Meridian Unplugged - Powered by MrTechGuy.co.uk Forums Discussion HiFi & HT Chat ‘Budget’ AV System

In an ideal world I would have the means to buy extra DSP’s and a Trinnov Processor for a decent AV System. Given my realistic finances, I’ve contemplated a more ‘budget’ oriented approach for my modest (15’ x 11’) sized Lounge.

A speculative future purchase, this would be a 7.1.4 system, using a mix of old, existing and new equipment…

(I would keep my 218/210, fed into the 271)

Meridian M6,
Meridian DSW.2,
Meridian 271,
Meridian 258,
JBL Synthesis SDP-55 Processor (new, SDP-58 expected soon),
4 x Focal Sib Evo Atmos Rear and Front/Side Speakers,
Mission Elegante E8c Centre,
Meridian 555.

The JBL is an enhanced Arcam AV40: Direc Live room equalisation is included, is Roon Ready, with MQA - plus FM/DAB Tuner. Unlike Arcam, the JBL has Dante Digital Ouputs (AES67 compatible) directly connected to the Digital Inputs of the Meridian 271.

Until they get the firmware issues straightened out I would not suggest the JBL/Arcam processors.

What is the issue with the JBL?

Does the Lexicon MC-10 suffer with the same issues?

You don't mention the Anthem AVM70; I believe that is a near-clone of the Arcam too, like the JBL. I would imagine that it might thus be affected by the same firmware issues that Bruce mentions but I have no experience either way.

The units have been coming up with a DSP fail error. Sometimes straight out of the box. Attempts to update the firmware have failed and rendered the units to doorstop status. I have returned nearly every one of them for refunds. I have not had any issues previously with the MC10 but have not sold any for a couple of years. Anthems have been pretty good when you can get them.

Hi,

While I do appreciate your issues, I do have to wonder about the merits of spending £2k on a 271, just to maintain the operation of the M6 and DSW combination in an otherwise all analogue system.

I'd be rather tempted to use the M6/DSW with the 210/218 combo as a separate music system and go for a separate 7.1.4 AV receiver or processor for atmos movie watching. The £2k for the 271 could be spent on the L/R speaker set up (perhaps another 2 of the Focal speakers you mention _ actually it's a pity you have M6 speakers, with a pair of DSP52k or 5K, you could simply sit the Focal speakers on top).

Another option might be to just to spend £2k on a top of the range soundbar system and use that for atmos movies.

I've had similar speculations to yours and decided it's not worth the bother. Actually, last Christmas I purchased a JBL 9.1 soundbar and that's been quite fun for atmos movie audio and sits nicely in front of (and below) my DSP 5200SE.

Brian

I ask because one UK dealer has a job lot of brand-new MC-10 units for sale at £1,699 (reduced from £4,799).

I’ve recently stumbled on this unit too and clocked the good pricing. I’ve found little user info about the unit online.

As I toy with switching to full M vs active analogue/Pre Pro M, I’ve also struggled to reconcile the cost of the 271 in order to run Atmos options when having DSPs in the mix.

That’s why the introduction of a Meridian 265 AV Processor would be a very welcome addition to the 200 Series.

The price of those MC-10s is unbelievable. I wonder if one would make a solid upgrade from my Marantz 8802a...

In your case just run the analog left and right outputs of the MC10 into the 218 then onto the M6 SpeakerLink with the DSWs daisy chained off the M6. No 271 required if all the other speakers are to be analog.

Terrific; I had not considered such a configuration.

Even so, the ‘problem’ in that configuration is that the DSW.2 wouldn’t be correctly assigned to its own dedicated LFE channel for Movies.

While I appreciate that the DSW.2 can be designated as ‘Music’ or ‘Movies’ in the 218’s configuration, it’s not the same as having it’s own designated channel.

Such hybrid systems will always have a caveat. It is just where each one falls on the importance scale of each particular user. In this case, a dedicated sub channel for DSW requires a 271. That importance scale adds $3000.00 US to the equation

There speaks the voice of wisdom.

It’s just as well that I have a spare active Sub (B&W PV-1) to use in such a hybrid system, in lieu of my DSW.2 (which I would use for music playback alone).

Have others here successfully implemented a hybrid system utilising 218 and front DSP’s - plus analogue surround Receiver?

I don’t have any issue in buying a 271 if required, nor a 258. What I don’t have is the available space (the means) for multiple DSP’s dotted around my Lounge. Ceiling Beams mean that I cannot install Ceiling speakers.

