Yamaha RX-Z9 vs Pioneer Elite VSX-59txi
|
The Promoter | Flagship vs flagship, Our King vs Your King, my top assasin vs your top assasin, heavyweight vs heavyweight-----Gentlemen/Ladies theses are the rules : no personal attacks, only the facts, no rough stuff, no lying...Let's get it on!!! Of course, we'll only have to go on the literature that is out now since both may not have made it to the consumer yet, I don't believe the 59txi is out, but I think the Z-9 has been released. It should be fun until they're both out a while and then it will get down right brutal. AAAAAHHHH nothing like the smell of hot electronics in the morning! |
|
Philip Glassfan | I posted the same question before I noticed your post- we're on the same page! |
|
Tim Bell | Finally Yamaha has come out and made a receiver worthy of being called a flagship. I've waited a long time to be able to upgrade my RX-V2095. Before Yamaha released the RX-Z9, the Pioneer Elite VSX-49TXi was at the top of my list, along with the Denon AVR-5803. The Pioneer Elite VSX-49TXi has everything I want from a receiver but lacked certain adjustments in its surround modes, therefore I was leaning towards the Denon. For example, in the Prologic II Music Mode, you could not adjust the Center Width, Panorama, or Dimension features because they were not included. Also missing was the Center Image adjust from the DTS:Neo6 music mode. Even if I didn't use them I would at least like the option to experiment with these surround modes just to see if I heard a difference. I haven't seen the feature list for the new VSX-59TXi and I wonder if Pioneer will offer it's customers the ability to adjust its surround modes like Yamaha and Denon. Yamaha prior to the RX-Z9 was missing so much in it's flagship receivers that they were lagging behind Denon and Pioneer as far as features and options went. With the release of the RX-Z9 Yamaha has just made up for years of lag and has taken the lead in the receiver game, in my opinion. It's very hard to beat the sound of a Yamaha. I've listened to Pioneer and Denon and knew I would miss the sound of my Yamaha if I purchased either of these receivers. My decision goes to Yamaha. With its newly incorporated features, YPAO, THX, Faroudja processing, built in progressive scanning, and 170 Watts the RX-Z9 with be on the rack by Christmas. |
|
G-Man | If the Yamaha is capable of using the Faroudja DCDi and progressive scanning on television broadcasts I can see an advantage. If it only works on dvd's it strikes me as a waste. Anyone paying that much for a receiver will surely be spending the $25 extra dollars on progressive scanning in a dvd player--plus a lot of dvd players have Faroudja--a number of HDTV's have Faroudja too--particularly ones that don't have more expensive upconverting chips/circuitry. Heck, the highest rated rear projection sets from Toshiba LCOS to Hitachi, Sony, and others have their own circuitry that in combination with whatever else they have seem to outperform most Farodja equipped sets. To me the Faroudja selling point would be if the receiver could use it on standard tv broadcasts. But not a biggie for me one way or the other. A more intelligent addition (at least I see Yamaha finally copied Pioneer Elite in adding firewire) might have been the addition of an HDMI input/output--supposed to be in the 59TXI and the soon to be released 59AVi dvd player. That is a huge difference. It will be interesting to see how the advanced MCCAC acoustic balancing system of the 59TXi compares with the one Yamaha puts on its model. I am likely to wait unti I see some reviews on the Yamaha, the 59TXi, and the 59AVi dvd player. I would likely only buy an HDTV with at least DVI-D, but preferably HDMI which carries both the digital video on one cable and up to 8 channels of digital audio on the same cable. Huge advantage in quality and saving money on 9 different cables. From what I have read on the PE 59AVi it has HDMI, i-link (firewire), plus T-REX chip which upconverts traditional dvd discs to HDTV quality.That is a biggie, because everyone would use and benefit by it. The main Yamaha aspect--I hope they add Prologic IIX which the 59TXi has, is 9 amps for bigger soundfield speaker surround. To me it is unimportant as I only use 5.1 and I have a 7.1 receiver. For 9.1 you better have a very big room with a lot of space behind your listening position. Also, none of it is discrete---it is a matrix--not that there is anything wrong with that. If you need that large a soundfield behind where you sit---go for it. I don;t even use 1/4 of the DSP's I have now. I can't imagine what I'd do with over 50 different sound delays and alterrations. Just not that important to me. But if I hear great reviews from Sound and Vision and the few other straight forward magazines I will give it a listen. But I can't see me wanting 9 speakers in the near or distant future. |
