Dolby PLII vs stereo

Autor

Beitrag

Debu
Ist häufiger hier

#1 erstellt: 09. Apr 2006, 09:47

Hi,

I have Denon 1705, and I enjoy Dolby PLII much more than stereo mode for normal 2ch audio cds. I set tone defeat on. This is perhaps contrary to popular audiophile belief that stereo is the best for ACDs.

Anyone agrees with similar experience.

-Debu

bothfelder
Inventar

#2 erstellt: 09. Apr 2006, 22:01

Hi!

PL2 is better than Stereo direct...?
It's IMHO depend from the software. Sometimes, I would to prefer the surround solution, but not always.
The Denon AVR 1705 it's better in surround than in stereo.
I think it's valid for the most AVR's.

Andre

abhi.pani
Inventar

#3 erstellt: 10. Apr 2006, 07:25

bothfelder schrieb:

Except Marantz...where Stereo Excels

Shahrukh
Inventar

#4 erstellt: 10. Apr 2006, 07:41

abhi.pani schrieb:

bothfelder schrieb:

Except Marantz...where Stereo Excels

A G R E E !!

nimz
Ist häufiger hier

#5 erstellt: 10. Apr 2006, 09:17

Shahrukh schrieb:

abhi.pani schrieb:

bothfelder schrieb:

Except Marantz...where Stereo Excels

A G R E E !!

Yup... the DIrect mode on the marantz is too good!! certain recordings (MP3 mainly),, i find the extra thump of the CSII mode better!!

anirvan
Stammgast

#6 erstellt: 18. Apr 2006, 04:17

i did try all the surround modes,
but found the pure direct mode the best for audio.
i use the marantz avr 5500;

regards
anirvan

nimz
Ist häufiger hier

#7 erstellt: 18. Apr 2006, 06:49

anirvan schrieb:

i did try all the surround modes,
but found the pure direct mode the best for audio.
i use the marantz avr 5500;

regards
anirvan

hi Anirvan,

wot are the speakers u use?

Nimz

anirvan
Stammgast

#8 erstellt: 19. Apr 2006, 12:03

well i got floorstanders made by a guy,
decent sounding and very cheap( to my ears ),
i use a wharfedale centre- and surrounds - i am delaying those so my project continues

r
anirvan

juggy_25
Ist häufiger hier

#9 erstellt: 20. Apr 2006, 21:42

whats the price for a marantz-5500? Is the Marantz good in Stereo Sound (5.1) too?

diskspinner
Ist häufiger hier

#10 erstellt: 21. Apr 2006, 03:54

Yes, Marantz is good in stereo but why have written stereo (5.1)? 5.1 and stereo are not the same thing.

bothfelder
Inventar

#11 erstellt: 21. Apr 2006, 05:01

Hi!

Juggy25 means IMHO it's possible that a 5.1(7.1)-Multi-Chanal-Receiver of Marantz has also a good Stereo performance like a pur Stereo Amplifier? In the german Threads the meaning is present that only the bigsize models having a good stereo performance (means bigger than 8500er). May be it's a matter of taste.

Andre

juggy_25
Ist häufiger hier

#12 erstellt: 21. Apr 2006, 13:07

oops, I didnt mean stereo sound (5.1). I meant Surround sound for movies (5.1).
I watch movies 50% and listen to muzik 50%. So I prefer an AV Receiver, which functions satisfactorily in both.
Marantz sounds to be the Fav in Music. Does it give equal performance in movies too?

bothfelder
Inventar

#13 erstellt: 21. Apr 2006, 13:54

Hi!

In Movie you can take all brands. Marantz, Pioneer, Denon, Yamaha ... The differences between the brands in 5.1 is IMHO not so big. It's more personal taste, design, haptic...
The problem is can all plays a good stereo?

I have a Pioneer AX3. In my eyes his stereo is good. In the near furure I will complete my system with an additional stereo power amplifier for the main speakers. The stereo perfomance will be better. I already checked this.

Andre
from Hannover/Germany