Having trawled through 300+ pages on AVS Forums regarding JBL Synthesis SDP-55 owners, it would appear that the firmware has sufficiently evolved over 2 years (!) to ensure that the device is a viable alternative to Lyngdorf/Trinnov - just at the point where the successor SDP-58 is due to emerge. Even so, I can’t believe that such a device would be introduced into the market that isn’t fully functional at launch.

This made me laugh so hard I spit out my coffee. There are so many devices that do not perform fully straight out of the box that it would blow you away. There has to be some reason that those units are being offered at far below dealer cost over there.

I ordered and delivered ten SDP55 and two Arcam versions this year. All except one of them had to be returned along with countless hours spent on the phone with tech support attempting countless attempts at firmware updates. I simply was giving fair warning based on recent experience.

Anthem units will not allow you to use ARC until the firmware is updated. Many Crestron products do not work correctly until the latest firmware is installed. I could go on and on.

The AVS forums have enough out of box horror stories of other products to keep one busy for many days reading them.

Having worked in QA for video games, this is all to common, for many years - Buggy new releases with patches rolled out on day 1.

I guess it’s an indication of the general complexity of making surround processors nowadays. Time and money vs needed income post the development and marketing costs. Get the product out, get consumer feedback and release firmware updates to fix the most severe bugs.

Still it’s a very annoying.

I think another well known example is the Emotiva RMC1.

I have the very strong impression that Trinnov (and Lyngdorf) are the exception to the rule for the absence of such bug-ridden software.

For the most part, yes. Lyngdorf has had some issues with Roon integration and some HDMI glitches, Trinnov almost never.

Manufacturers beta testing dealers and consumers is nothing new. Ask any early Control 4 or Elan Home Systems integrator, back in those days more stuff was returned than stayed in a system.

Being a dealer for Trinnov, Lyngdorf, Storm, JBL, Arcam, NAD, Theta Digital, Datasat, Anthem, Audio Control, Lexicon, and others, I have seen my fair share of components that were not quite ready for prime time.

It seems I spoke too soon about Trinnov being problem free…

So if a customer calls into your shop Bruce and says he wants an AV processor, presumably your answer is "Trinnov"? But if the hapless customer says "My pockets aren't that deep", what would your advice be, NAD?

Anthem, NAD or Lexicon.

Interesting; thanks Bruce.

Atmos upfirers? Or even a Sennheiser Ambeo soundbar? Or would that be a compromise too far?

As previously indicated, the Focal Sib Evo Atmos have dual height and forward speakers. Two pairs of these (8 speakers) would be driven by an 8 channel Meridian 258.

In an ideal world, B&W would similarly redesign their existing M-1 Satellite Speakers.

I’ve calculated (with modest discounts) that by adding an extra pair of M6 (rears), 3200 (centre), G65, plus 722 - for a 5.1 system - is comparative in cost to a budget Atmos system, consisting of JBL SDP-55, 271, 258, 3200, plus Focal Sib Evo speakers.

What’s your preference - an all Meridian 5.1 DSP system, or a hybrid 7.1.4 Atmos AV system?

I must emphasise, as always, that sound is totally subjective. Having said that, I would go for the hybrid Atmos. For me, it provides sound (I am talking music here) that is just more lifelike. When I go to a live performance (and I often do - in London I am literally just round the corner from the Wigmore Hall) I am always struck, whatever the ensemble I am listening to, as to how much more free and airy it is than even the very best electronic system. Each instrument or voice (provided they are not amplified) makes its sound and those sound waves are immediately free to escape, so to speak, and go wherever they wish, independent of each other. Hence the airiness and ambient enhanced sound.

With reproduced sound, first it has to be captured by microphones which (however good) constrain the sound into a figurative 'pipe' (even multi-miking does this) before the waves have escaped very far. Then someone with a mixing desk fiddles with all sorts of parameters and eventually those sounds (in the vast majority of cases) are combined as just 2 (stereo) channels. Then we reproduce them through loudspeakers as faithfully as we can. Only then can the sound waves escape again (typically into a very small space - just a domestic room). Small wonder it is so unlifelike. I find that the extra speakers and speaker spacing of an Atmos layout, together with the jiggery pokery of things like Auro 3D or Neural X, add artificial but still effective degrees of sound freedom that the constraints of stereo alone do not do.

Many years ago (back in the 1950s) Gilbert Briggs, the founder of Wharfedale speakers, ran a series of concerts at the Royal Festival Hall where, behind curtains, he had musicians playing and also a stereo system cutting in and out with the same music. I was very young, but it was pretty hard to distinguish the two. However, the distance from the listener to the musicians or speakers was huge and so the reproduced sound could escape nearly as well as the live sounds. Atmos (or equivalents) are a piece of technical magic that, in my view, helps create an illusion of the size of venue that live performances are normally heard in. It is not for the HiFi purist, but I just like it because it takes me (I should say it takes my brain's interpretation of the sounds) nearer to the Holy Grail of being in a live venue. Bearing in mind the subjectivity of sound, it may not do what you want, of course.