|
Tim Bell | Good Points G-Man. From what I have read it seems as though the Yamaha will be able to provide progressive scanning on standard TV broadcast, which is why they have increased the component video inputs from three to six. Also, from the initial press releases on the VSX-59TXi it doesn't seem to have the HDMI connection. It looks like they want you to connect the 59AVi directly into one of their HDTV's with HDMI and bypass the receiver connection all together. All in all Pioneer has finally got some real competition as far as features go. I don't think you could go wrong with either unit. I will be giving both of these units a serious listen before I make my decision. I might have jump the gun in saying the Yammie will be on my shelf by Christmas without considering the Pioneer. Oh, Prologic IIx is on board the Yamaha too. |
|
elitefan | G-Man and Tim, For the price of either receiver why not go with seperates? I know receivers are more convienient but for that kind of money I would look hard at seperates. Just my opinion. |
|
G-Man | If There are separate pre-amps with firewire it would be interesting. Have yet to see one. I have Aragon separates too. The separates are good in my room that is 25 feet x 30 feet x about 16 feet high. No receivers can really fill that room unless you use the most efficient speakers in the world. But in the average to even fairly large room the PE 49TXi is great--and generally watch in the 22 x 15 foot room. It is my upstairs hideaway. When I have 4 or less people we invariably use the upstairs room for DVD watching or DirecTV programming in surround (I have the Monitor Audio GR 10's upstairs) and everyone likes that system better than the one downstairs--myself included. |
|
elitefan | G-Man, As you know I also have a Elite/Monitor system but not as upscale as yours. I would love to hear the Gold 10 with the 49txi. Your point about firewire is a good one and hopefully that will become a common feature in the near future. Another high priced receiver that I like that doesn't get enough mention here is the Marantz 9300. Lots of good sound and power fot the money IMO. |
|
Tim Bell | I've been considering separates for some time now. Even before the release of the latest Yamaha and Pioneer receivers. There are a couple of high end stores minutes from my house that sell Mcintosh, Anthem, B&K, Rotel, Lexicon, Marantz, and Parasound. I've have the opportunity to listen to the some outstanding pre/pro's like the Lexicon MC-12B, Parasound Halo C1, Anthem AVM20, Rotel RSP-1098, and the McIntosh MX-134. My favorites were the Lexicon, Parasound, and the Mac. I would love to have an all McIntosh system or the Lexicon MC-12B mated with McIntosh amps. The all Parasound system sounded very, very, good and I would be hard pressed to choice between an all McIntosh or an all Parasound Halo system. Its just that the blue meters on the McIntosh amps are hynotic and I love them. Not to mention they sound good too. All of the above pre/pro's have left space on the back of their units to allow for firewire connectivity. Although none have done so to date. When you think about it no receiver can match the sound of a separate system. It's just that receivers are so convenient and space saving. Buy purchasing a flagship receiver you are getting close to matching the sound of separate system with some trade offs of course. |
|
Philip Glassfan | I still play laserdiscs once in a while (Star Wars is not on DVD, for example) and the progressive conversion that the RX-Z9 has might come in handy. The RX-Z9 has everything one could ever ask for except it apparently does not have a USB input (not a big deal for me). |
|
