[virometal]

http://www.audioholics.com/reviews/r...z11-first-look

Can there ever be enough channels? Many would probably say yes.

Me, I would love to hear it.

 

[Electro Point]

Dang, I thought 5.1 was enough for me to handle.

 

[Prozakk]

I'd rather just use it as a preamp. Seperate amps are way better IMO. I paid $1600 for my Yamaha RX-V1700 receiver, Harman Kardon Signature 2.1, and 1.5. I'm sure that $5k+ receiver can't handle peaks like my HT.

 

[virometal]

Quote:

Originally Posted by Prozakk /img/forum/go_quote.gif I'd rather just use it as a preamp. Seperate amps are way better IMO.

I would say it depends on the efficiency of the speakers, but yes, that is a common opinion. One I share to an extent.

To me the implementation of the eleven channels is what's interesting, not the capability of this particular receiver's amps per se.

 

[infinitesymphony]

I saw the RX-Z11 on Yamaha's page when I was looking up information about the RX-Z9. That one's been around for a while and has nine channels plus what look like B-speaker outputs. I thought the back layout was pretty cool. It only makes sense that the speaker outputs should be at the top of the receiver.

RX-Z9

RX-Z11

Yamaha has been very good lately about implementing new features and incorporating future-proofing (ex. extra channels). For example, the RX-V661 supports HDMI 1.2a and has Burr-Brown DACs and room calibration... And it's roughly $390 brand new on eBay.

I went with a Pioneer Elite for my recent receiver purchase, but the Yamahas were definitely in the running.

 

[Chu]

Wondering, what is the point of .2? I thought the it was impossible for humans to spatially resolve the portion of the audio spectrum that subwoofers produce.

 

[infinitesymphony]

Quote:

Originally Posted by Chu /img/forum/go_quote.gif Wondering, what is the point of .2? I thought the it was impossible for humans to spatially resolve the portion of the audio spectrum that subwoofers produce.

It's true that low frequencies are difficult to localize and that there is more of a chance with phase issues with two subwoofers, but I imagine it's on this receiver for either multi-room or space considerations. Someone with a huge room will probably need two subwoofers to get the job done, or you could essentially have two 5.1 systems in different rooms.

 

[virometal]

From the press release and link:

Obviously, there are multi-room options with this unit, but the same room application is what interests me.

Considering an eleven speaker installation with bookshelves, I think dual subs would almost be a necessity to handle the workload of all those speakers cleanly, especially at higher crossovers. Take the wall mounted "presence" channels - maybe 120 - 150hz crossovers if the speakers are small. Direction comes into play then.

 

[infinitesymphony]

I've seen that graphic before... I wonder, is this going to be the eventual specification, or is Yamaha making a hypothetical justification for an eleven-channel system?

 

[virometal]

Quote:

Originally Posted by infinitesymphony /img/forum/go_quote.gif Yamaha making a hypothetical justification for an eleven-channel system?

That's the million dollar question ain't it!

Like you mentioned in post #5, Yamaha seems to always be on the forefront with their mult-channel DSP stuff. IIRC, weren't they the first to introduce 7.1? Maybe I'm wrong. Then, there's the virtual surround bars they released a couple of years ago.

As a 7.1 owner, all my 7.1 listening is processed - non native. This would be merely an extension of that wouldn't it?

Like I said, I would love to test this whether it's overkill. It looks awesome to me.

What do you think? Is it more marketing hoopla or could it bear meaningful results?

 

[SilverTrumpet999]

More sources = possibility for better localization over a larger area. Fourier theory holds. Movie theaters have many, many speakers surrounding the seats for this reason. However, at 11.2 the sheer complexity of the system becomes somewhat daunting (even to a Physics major); installing wouldn't be a problem but exploring the optimization phase space would drive me nuts. "What happens when I turn this one a bit this way, and that one a bit that way... how about all three of these a little this way... what if I raised these... how about tilting them..." etc. Professional optimization/setup may be required to get the best out of an 11.2 system.

Nevermind the cost of speakers more than doubled from the 5.1 era.

Here's what bugs me most: very little music is recorded this way, so most of the usage of a system like this will be for movies. This system is flat-out pointless for DVDs, as there is just not enough room on the disc to fit 13 channels of audio at normal quality (and "normal" for a DVD - DTS or DD - isn't even lossless). Therefore it must be targeted at the HD market, but I am not sure there are any players out for Blu-Ray or HDDVD that have this many analog outputs. To truly take advantage of this size of a system, we need a new audio format (probably based on HDDVD or Blu-Ray) that can support 13 lossless channels. I haven't heard of one, have you?

Yamaha will no doubt have an algorithm to convert sources up to the 11.2 level, but why not just listen as the music was mixed? Upconverting stuff like that (Neo:6, Prologic in its various forms) always seems like a cheap trick thrown in to justify the cost of the system.

Then again, I am a stereo guy.

 

[SilverTrumpet999]

Oh, and there is some localization of sound in the frequency range normally reserved for subwoofers. If you audition a pair of floorstanding speakers with built-in powered subs vs. a single subwoofer, there is a difference. Just not a huge difference, and not one that everyone has heard.

 

[Prozakk]

Quote:

Originally Posted by virometal /img/forum/go_quote.gif I would say it depends on the efficiency of the speakers, but yes, that is a common opinion. One I share to an extent. To me the implementation of the eleven channels is what's interesting, not the capability of this particular receiver's amps per se.

Once you go with seperate amplifiers, you'd never want to go back.

Yamaha gives you way more for your $.

Now if you'd just rid yourself of that avatar...

 

[Wodgy]

Quote:

Originally Posted by infinitesymphony /img/forum/go_quote.gif

There is something just, frankly, a little sad about those back panels. Does anyone seriously want all that? What kind of mindset wants all that?

If the trend beyond 5.1 is causing people to generally buy poorer speakers so they can afford more speakers, it's a bad trend. Transducers have the most distortion of any component in an audio system, and they make by far the most difference. That's where the money should be going, not gimmicks.

 

[ooheadsoo]

Quote:

Originally Posted by Wodgy /img/forum/go_quote.gif There is something just, frankly, a little sad about those back panels. Does anyone seriously want all that? What kind of mindset wants all that? If the trend beyond 5.1 is causing people to generally buy poorer speakers so they can afford more speakers, it's a bad trend. Transducers have the most distortion of any component in an audio system, and they make by far the most difference. That's where the money should be going, not gimmicks.

Actually, more speakers is a legitimate sort of band-aid, but you do have to get up to a certain quality for the satellites before it will be satisfactory. The cheap low excursion but otherwise fine set of tradeoffs designs would fit with this plan well, in many ways.

I think the HK subwoofer white papers find that two subwoofers on opposite sides of the room generated the least deviation from seat to seat in bass response. Three subwoofers was actually significantly worse in deviation.

http://www.harman.com/wp/pdf/multsubs.pdf