I, too, would opt for the hybrid Atmos system, although I'm not entirely sure that the system you describe could be accurately described as 'budget', kicking off with a £5k processor as it does. It's all relative of course & even some Trinnov / 8kSE systems on here would no doubt be viewed as budget by various oligarchs.

I thoroughly enjoyed Longitude's thoughts about sound and how he feels live sound can be closely reproduced at home. Back when I ran Meridian processors I found that I preferred Ambisonics ahead of Trifield (which was the default multi-channel algorithm for many), precisely because of the extra space and air that it gave me.

I suspect that a lot of the purist 2-channel penchant may well be convention. The purist listens to better and better 2 channel hi-fi systems and becomes accustomed to the type of sound that they make. The thought of multi-channel is anathema to them, which is absolutely fine. As ever, there are no right or wrong answers with this, although it is probably possible to state objectively that a Trinnov is better than a Meridian 565.

It's 'budget' in that I would be paying £4,500 (discounted) for the processor compared to <£14,000 for the entry-level Trinnov Altitude 16 or Lyngdorf MP-60.

The JBL unit that interests me is the only one in its price bracket that has digital audio outputs like Trinnov/Lyngdorf. Indeed, I am not aware of anything else besides Trinnov/Lyngdorf that has digital audio outputs (for connecting to the digital audio inputs on a 271).

From what I can see, none of the processors on the market are risk-free. The one common problem amongst them all is audio 'popping' when changing source resolution.

I sometimes miss my Meridian G95 5.1 passive system for watching live concert performances on DVD - but I much prefer the vastly superior audio performance from Meridian DSPs.

I listen to music far more than I watch Movies or live concert performances, so I cannot justify spending such a significant amount on Trinnov/Lyngdorf.

Subsequently, a digital front end (M6 + 3200) - with 218/210 feeding a 271 - appears to be the sensible approach to spending on a 'music first' system in a modest-sized room.

Incidentally, during the 1970s, I owned a couple of CD-4, QS, SQ, UHJ quadraphonic systems (I still own a JVC CD-4 Demodulator and AKG Shibata Cartridge) - so I am more than familiar with Ambisonics (UHJ) recordings.

The Dante digital audio output of the SDP55 is not like the AES digital output of the Trinnov, Lyngdorf or Storm processors. Dante is a network protocol for transmitting up to 32 digital channels over a TCPIP network connection. Although they share a similar RJ45 connector, their intended use is completely different. You cannot simply connect the RJ45 output of the SDP55 to the RJ45 input of the 271. You could with the correct software, use Dante to AES3 converters to extract the audio with each converter having its own discrete IP address and ethernet cable. However, the associated devices required to make this happen such as a Dante audio over IP POE network switch and or POE injectors, a Dante to AES3 adapter for each channel pair, DB25 to 8 XLR cable, ethernet cables, power cords and or wall warts, etcetera make for a rack full of stuff. It will also require a good deal of network experience to pull it off. Imagine having to reset your network switch to get your rear speakers to work. The needed devices would also blow the budget up a couple of grand. The Dante output on the DSP55 is also limited to 48k.

My understanding was that Dante is compatible with AES67.

Are the 271’s digital inputs not AES67 too?

No. It is AES3. The 271 does not have any network streaming capabilities.

Page 6 of the 271 User Guide advises that a connection be made between the digital inputs of the 271 to the digital outputs of a ‘Digital AVR’ using RJ-45 connectors.

So, from your comments, the SDP-55 does not have such digital outputs (Dante)?

What are the ‘Digital AVR’ alternatives that Meridian have in mind?

Page 3 of the same manual for the 271 states: "Digital AES input on twin RJ45 connector (Datasat and Storm Audio pin configuration)"

Processors with digital outputs:

Trinnov Altitude 32 can output up to 16 Digital channels on DB25 in AES3 format. Even with the extra 4 channel upgrade or any other 8 channel upgrade it can only output 16 digital channels.

Lyngdorf MP60 up to 16 digital channels on DB25 in AES3 format.

Datasat 16 digital channels on two RJ45 connectors in AES3 format.

Storm Audio up to 32 digital channels on RJ45 in 8 channels per RJ45. To do 32 digital AES channels with Meridian DSP speakers you would need two 271's

Theta Digital Casablanca 4 and 5 12 channels AES 3 output over XLR. These channels are not subject to calibration levels so getting speaker levels correct requires great creativity and a sophisticated control system.