Philip Glassfan | One poster said that ProLogic IIx was on the Yamaha. I don't see any mention of it on Yamaha's website product info. I do like how Yamaha goes into more detail on what's inside the receiver (downloadable product brochure). Pioneer's build quality will be hard for Yamaha to beat. Why did Pioneer add a yellow strip between the display and the door? Kind of takes away from the aesthetics a little in my opinion. |
|
Philip Glassfan | Why did Yamaha go back to their so-so remote? |
|
Tim Bell | Philip, try the Yamaha Japan site. They lay out all of the surround sound formats for the DSP-Z9, which is the same as the RX-Z9 without the tuner. You'll see Prologic II and Prologic IIx. I really don't know why they went back to their so-so remote. I do know that audiophiles hate touchscreen remotes, they tend favor the tactical feel of buttons. Plus you don't have to switch screens to get to all of the functions. Maybe Yamaha had this in mind when they released the RX-Z9. One thing I like about the Pioneer Elite VSX-59TXi is that it gives you the flexibility to view detailed information from the MCACC on computer. I don't know if you'll be able to change the information on computer and upload it back to the receiver or not. If so that would be a awesome feature. The Yamaha has a Graphical User Interface(GUI) which will provide more detailed views of the set-up screens and menus and should make set-up a lot easier. It's definitely better the regular set-up screens. |
|
Anonymous | Has anyone heard of any reviews of the Yamaha Z-9 yet? I know some people have bought the Z-9 but it seems to be taking quite some time to find out anything from the owners or the magazine reviewers. |
|
Dertman Unregistered guest | Has anyone heard of a release date yet for the 59TXi? I am hearing January 15th (roughly), but no one is sure. They just keep saying after CES. I too would like to hear from anyone who purchased the Z9 because these are the two that I am down to (leaning toward the 59TXi though (g)). And no, I don't want to purchase separates for that amount. I am sure I could get better sound from Outlaw, etc. (1) I think for HT you get "more" from a flagship receiver (Dolby IIx, HDMI, etc.); (2) music may be slightly less quality, but that is somewhat debatable; and (3) I just want it to "work" and I feel that separates would require more of my time (to research, setup, etc.). If I want aggravation, I stick with computers which is my primary hobby. |
|
New member Username: GdawgPost Number: 23 Registered: 12-2003 | FYI, The Yamaha Z9's extra 9.1 channels are front effects speakers, and are not in the rear. My vote goes to the PE 59TXi honestly. Mostly because I have so much respect for the Elite name. Dertman, Jan 15th was what I got from Pioneer. So that means about 11 days till I order the Elite 59TXi. Just want a step up, too impressed with the Elite I got. EliteFan, Just want to say, I want your opinion on whether I should go Parasound or Elite 59. I value your opinion on this and will probably go Elite just because I love the Elite I have now. If I get the 59TXi I will write a review on what I think of it and post on another thread. Almost thinking of seperates though.(Parasound?) I will have to wait and see how the 59 looks, and will go from there. G.DawG |
|
New member Username: GdawgPost Number: 26 Registered: 12-2003 | Just checking out the Elite 59TXi at the Pioneer website, I see it has ugly black legs. Maybe I will go for 49TXi instead. However, I just looked, it looks like the legs on my 43 do screw off. So I could switch them, but who here thinks it would be worth spending an extra cash on the 59TXi? Just looking for opinions on this. Elitefan? G.DawG |
|
New member Username: GdawgPost Number: 27 Registered: 12-2003 | Basicly what I meant in the last post, and didnt say was, does anyone know the major differences between the 49TXi and 59TXi? |
|
New member Username: AvdudePost Number: 31 Registered: 12-2003 | Along those lines, I was wondering what the difference(s) is (are) between the 43TX and 53TX? Are there any major differences? The 53TX seems to have one extra optical input. They also mention 'Air Studios Sound Tuning' for the 53TX. I am not sure what that means... I am very happy with my 43TX and not considering a change, just curious.... |
