot in the sound field is the sweet spot!

So...that being said... do you at least auto calibrate your pre-pro/receiver?

Ohh..almost forgot

5)"Forgot to say that I run the center channel .5 db down because most movies are too hot in the center and I adjust the xover on the subs in 2 Hz increments and are usually riding between 24 and 32 Hz."

Your center is still too "hot" and you sub xover is too low. Care to explain why?

and of course...

6)"I then integrate the sub or subs by movement, phase, rake, and toe in."

I thought low frequencies, especially those handled by the sub, were omni-directional? From a non-distinguishable standpoint, that is.

I'm being a little tougher on you, yes I know. That’s because you're the professional and this site is dedicated to those who search for the answers in areas to include the pros. Just wondering if you can help us out. ;)
Rad -

It may be an option to future proof. Although you may not be interested in PLIIx or other 7.1 variations, before long these formats will become more available on forms of media. Besides, you can also use the extra 2 channels for biamping until then.

IMO, If the prices are relatively the same between components you're looking at, then it wouldn't hurt to spend a few extra bucks for the extra channels.

The option is yours.
Bruce - you hit the nail on the head, but unfortunately Rad's not interested. Not sure if its space issues or what, but if he ever got a taste of 7.1 or 7.2 done rights, he'd never come back to 5.1. I agree with you whole heartedly.

Even though there is no media formated in 7.1, just the soundfield variations of 7.1 are remarkable. Whats even more remarkable is that so many "audiophile" discredit surround for Music and only limit it to movie. But thats another thread in itself.

Rad - what have you experienced in 7.1?
"Give me quality (even 2 channel w/sub) over 7 channels of mediocre quality, poorly setup and un-calibrated system performance, ANY TIME!!!"

I agree totally! EXCELLENT POINT!! BRAVO!

However, this statment looses it merit EXTREMELY fast when you have a good quality, correctly setup and calibrated 7 channel system. But thanks for your 2 cents anyway, Flrn. ;)