The Trinnov Altitude 16 is Analog output over DB25. The extra 4 channels made available by the last update are digital (two SPDIF RCA and two over Toslink) these channels are limited to 48k.

Sonifex (a British company) do this: AVN-DIO19 Dante to AES3 16 Channel I/O Converter but it will still eat into the budget a bit.

It's not so much the outputs but the protocols supported by the outputs. SpeakerLink is presented through an RJ45 output but could not be read with an RJ45 connection that is configured to accept a network protocol e.g. network switch. network card, router.

FWIW, while the JBL Synthesis SDP-55 is a re-incarnated Arcam AV40, it’s big brother, the SDP-75 is a re-badged Trinnov Altitude, created in partnership with Trinnov, with 16, 25 and 32 variants. Quite why anyone would pay a minimum of £25k for this compared to buying a Trinnov…

Part of the reason is when it is a JBL Synthesis system, all the Harmon speaker eq is already loaded. Other than that badging is the main difference. When it comes to pricing the JBL SDP75 is actually cheaper than the Trinnov Altitude 32 as the JBL includes the 3d codecs and on the Trinnov, it is a $2950.00 upcharge. The 3D mic is also a little cheaper from JBL. Of course, this is based off US retail pricing. There is no JBL version of the Trinnov Altitude 16.

I visited my local PP to pick up an item and to discuss Home Theatre matters…

His advice was that my beamed Ceiling would play havoc with the sound if utilising Atmos up-firing speakers or any Atmos Soundbar - and subsequently I would be wasting my money.

I also asked his advice on ‘budget’ processors in a hybrid system (he sells Lyngdorf and Trinnov). Without any prompting from me, he suggested Arcam/Lexicon/JBL Synthesis because they all use Dirac - which, in his opinion, offers the next best solution compared to Room Perfect and Optimiser. Although he also sells Anthem and Marantz/Denon, in his experience Dirac was the better room correction software.

Regarding Atmos speaker placement, it seems to me that downward-firing speakers - mounted high up on the walls - is the compromise solution (or I could move house ).

In due course, my local PP is likely to have a JBL Synthesis on demo.

I have no desire for an Atmos type installation but I was looking at some of those upwards-firing speakers as possible candidates for an easy, non-invasive solution for side or rear additions to add a little height effect to a Meridian 5.0 DSP system.

The power-handling and frequency response seem well below what big Meridian DSPs can deliver. Surely they would either be overwhelmed or at risk of damage when the system is in full action mode.

Has anyone any experience of using Atmos speakers in that combination and role?

Home Cinema Choice magazine last month (Dec 2021) tested the new Anthem AVM70 processor (15.2) & concluded that its new ARC Genesis room correction was "cutting edge". As it's new, that wouldn't contradict your PP. It seems to be something of a bargain too at £3,600 RRP in the UK.

It might be a bridge too far but would / could you consider installing a false ceiling in your beamed room? I think that beamed ceilings generally are fairly low so it might not be practicable.

Hi,

Depending on your access to the space above the ceiling another option might be to use Gallo Acoustic 'pendent' speakers for the height channels.

Brian

You might like to know that, had I been as thorough as you in researching the immersive processor market, I very likely would have gone for the Dante equipped JBL you found together with a Sonifex Dante to AES converter (and a 271, of course). It would have been an excellent keep-it-digital-as-long-as-possible system at a very attractive price.

Regarding ceiling speakers (or their floor based equivalent, and I am not a dealer selling speakers) I do not think you should worry over much about your beams. From my experience with a Trinnov and in-ceiling speakers I am strongly of the view that the sound from height speakers is there to add air, atmosphere and ambience. Precision is not just less important - breaking up the directionality of sound from those channels probably helps. And I say this despite being rather obsessed with phase coherence from the main channels.

Well done and keep it up. You have shown yourself to be a very thorough and thoughtful person in striving for good quality but with a keen eye for value for money.

And that was how I was hoping to use them.

But surely, in a true object-based installation, they are there to accurately position sounds in three-dimensional space - at least that is what I have gleaned from the marketing literature for such things.

Accurate 3D positioning is indeed the objective - for cinema. Sounds swerving about your head is what many people find exciting, especially when it emphasises the action in a film. I should have made it clear, and forgot to do so, that I was talking about music primarily. I do, of course, use my Trinnov for films and even then I am not convinced that 3D point precision is that important. One's mind is on the drama so point sound precision is just part of a visual and sonic canvas that paints an overall picture. What I enjoy most with good 3D sound is music because it takes me much closer to real life performance. The point precision is at the front but the all important ambience is all over the place.