|
Anonymous | One of the major differences between the 43TX and the 53TX is the auto MCACC that it incorporates into the setup. It comes with a setup microphone that automatically sets the speaker level for each individual speaker. |
|
New member Username: Elitefan1Post Number: 95 Registered: 12-2003 | G.DawG, I think you are right to wait til the 59 comes out to decide. It is just so hard for me to imagine spending $4000 or so for a receiver no matter which one it might be. Like you I love the Elite line so that's probably the only one Iwould consider for that money as opposed to seperates. I will be interested in hearing your impressions when the 59 comes out. |
|
Unregistered guest | After many hours of listening to various forms of high resolution music and surround sound tracks i believe the new Yamaha RX-9 outperforms the Pioneer 53TX. Both were tested in our sound lounge under identical conditions using the same test equipment. |
|
New member Username: Elitefan1Post Number: 136 Registered: 12-2003 | Gee, a $4500 receiever outperforms a $1400 receiver! What a brilliant deduction. Why in the world would anyone waste time comparing two receivers of such different price points. Wait and compare the RX-9 to the 59txi when it come out and then you will have a valid comparison. |
|
Jonathan Roberts Unregistered guest | Sorry i made a typing error. The machine tested was the new Pioneer 59txi, not 53tx as stated in my message dated 23 January. The Australian prices are $12,000 for the RX-Z9 and $11,500 for the 59txi. |
|
PPP Unregistered guest | Jonathan, did you know if it's possible for the Yam to be upgrade by internet like the pioneer? Than'k |
|
Silver Member Username: GmanPost Number: 159 Registered: 12-2003 | I would think the top of the line Yammie has an RS-232 data input like the 59txi. Actually, I would be shocked if it didn't. |
|
Eric Unregistered guest | In the near future I will be purchasing a a/v receiver and I am currently leaning towards the Yamaha RX-Z9. I am also looking at Pioneer's model metioned in this thread and also Denon's top model. However, no one seems to mention Sony's ES STR-DA9000ES. It sounds great but I wanted to know if anyone had any experience with this, and would you recommend it. Every time people talk about receivers I always hear Yamaha, Pioneer... and so on but never Sony. Here is a link to it on crutchfield: http://www.crutchfield.com/cgi-bin/S-mv7zPBvhQjS/ProdView.asp?s=0&c=4&g=10420&I= 158STRDA9K&o=m&a=0&cc=01&avf=N Thanks a lot, Eric p.s. Is Dolby Digital 6.1 the same thing as Dolby Digital EX? |
|
Silver Member Username: GmanPost Number: 166 Registered: 12-2003 | Eric-- I believe Dolby Digital EX is a 5.1 format that has an algorithm that mixes the two rear surrounds for a 6th channel. Dolby Digital 6.1 has a discrete 6th channel. It is not matrixed. Of course, you will need a 6.1 Dolby Digital disc to play the 6th channel. I don't think many discs have that yet. And I imagine just about every receiver that has 6.1 has EX. The new Sony hasn't been reviewed by any reputable magazine yet. It certainly looks intriguing. I wonder if it suffers from the same power dip that most digital amps that have been reviewed suffer from. The good part is that even if it does dip considerably it is listed at 200 watts/channel, so one would think there would be sufficient power for surrounds in all but the largest rooms. But I would hate to be the guinea pig on an item so expensive before it has been tested and run around the track a few times by others. I am sure in the next month or two some magazines will test it. Let's hope they do a thorough job. |
|
Eric Unregistered guest | Thanks Gregory! Yeah I would not want to be a $4k guinea pig either :-) |
|
dlwsqrd Unregistered guest | Having spent the last 30 days with my new RX-Z9 I can attest that it is a rock-solid performer and has some "blow me away" features built in. The automatic audio set-up feature is phenomenal and found a speaker that I have had for 2 years was wired wrong from the factory. Positive and negative were reversed inside the speaker. I would have never known otherwise. It really does make the video look better with more depth and no video noise. Amazing. |
|
