DSU vs. Neural X

   Jeg starter lige en tråd her, hvor vi kan debattere de to upscallers, så vi ikke spammer Streckers bio-tråd.

Det kunne være meget spændende, at høre om jeres oplevelser med de to formater. Jeg skal også nok fortælle lidt om mine erfaringer, når jeg selv har fået mulighed for at teste det.

Til at kickstarte tråden, har jeg sakset dette indlæg fra AVS forum:

 Nalleh på AVS Forum skrev:

First impressions DTS Neural:X upmixer compared to "the other two".

So i sat down yesterday to get to know the new upmixer from DTS. Setup as follows:

Denon AVR 7200W updated with Auro 3D and DTS:X, with 7.1.4 FH+TM.

Audyssey on, DEQ off.

So DSU and Neural:X had 7.1.4, Auromatic 7.1.2(9.1).

I also moved my seat to the center/sweetspot, as the normal arrangement is two recliners beside each other.

I listened to various music in 2.0 PCM, or stereo(CD's), and played the 
same clips over and over in sequence: stereo, DSU, Neural:X and last 
Auromatic.

Before i start, i want to say i am no expert, and this may be 
simplified, but i am just trying to explain what i hear, and the 
differences.

Stereo.

This is the benchmark i compare the others to. Listening in stereo, what
 comes to mind is dry. No ambiance, echoes or traces of processing, 
other than what is in the track. And as i would call it: Front-centric. 
Regular stereo is something everybody is familiar with, so no need to 
elaborate.

DSU.

This mode moves a lot of sounds and instrument out in the room, while keeping voices/dialog front and center. Guitars, piono, violins, etc are moved to all the surrounds. I would call DSU Surround-centric. It opens up the room and makes you the centerpiece.

Neural:X.

This behaves a lot like DSU, in that it moves sound out into the room. 
However there are two noticable diffeences. While DSU puts instrument in
 the surrounds, Neural:X puts them even further back, towards the 
surround back. In that regard i would call it Surround-back-centric.

Not only that, but it also bleed the vocals/voices/dialog to the rear! 
WHEN it works, i puts vocals almost in your head!, but otherwise it 
makes it kind of echo-ish. Very strange behaviour.

Sidenote. Earlier upmixer often had a seperate setting for music. The two above only have one setting only.

Auromatic.

No surprise, this sounds most like the original stereo sound field, and 
as such, are also Front-centric. However it manages to sound wider, 
bigger, more air, more relaxed.  Like stereo on stereoids! Easy 
noticable and very pleasant.

Sidenote: Auromatic was the only one who managed to keep Q-sounds 
effects! It  actually widened the sweet spot for them, as the effects 
actually came from the surrounds.

Both the others "destroyed" all Q-Sound and placed them smack in the fronts(LR).

I will not declare a winner here, first of all because i simply don't 
listen that much to music, and secondly because i sit off-axis normally,
 so that rules out stereo(and Auromatic). You deside.

Movies.

Ok, it order to compare all three, without TOO much work, i change setup a bit.

Audussey off.

Changed amp assign to 7.1.4 with FH+RH+VOG. Adjusted RH and VOG level 
and distance manually. And switched BD player from bitstream to PCM. 
This way i could compare all three with the same source, and same 
settings. And i listened to the same clips over and over in Multi ch 
5.1/7.1, DSU, AUROMATIC and Neural:X.

So DSU and Neural:X in 7.1.4, while Auromatic in 10.1.

I watched clips from Interstellar, Into the storm, Clovefield, Lone Survior, TAOE and Maze runner, and som more.

Multi ch 5.1/7.1.

It has been a long time since i watched a movie without upmixers, so 
this was actually fun! Even though i have ear level surrounds, there 
were SOME sense of "height". All sound tracks sounded great, but not 
quite what we are used to these days.

DSU.

5.1/7.1 tracks have more for the upmixers to work with than 2.0, and DSU
 opens it up and brings height into the picture. VERY noticable 
difference from just 5.1/7.1, and it really adds to the immersive soundfield.

Auromatic.

Well, i know i am getting flack for this, and i don't know how they do 
it, but often Auromatic sound better than DSU. It is quite remarkable 
that it is so much like DSU, but somehow manages to open it up even 
more, more distance, adds depth, sounds more real. After DSU, my jaw 
dropped a bit when Auromatic was up.

The drop scene in Lone survivor, wormhole scene in Interstellar,  it was like DSU turned up a notch.

Neural:X.

I saved this one for last 
 I expected this to be pretty much like DSU in that they work most 
similar. They have similarities, but boy did my jaw drop to the floor on
 this one! The intro scene in Into the storm, so much more pronounced 
thunder from above! Scary actually. Drop scene from Lone Survivor: the 
helicopters REALLY was above you. Subway scenes in Cloverfield: Neural:X
 was the ONLY one who placed the explosions from above.

Auromatic and Neural:X have in common that they sound natural and are more seamless in pannings from ear level to height.

Funny note: in the drop scene in Lone survivor, there is a short 5 
second part where all the helicopters fly low on the screen trough a walley.
 ALL THREE upmixers placed these sounds correct, in the ear level 
fronts, and NOT in the heights! Quite impressed by that, since the whole
 scene is helicopters.

Ok, in my humble opinion, on a scale from 1 to 10, i would rank them as follows:

Multi ch 5.1/7.1 = 5 points

DSU = 8.5 points

Auromatic = 9 points

Neural:X = 9.7 points

End note: this is neither a correct test or a blindtest, but the easiest
 way to compare all three. I was able to use the same source, and one 
shared setup, and all three had the same conditions. However, as this is
 a shared setup, it is probably not optimal for none of them. I feel a 
TF+TR Atmos setup, maybe the same for DTS:X 
and a proper surround height Auro 3D setup would be best. And also 
calibrate those setups properly. But that will take more time. I can do 
that, my setup can handle that, but DTS:X actually put a monkey wrench in my plans, regarding total setup. So i have to rethink an regroup to get the best compromise.

What i can say, is that such a shared setup works!!  I was VERY 
impressed with how good all formats sounded, espesially since DSU and 
Neural:X only had heights, not tops/ceiling. Neural:X DEFINITELY WORKS 
with heights only! And it was so much fun to switch instantly between 
all formats.

Hope this wasn't too much "Norwenglish", and just ask if any questions .


Skift forum	Forum-tilladelser Du kan ikke oprette nye emner i dette forum Du kan ikke besvare indlæg i dette forum Du kan ikke slette dine indlæg i dette forum Du kan ikke redigere dine indlæg i dette forum Du kan ikke oprette afstemninger i dette forum Du kan ikke stemme i dette forum


Besvar	Side 12 3 4 >