Nick; I'm amazed to read that after having previously enjoyed reading your unrestrained praise of the Trinnov. Perhaps I don't need to aim so high after all & a JBL / Anthem might do the job.

Also, McIntosh processors never seem to get a mention. Are they re-badged too? The McIntosh MX123 seems to have all the bells and whistles for c £10k in the UK.

Make no mistake, the Trinnov is wonderful. What surprised me most after getting it has been not so much its amazing versatility but its sound quality. Bearing in mind it is, at bottom, just a powerful PC with stunning software, its in and out interfaces must be very special too. However, to get the digital out version it is very costly (£20,000+) and I am very pragmatic. Would I be able to tell the difference in sound between it and the JBL/Sonifex/271 combo? I don't know, but I certainly can't hear many things (cables of all types with various claims made for them or special network switches, for example) which some people apparently can discern, so I might well have been satisfied. I would have had to try the alternatives and I don't at all underrate the Trinnov's very clever software. It is, after all, how they started out with their studio work years ago and it is certainly part of what one is paying for (the majority since there is a clear limit on what PC hardware costs).

Bearing in mind also my fussiness when it comes to phase coherence it could be that the JBL/Sonifex/271 combo would just not work for me, but money talks! I can usually tame my aspirations in the interest of value for money because I get a great deal of satisfaction of getting something really good at a fraction of the cost of the very best. I just love repairing things people are throwing out and getting excellence at the cost only of my time - though, as I get older, the value of my remaining time is shooting up!

So you might potentially be happy with a JBL or similar but you presumably weren't happy with your previous Marantz. What didn't that do that you wanted it to do? You've obviously found the elusive X factor with the Trinnov and are open to the possibility that similar pleasures might be found at lower levels. What is difficult / impossible for anyone this side of a dealer is to try a range of processors at various price points and be able to strike their own cost-to-performance balance, so to a certain extent a purchase will always be a bit of a leap of faith.

Marcus, I ended up with the Trinnov by a roundabout route that, to begin with, was more to do with some purely personal choices than anything else. It was only when I got it (I had not heard one before and bought it on reputation) that I found out how good the sound quality is, and not just because of 3D sound.

Because I like gadgets and trendy stuff, when I had re-established my cinema using my 861v8/UHD722 etc I decided I would try immersive sound, but I only wanted to explore it on the cheap so to speak. So I bought a Marantz 7013, essentially as a processor with some power amplifiers built-in. I put in 4 passive ceiling speakers, drove those directly from the 7013 and got a 271 so the 7013 (as a processor) could drive my other 7 speakers and 2 subwoofers, all Meridian. This allowed me to have Atmos etc with relatively little outlay.

For cinema, I liked what I heard and, frankly, if cinema were the only objective I could have stuck with that. However, the 861v8 was noticeably better for music and so I wanted to retain that. Hence I built an automatic switcher (written about on HHGTM, with pictures) so I could very easily switch my Meridian SL speakers between the outputs on the 271 or the outputs on the 861v8. This was a necessity as, ridiculously, you can feed a huge range of processors into a 271 but not Meridian's own - unless you are prepared to have just analogue out on your 861, which I didn't have and didn't want.

I used this setup for almost a year and then (and this has much more to do with my personality than anything else) I asked myself why, at my age, I was still pursuing my lifelong values of saving money by ingenuity and hard work (the switcher was very tedious to wire up!) and ending up with something that is very good but not necessarily the best. I could easily afford to buy a Trinnov but my habit (from when I had no money) is always to get the best value for money and I really don't embrace extravagance (as I call it) at all easily.

Anyway, I got talking to the excellent Rick Weldon of Audio Images and found that he is not only outstandingly good technically but also a great salesman, so a deal was done which was, for me, an indulgence that was mainly driven by the convenience of one box (the Trinnov) rather than several (the 7013, the 861v8, the UHD722 and my beautiful (!) switcher).

I then got the Trinnov and was amazed how much better the sound was for both cinema and music. The Trinnov is for me identifiably better than the 861 even just on plain stereo, and it is certainly a great step forward in convenience so, almost by accident, I got much improved sound as well as a simplified system. I should stress that, once sound reproduction is good, I often don't hear things that others seem to be able to. MQA, yes (if the original recording was sound engineered well), room correction (physical or electronic), yes, but cables, no, nor special feet, stands, digital processing above about 44kHz etc. But, to my surprise and pleasure (and I explain it by phase coherence) the Trinnov, yes.

So there you have it. Stumbling along, as usual, and finding life seems to justify optimism.

Would you please remind us of the signal path here?

Is the Trinnov output feeding the DSPs digitally via the 271 or is there an analogue conversion stage?

Is MHR being removed and/or applied?