New member Username: ShortyPost Number: 3 Registered: 02-2004 | dlwsqrd- I sure would like to hear more of your impressions of the RX-Z9. What speakers are you driving and how would you characterise the sound of the receiver. Would it sound better with bright or laid back speakers? |
|
Eric Unregistered guest | dlwsqrd, I would also like to hear a little more. I am considering purchasing the RX-Z9 and I am still unsure of what speakers to go with. Which ones are you using and what type of set up do you have? Have you heard of any speakers that sound particulary good (or bad) with the RX-Z9? Thanks. |
|
New member Username: GdawgPost Number: 65 Registered: 12-2003 | Elitefan and others: I just got a new 59TXi today, and I have noticed a few things... #1- The power is alot greater, but thats always a good thing  It has NO problem whatsoever driving my Klipsch speakers, and I couldnt make it loose headroom even at +11db! My ears were really hurting at that level, and I had to turn it down quick. I might have put it up more, but my Klipsch were bottoming. #2- The sound, I find to be MUCH more "brighter" then my previous 43TX. I Dont know why, as all Elites up until now have been alot "warmer"in their sound. This is bad because, as some know, I have Klipsch all around. It still sounds alright, and is easy to listen too, but its just brighter, and I thought I would bring it to you guy's attention. #3-The Tuner SUCKS... I can only get around 4 or 5 stations, my old 43TX used to get around 40. I dont listen to the radio much anyways, so its no biggie for me, but it would be for someone who engoys the radio. Thats basicly it, im still playing with some of the new features, they are a little overwhelming:D but they are good to keep an audiophile busy Ill have a better more detailed review later, im trying to type fast so I can get back to my Pink Floyd:-) G.DawG |
|
SARADON Unregistered guest | GREG YOU MEAN THE DTS ES HAS A Discrete 6TH CHANNEL. DOLBY EX IS ONLY A MATRIX CHANNEL NOT DISCRETE. |
|
Silver Member Username: GeekboyPost Number: 181 Registered: 12-2003 | G.DawG: you need to update your profile to show the 59txi. What happened with the 43? |
|
Silver Member Username: GmanPost Number: 172 Registered: 12-2003 | Sarandon--correct. Dolby doesn't make a discrete 6 channel. DTS does. Dawg-- Suprised you are having tuner problems. I have the 49TXi and my tuner works great. I'd be very suprised if they changed the tuner for the worse, if at all. Hope you didn't get a faulty tuner. As far as I know the 49txi and 59txi have the same amps. I certainly wouldn't characterize the receiver as bright, even though the Monitor GR 10's and the GR center channel have a slightly "hot" tweeter. Although nothing like a Klipsch horn tweeter. It could be you were under-feeding the Klipsch speakers (powerwise) before and now you are hearing them in full bloom. And you might not be as fond of it. But there are things you can do with the EQ, with tonal calibration, or with room acoustic adjustment to tame a hot high end. Anyway, I hope you enjoy your new receiver and work your way through any problems. These receivers can do so many things it takes a dogs age to drill down through the pre-amp to discover all it can do. |
|
Bronze Member Username: GdawgPost Number: 66 Registered: 12-2003 | Gregory, I doubt its a lemon, and, honestly, I wouldnt care if it was. I use the radio once in a blue moon, and I get the only station I ever listen to anyways. It may be because I was under powering my Klipsch before, hmmm The 43TX never sounded underpowered however:S? I didnt say it was "bright", well I did, but that wasnt what I meant. What I meant is the receiver sounds a tad bit more brighter than my 43 ever did. I beat you too it, when playing with the EQ, I adjusted it, but thanks. Geekboy, My 43TX in currently sitting in my bedroom, I was thinking of using it to power my rear channels, but that would be a downgrade in power. I will probably end up selling it. P.S. I gave my second HT to my son for his birthday present, and hes already rented 13 DVD's! (I think he likes it) G.DawG |
|
Anonymous | PPP Yes, the Yamaha RX-Z9 does come equipped with a RS232 serial connection for onboard software upgrade (i.e. for future surround sound format). |
|
Anonymous | Eric, The last two Star Wars and the James Bond movies on DVD are encoded with Dolby Digital 6.1 sound track. However, you will need a 6.1 amp and rear center channel speaker to enjoy the benefits. You can also get DTS ES (6.1)encoded high resolution music CDs (24/96 or 24/192 sampling rates. Please check out the following web site for more details www.dtsentertainment.com Happy listening! |
|
Unregistered guest | G.DawG, I can't make up my mind between a used 49txi ($1800)or a new 59txi. I know the 59 has more power, PC connections and upgraded (from 48 to 96) DSP sound, Are you or anyone else familair with any other differences? I'm most interested in video upconverting for any SD signals. |
|
New member Username: RudolphtPost Number: 1 Registered: 02-2004 | There is already a planned upgrade to do WMA directly. MCACC is upgraded, though I have no idea with proper use how the receiver could sound bright?!? Sound Delay is important if you have video processors. Dolby ProLogic IIx is pretty significant in that it can keep discretes discrete and smartly synthesize other channels missing. It basically makes it a fire and forget setting excepting DTS-ES discrete (very limited number of films). The 49-TXi is ending it's lifecycle and the new flagship should have more upgrades in it for a couple years. From the one reported owner in this thread, it would be useful to get more feedback, even subjective. I should have a unit tomorrow or the next day, upgrading from a 49-TX (knowing to go to new unit vs get interim upgrades). Tim |
|
Silver Member Username: GmanPost Number: 215 Registered: 12-2003 | G-Dawg The power in the 59TXi and the 49Txi is the same, but it is certainly much more potent than 43TX. Tim Dolby Prologic IIx is not discrete. It matrixes 5 channel recordings to both 6 and 7 channel playback. There is no discrete 6th or 7th channel--they are created by algorithms. Whereas Dolby Prologic II creates a 5.1 matrix from a stereo source. Hence you can play cd's or your tuner or phonograph with Prologic II and get good surround results, or play stereo VHS and get matrixed 5.1 surround. The 49TXi plays discrete 5.1 and has certain 6.1 format matrixes such as Neo. As the main video I want to upconvert is DVD's which are 480 pixel in general, I bought the new PE 59AVi dvd player which does that with the TREX chipset. To me there aren't enough improvements on the 59TXi to buy it over the 49TXi I own. Obviously I would buy the 59TXi if I didn't own the 49TXi. If I upgrade I'll buy either another brand or wait for PE's upgrades in a year or two. I am in no rush. Happy with my system currently. |
|
Bronze Member Username: GdawgPost Number: 84 Registered: 12-2003 | Tim, To be honest, I tried Dolby PLIIx for about 5 minutes tops, I tried many songs and artists, but just could get the surround speakers to mix with the surround back speakers. I have never used it since. Gregory, When at my local dealer I only got the 59TXi instead of a demo 49TX they had there because of the I-Link I thought I might use later. I will buy a new DVD Player after I can save up some more money. There is no reason currently, because my TV is in the repair shop. The sound was identical between the two, I cant see any reason to upgrade except the i-Link. Unless you like that gold line, which I find kind of ugly. FYI, I decided to keep the black feet. Also, When I have away my second system to my son, I had to give away the Kenwood 6070's remote(which I was using with the 43), and I was stuck with that remote that came with my 43. Thats the reason I went to my local dealer to go pick up a universal, but came home with a 65 lb box. That touchscreen remote is annoying!! I miss buttons.... G.DawG |
|
Silver Member Username: GmanPost Number: 219 Registered: 12-2003 | G. Dawg-- As I have the 49TXi with the i-link connected to the 59AVi dvd player via i-link, I will wait until PE upgrades the 59TXi to have HDMI inputs and whatever might seem useful in the next 2 years. The 59AVi has HDMI---one would have thought PE might have put it on the receiver too. C'est la vie. |
|