And by plain stereo do you mean without room correction?

TIA

4 good questions ????
Everyone's budget is different!

Gianni: your questions.

Is the Trinnov output feeding the DSPs digitally via the 271 or is there an analogue conversion stage? All digital.

Is MHR being removed and/or applied? I don't recall for sure how the 271 works but I believe it applies MHR on its SL outputs since Meridian speakers understand this and it will be Meridian's way of locking you to their speakers.

And by plain stereo do you mean without room correction? No. On the contrary, it is my belief that the Trinnov suits me so well because it goes to great lengths to adjust signals (phase) in the knowledge of loudspeaker positions to provide a phase coherence and a frequency profile that, despite the constraints of one's room, makes things more lifelike. If you want, it can also provide differing immersive adjustments (from a sort of super Trifield onwards), but I think it is better even with plain stereo if that is what you want (though why would you if you have gone to the trouble of getting a Trinnov since it offers so much more to bring musical real life into your domestic setting?).

This has turned out to be a great thread. So, Longitude's main driver for his Trinnov was for music. My only real interest in processors is for cinema where the processor will live in a dedicated black room (once the house refurb is complete). Do we think that processor quality might be less critical in such an environment? "Unlikely" is probably the answer.

I remember seeing a What Hi-Fi demo at the Bristol show many years ago where they compared a cheap sound system and expensive projector with an expensive sound system and cheap projector and coming out of it wanting to watch the rest of the movie . Obviously it's a very personal decision about what is 'good enough' but that was the time that I realised that chasing 'perfection' wasn't really necessary (or indeed possible on my budget). Having said that I now have an epson projector, trinnov and dsp8000s but in a less than ideal lounge/cinema and I'm very happy with the family friendly non dedicated cinema big screen.

Chris

Marcus, As I tried (but obviously failed) to explain above, my original primary aim in getting the Trinnov was to simplify my system (fewer boxes) and to indulge myself (unusual) by getting something that is widely acknowledged as the best. For cinema, I could have stayed with the Marantz 7013 and the 271 because I don't notice the last increments of sound quality when watching a film - there is too much else going on to worry my brain. I was reassured by Rick Weldon that I would also find the Trinnov better than the 861 for music because of its much more sophisticated room correction, but I was a bit sceptical. I was absolutely delighted (and not really surprised because Rick's advice is always good in my experience) when I heard just how much better the Trinnov is for music as well as cinema. Would a JBL/Sonifex combination have been as good? Possibly (to my ears), and I would have really liked saving the money, but I am happy where I am as it sounds great and I feel good about having the acknowledged best in class.

Hi,

I appreciate I'm going off topic slightly, but I'd just like to ask Nick and Chris about how they deploy their speakers.

Chris, you seem to have four DSP speakers in the ceiling and I just wondered if you had any side speakers either at floor level or high on the wall?
Nick, you have 4 DSP3300 speakers listed. Are they deployed as side speakers?

Brian

The DSP3300s are indeed for sides and rears and they are horizontally wall mounted just below the dropped perimeter edge of my cinema's ceiling (20cm drop extending about 60cm in all the way round). The 4 ceiling speakers are mounted in the full height ceiling, disposed as recommended for Atmos (almost - joists have forced some compromise but very little).

At floor level we just have the M6 rears with the 8ks at the front. The left side is all glass, right side is an internal wall. So all far from ideal.

Chris

Chris and Nick. Thanks for your replies.

I'm also interested in going down the Atmos route but I don't really have space for side speakers, so I was interested to see what your 'side' arrangements were.

Otherwise, I'll just continue to experiment with my JBL 9.1 soundbar (I don't have too much Atmos material anyway) until I decide on what to do in the longer term.

Brian

Nick; do I understand correctly that your side / rear DSPs are almost at ceiling height? My understanding was that they were best placed just above ear height. Unless I am mistaken (highly likely), did you place them there for more 'air'?

Marcus, It is indeed true that some loudspeaker manufacturers, especially those whose most expensive speakers are floor standers, recommend head height. In my experience, wall mounting is better for sides and rears. Have you noticed how in commercial cinemas the surround speakers are always above head height? I am somewhat heretical. Sides and rears are for atmosphere, preferably, but are also used by directors for adding excitement (bullets, missiles, helicopters etc). Either way, I think a bit of height helps (even if you have Atmos or the like). And out and out sound quality is not terribly important because one's mind is on a story and visuals. I used to have Mission dipoles (passives) with my Meridian speakers. If I was stupid enough to stop and listen to them they were good but not as good as my other speakers, obviously, but it didn't matter at all for watching and experiencing the sound of films. The misguided purist in me went for the DSP3300s, but, actually, I have found that, really, I wasted my money as I don't notice the difference in everyday usage. But have your sides and rears up a bit. In my opinion they work better up there for their purpose.