New member Username: RudolphtPost Number: 2 Registered: 02-2004 | Greg, Couple items. I understand that the matrixed 6th and 7th channels are not discrete. The "novelty" is that if a DD 5.1 or DD anything is passed to IIx those discrete channels remain discrete, with 6 & 7 being synthesized. Also Pro logic or simply stereo can synthesize channels 1-5 like old DPL II, but the important feature is keeping the discrete's discrete. That said I only used DPL II for non-discrete material. Now I can use it for non-DTS-ES Discrete material w/o futzing around. For music I only used 7 channel stereo, so G is probably be right on music applications. They probably should have named it something other than DPL IIx as it seems to diminisgh the value of DD while passing the discretes as a feature. Power is different but I just lugged up the heavier box (the gold line may have added weight ) The software download to support WMA as newer codecs for home theater catch on is a nice feature. If I had a 49 TXi vs a TX I would think twice before springing, but probably would anyways as I am really happy with the 49 and incremental improvements are OK with me or I have too much money. Tim |
|
Silver Member Username: GmanPost Number: 222 Registered: 12-2003 | Tim-- Discrete means the channel is played as separately recorded on the disc. With Dolby Prologic IIx only the 5.1 are discrete. Dolby doesn't mess with the discrete channels when they have separate speakers available to play the discrete recorded channels on the disc. On IIx The 6th and 7th channel are made by a chipset algorithm that matrixes the surrounds to form the 6th and 7th channel that really do not exist in the recording. The IIx is a feature for people with 6 or 7 speakers that want a regular discrete 5.1 with matrixed 6th and 7th speakers, just as Dolby Prologic II is a feature for people who want to play 2-channel discrete stereo as is while converting the 3 other channels into a matrix to mimic a 5.1 surround. It is a matter of taste whether you like them. I listen to movies on dvd in their natural discrete 5.1 as 7.1 is not appropriate for my upstairs set-up. But I do like to often play stereo cd's on Prologic II to get the matrixed surround sound. It works great on some cd's and on those it doesn't work great on--I listen to them in their original discrete stereo. There are very few discrete 6.1 dvd's and I don't think there are any 7.1 commercial dvd's. So one is generally listening to matrixed 6th and 7th speakers on regular 7.1 AV receivers and for those with Yamaha's new 9.1 receivers they are listening to Yamaha's own DSP chips that matrix sound from 5.1 discrete to matrixed sound on the 4 other speakers. If you have the room and the money, a number of people like a continuous circle of sound around them. I imagine at some time in the future when more houses have large separate media rooms there may well be as many as 20 speakers surrounding you and the rest of your home theatre audience. An d it will be mostly matrixed sound in the speakers, unless they start making discs with 20 discretely miked channels. I'm glad I don't have to think about that now:-) |
|
New member Username: RudolphtPost Number: 3 Registered: 02-2004 | Greg, I think that's what I said. (Incidentally I have had most of the prior gen flagships, Onkyo 989, Denon 5800, and 49-TX, and understand the all the matrixed and discrete formats.) So, while I used to use: Dolby Surround EX for EX encoded DD & DTS-ES Matrix (used to called Dolby Surround EX before DD EX) DTS-ES Matrix for DTS-ES matrixed rears. DTS-ES Discrete for DTS 6.1 material DD +TX for 5.1 discrete material Dolby DPL II Movie for Dolby Surround (non-DD) and stereo or mono movies/TV 7 Channel Stereo for Stereo music Now setting DPL IIx I fire & forget all material and the proper sound format kicks in except DTS-ES Discrete (a minor annouyance) Is DPL IIx better for DD 5.1 synthesized back 6th & 7th channel vs DD +TX for a synthesized mirrored 6th channel? Don't know, finished setting up receiver at 4AM, just finished calibration, and now need to play. As a 49-TX upgrade my biggest hassle was mapping to the slightly different titles of devices, then recustomizing, and all MX-800 & pronto 6000 remotes work with no changes. I do have 6 top o' the line wharfdale pacifica and one Magnepan CC3 center under my plasma for the circle of surround (or holosonic for inventors of English) ... and don't have to buy 2 matched overkill speakers that I would for the Z9 All I can say is there are few things more beautiful than seeing my DVD-59avi with two blue lights lit (one for i.link, one for HDMI-DVI video). Very happy. Time to play, Tim |