Incidentally, I can angle the DSP3300s down to point at the listener. I don't - the effects they are reproducing just don't sound as atmospheric. Temperamentally, I rarely follow instructions without testing things for myself and without taking the trouble to understand why something should be as instructed.

Interesting. Did you arrive at the near-ceiling-height position through trial & error or was it just a gut feeling?

As an aside, I like the look of my 3100s but I find the wall brackets rather agricultural but that would be less of an issue if they were up out of the way.

Thanks for the reply.

My early trials of surround sound were in the late 80s and the speakers were at head height (on stilts) as it was not a dedicated cinema room. I didn't like the side speakers firing into my ears though the rears were more tolerable. I played with the angle of the speakers, which helped, but in my first dedicated room I implemented what I had experienced in commercial cinemas where surround sound was much more diffuse because the speakers were both higher and much further away (even in small venues). I chose dipoles because they fired past you rather than at you and I mounted them about 3 feet above head height. I liked what I heard and have carried on from there.

Thanks Nick. By the sound of your experience, my 3100s might be better placed some way above standing head height. I have 2 pairs for surround duties but our new (dedicated) room will only be 4.5 x 4m so there is the potential for them being too 'direct' I suppose but hopefully the processor will be able to make a decent fist of it.

Has the OP reached any sort of conclusion?

He’s contemplating moving house.

Well, that's a pity (obviously, not really - I wish you very well in your endeavour) as I assume it will distract you from trying a JBL/Sonifex/271 combination. I was much looking forward to your assessment.

It's a small price to pay.

The opportunity currently doesn’t exist to audition the processor. February will herald the arrival of the replacement JBL Synthesis SDP-58.

Same box, new HDMI board. About $300.00 more than SDP55 at suggested pricing.

From the posts on this thread it appears that the JBL processor appeals the most of the non-elite ones. If I were to buy one I'd be tempted by the Anthem, mainly as it's supposed to be excellent, has great room correction & is relatively cheap. Am I missing something?

I think the main appeal to using the JBL is that it has a Dante output which could keep things in the digital domain. The added complexity of the extra devices to convert the signals to the correct format for input to a 271 could be an issue for some. Also the Dante output on the JBL is limited to 48k. The Anthem is a great alternative with good sound and features but adds a analog to digital conversion in the 271.

Great; thanks for the explanation Bruce. I don't think that an extra layer of complexity (extra ADC in the 271) would put me off. If I was looking for a 'budget' processor, I think that compromise would be one worth accepting, particularly as it's likely to be a high quality ADC in the 271.

By now I had wanted to audition a JBL Synthesis SDP-58. Sadly, my local dealership was unable to negotiate acceptable terms with JBL.

I’m in no hurry to find an acceptable processor at an acceptable price.

Has anyone here had experience of Rotel? Their RSP-1576MKII is a 7.1.4 capable processor with full Dirac. While it lacks the latest HDMI 2.1 connectivity I get the clear impression that it is a reliable device. I am hopeful that a future MKIII version will address the current version’s shortcomings. Maybe, Rotel might release a Diamond derivative of this processor. Rotel do not have a reputation for regularly/frequently updating their product line.

While the current Rotel is listed at the same price point as an Anthem AVM70, the Rotel can be found for similar money as a discounted Lexicon MC-10.

That Rotel is a very attractive beast, particularly in silver. I hadn't heard of the unit until now.

Until now, I had dismissed any notion of buying a Marantz processor because it utilised Audyssey Room Correction (that has critics due to its apparent limited functionality).

It’s now on my shortlist. Why? The Marantz AV8805A (unlike the AV8805) has an upgraded HDMI 2.1 board (you can upgrade the original AV8805). Unlike its predecessor - AV8802 - its chipset has been changed and significantly multiplied. Its Audyssey Room Correction has been updated to MultEQ X32 with more control on settings. Plus, there is expectation that Audyssey Pro is to become available for PC once more - that will offer comprehensive adjustment to settings (unlike on the current iOS/Android app).

Moreover, unlike its rivals at the same price point, it’s the only processor to offer Dolby Vision, HR10, HLG, Atmos, DTS-X, Auro, and IMAX. To achieve the same feature set requires increasing your budget to that of a Trinnov.

From what I have read, the Marantz has a reputation for rock-solid reliability. ‘It just works’, as they say.

As to being a ‘budget’ option, so-called ‘B Stock’ is available directly via the UK distributor at £1,500 below list price - with the same warranty as if buying from a retailer.