|
New member Username: RudolphtPost Number: 4 Registered: 02-2004 | USB Direct Stream works great from a PC. Look ma, no soundcard (thouth still run SPDIF off motherboard to a separate coaxial input. Note the optical digital inputs drops by one to 6 (still two outs) with the addition of USB. Tim |
|
Steve Williams Unregistered guest | Tim, Given the option, would you purchase a new 49-TXi for $800 less than a new 59-TXi or go for the new model with the PLIIx, usb, new remote, etc. Thanks for your reply. |
|
Silver Member Username: GmanPost Number: 238 Registered: 12-2003 | The 59TXi also has the WMA-9 Professional, which is Microsofts way to get their nose into the high end tent. And with there money and marketting I wouldn't sell them short. Preliminary tests from certain quarters say it is of very high quality. It looks like they aim to take a shot at the high end audio and video field with high quality audio and video processing that is computer compatible. Knowing Microsoft, more than take a shot---dominate the field and the codecs and protocol. Who knows--with their video media capable of going to 1920 x 1080 pixels, HD video at 1080 x 720, SD Video at 720 x 480 and having the audio at 5.1 with twice the resolution of cd's. Looks like they are trying to take over the codecs and protocol of the AV industry. Heck, with their money they are capable of giving great performance in both video and audio at a loss until they take over the market and then raise the prices. Or like an OS, just charge a nice price to every receiver or pre-amp company to have their chipsets and software. Dolby does this. As they are worried about losing Windows OS to Linux GUI---I am sure they are working on the audio/video front with a frenzy. Almost all the businesses around me have changed their servers to Linux, Unix, or the Unix-based OSX Apple servers. They are tired of Windows virus attacks and spotty code and crashes. Enough rave--back to your question. If you have an IPOD or any MP3, or want to connect your downloaded music to your receiver to the USB port then the 59TXi is a plus. If you have a 7.1 system then PLIIx is a plus. New remote may be a plus. The new MCAC acoustic balancing sytem is a plus. Only your wants and needs balanced by your wallet can answer your question. I can afford it--but I rarely listen to MP3's. I mostly listen to 5.1 and don't care about the new remote. The WMA-9 Professional is interesting, but not enough yet for me to buy into it. I will wait until quality receivers come out with HDMI among the other features. Heck, there are two kinds of blue ray lasers that are fighting over the new standards on the next generation dvd's. Much is in flux. I will stay with my upstairs 49txi and my downstairs Aragon Stage One with the 2007 amp. |
|
Tim Rudolph Unregistered guest | Steve, I would go for the 59-TXi now and be state of the art for a couple years. I do think the new remote is much better, but I use a Pronto & MX-800 so that in itself is not a compelling change. I have a great Gefen 4x HDTV (1920x1080 & 1280x720, & lower) HDMI switch for $400, so that's not stopping me either. The full multi-channel HDMI standards are being worked out and the receiver price premium on the 2 (1 announced, IntegraResearch custom build and Sony) is about 2K+. So now 59-TXi in HT & 49-TX in family room (overkill). I think you will be very happy with the 59, and despite some initial buyer's remorse on any large purchase, you would have more remorse not getting it in the long run. May not be compelling enough for some if they have a 49 with i.link, but buying new would shoot the works (if your significant other doesn't shoot you first ) Tim |
Main Forums
Today's Posts- Home Audio Forum
- A/V Receivers Forum
- Amps Forum
- Cassette Forum
- CD Players Forum
- CD Recorders Forum
- DAC & Transports Forum
- DVD-Audio & SACD Forum
- Equalizers Forum
- Integrated Amps Forum
- iPod Docks Forum
- MiniDisc Forum
- Mini Systems Forum
- Digital Music Systems Forum
- Phono Forum
- Preamps Forum
- Speakers Forum
- Subwoofers Forum
- Tuners Forum
- Home Video Forum
- Home Theater Forum
- Car Audio Forum
- Accessories Forum
- All Forum Topics