Currently, my updated shortlist is…

JBL Synthesis SDP-58,
Anthem AVM-70,
Marantz AV8805A.
Rotel RSP-1576 MKII (if/when it’s upgraded to HDMI 2.1).

FWIW, I’ve discovered a 1u rack alternative to the Soniflex, the Glensound Dark1616, for a similar price as the Soniflex.

What's stopping you making a decision & taking the plunge?

I think I have an unfounded bias against buying Marantz, where Audyssey appears to have a reputation for being a bit ‘Mickey Mouse’ compared to the alternatives (Dirac, ARC, Room Perfect, and Optimiser).

Even so, there are very positive reports about buying/implementing Audyssey MultEQ-X - with a $200 price tag from the Microsoft Store: for a single Processor that is non-transferable. Compared to the standard Audyssey, the MultEQ-X software provides a substantive ‘night and day’ improvement to any compatible Marantz Processor/AVR.

Then again, unlike the competition, Marantz kit seems to have a rock-solid reputation for just working out-of-the box without any of the drama of software glitches that plague other brands.

Plus, besides the recent HDMI 2.1 upgrades for Marantz, JBL, and Anthem, there have not been any completely new products since the start of the pandemic. I’m in no hurry. I’m prepared to sit it out and await any possible new products during Autumn/Winter - such as a Rotel Diamond Processor (with Dirac), for example.

I'll be very interested in hearing how successful the 2.1 upgrade actually is on these processors.

Given the big HDMI tech hurdles in the jump to 2.1, eg FRL, support for VRR etc etc, this is quite a big ask. HDFury have been doing this for years and VRRoom is still not there yet.

If you are just going to be plugging in a Bluray player, it wont really matter since none of these features are needed, but if you are going to be using XBox, AppleTV 4K etc, then expect some teething troubles.

Cheers
Greg

Therein is one of my concerns; where the manufacturer is ‘bolting on’ a HDMI 2.1 upgrade on a processor originally designed for 2.0.

That is, a processor that is primarily designed to function as a HDCP 2.2 device that is then somehow meant to function as a HDCP 2.3 processor.

Yes, I know, that’s the benefit of buying Trinnov, to overcome such difficulties, but while I can afford to buy a Trinnov I can’t justify its £15k purchase price - for only occasional use. I can, though, justify a processor in the <£5k price range (warts and all) in the current unfavourable economic climate.

Actually, it is a hardware upgrade for Trinnov as well to go to HDMI 2.1. The cost is 1000 to 1250 Euros depending upon which HDMI board is currently in the Trinnov. The HDMI handshaking and HDCP compatibility are handled on the HDMI board. Some boards have different power requirements, and this is where the bolt on upgrade can get complicated.

It's not just the £15k. The real benefit of the Trinnov over M processors is the immersive sound format support. BUT, I just wouldn't get away with putting a load of speakers in the ceiling, I'm barely allowed the 5.1 setup currently in the sitting room. So I'm stuck with 5.1!

In my dream world, I'd get Trinnov in a flash. But I don't.

So G65 (a lovely upgrade from my previous G61R), a HD621 (which I already had) and a VRRoom (circa £500) is quite a good combination.

I did look at the Marantz when my G61R fried its Switch mode PSU, but I decided to stick to Meridian processors and have no regrets.
Don't get me wrong, I'm not against the Marantz et al, but HDMI is a beast that gets worse with each iteration and I'm genuinely interested to see how well they handle the upgrade to 2.1

Cheers
Greg

My understanding is that additional Atmos loudspeakers don’t necessarily have to be full range, as they effectively operate and deliver the desired effect at higher frequency range.

Ideally, we would all be boring the requisite holes in our ceilings to accommodate downward/directional speakers - but the subsequent marriage counselling isn’t advisable.

I’ve been evaluating micro speakers that can be mounted high up on front/rear walls - such as the B&W M-1 or those from Gallo Acoustics. Or, one might consider Droplet speakers.

The emergence of the new Marantz AV10 is on the horizon. With Audyssey - but upgradable to Dirac Live.

Does the Marantz AV10 make the shortlist? I think early units are doing the rounds now.

Whatever I might want to buy I’m handicapped by local dealers’ unwillingness to both stock and support the processor in question.

Dirac Active Room Treatment launches at CES.

I see that true 'budget' AVRs are now coming with Dirac onboard.

Pioneer AVR

…but do you want to buy a Receiver or a Processor?

I wasn't suggesting that I might buy one, just to mention that Dirac is coming to more realistic (for more people) price points.

In response to Dirac ART, Lyngdorf is expected to reveal their major upgrade to RoomPerfect at ISE 2023.