5.1 Question For ML Users
01-07-10, 07:00 PM
#1
Driver
Thread Starter
5.1 Question For ML Users
My ML system isn't nearly what I expected.
When I first got my 2009 ES, I noticed right away that the tonal balance, while better than the stock sound system, was real tubby. Turning on the DSP actually helped flatten it out a bit (the bass, mid and treble controls are only marginally useful), but it's still relatively poor considering the pie-in-the-sky ML ad copy Lexus churns out.
Then I found that it refuses to play the 5.1 content on my DualDiscs -- it will only play the hi-res stereo. And with some of my other DVD-As, when it decides to play in 5.1, the rear surround content is completely missing.
In and out of the dealership a couple times, and Lexus corporate ultimately told me that these issues were essentially an "operating characteristic" of the system, and there was no firmware update or fix available. They did give me a $500 service and parts credit for my trouble, however.
Recently, I decided to try burning some DVD-As containing the 5.1 content from the discs that only play in stereo. It works, to the extent that the screen shows it's in 3/2.1 mode. When I listened carefully, though, it still didn't seem like I was getting the separation I hear from my home system. I attributed this to reflections in a small listening environment, but I wanted to see what was up with the 5.1.
So, I made a test disc. One song, seven versions. One with all channels, and one each with just one channel playing -- FL, C, FR, SL, SR & LFE. I verified it on my home system, and then popped it in the ML. Guess what? I'm getting nothing but stereo! The both the FL and SL channels are present in the left dash, the driver-side doors and the left rear deck; same with the FR and SR channels being spread evenly along the right side. The center channel? Comes out of 'em all -- same with the LFE. (The DSP again affects the tonal balance, but not the separation.)
Now, I realize that the ML I have is not the same flavor that comes in other models, but outside of amplifiers and speakers, there should be much in common regarding head unit electronics, right?
My question: Has anyone (especially ES owners) determined that their ML system definitely puts out discrete 5.1?
I want to know if I'm justified if I decide to have another go-around with Lexus over this. Maybe I should take some time to visit some local dealers with my test disc.
Any help would be greatly appreciated!
Bob
When I first got my 2009 ES, I noticed right away that the tonal balance, while better than the stock sound system, was real tubby. Turning on the DSP actually helped flatten it out a bit (the bass, mid and treble controls are only marginally useful), but it's still relatively poor considering the pie-in-the-sky ML ad copy Lexus churns out.
Then I found that it refuses to play the 5.1 content on my DualDiscs -- it will only play the hi-res stereo. And with some of my other DVD-As, when it decides to play in 5.1, the rear surround content is completely missing.
In and out of the dealership a couple times, and Lexus corporate ultimately told me that these issues were essentially an "operating characteristic" of the system, and there was no firmware update or fix available. They did give me a $500 service and parts credit for my trouble, however.
Recently, I decided to try burning some DVD-As containing the 5.1 content from the discs that only play in stereo. It works, to the extent that the screen shows it's in 3/2.1 mode. When I listened carefully, though, it still didn't seem like I was getting the separation I hear from my home system. I attributed this to reflections in a small listening environment, but I wanted to see what was up with the 5.1.
So, I made a test disc. One song, seven versions. One with all channels, and one each with just one channel playing -- FL, C, FR, SL, SR & LFE. I verified it on my home system, and then popped it in the ML. Guess what? I'm getting nothing but stereo! The both the FL and SL channels are present in the left dash, the driver-side doors and the left rear deck; same with the FR and SR channels being spread evenly along the right side. The center channel? Comes out of 'em all -- same with the LFE. (The DSP again affects the tonal balance, but not the separation.)
Now, I realize that the ML I have is not the same flavor that comes in other models, but outside of amplifiers and speakers, there should be much in common regarding head unit electronics, right?
My question: Has anyone (especially ES owners) determined that their ML system definitely puts out discrete 5.1?
I want to know if I'm justified if I decide to have another go-around with Lexus over this. Maybe I should take some time to visit some local dealers with my test disc.
Any help would be greatly appreciated!
Bob
Last edited by bobsobi; 01-11-10 at 10:16 AM.
01-09-10, 11:51 AM
#2
Moderator - Electronics Forum
Seems as if ML is deliberately "cheating" on their sound processing. I'd definitely take it up to the dealership again - maybe Lexus can do something about it, maybe not. If the dealership can't do anything, just bump it up to HQ and ask them what's going on.
For a "high end" stock audio system to do this is inexcusable. So much for their "countless man hours of tuning" when they should have had a few more minutes of coding to get it somewhat right.
For a "high end" stock audio system to do this is inexcusable. So much for their "countless man hours of tuning" when they should have had a few more minutes of coding to get it somewhat right.
01-10-10, 06:45 AM
#3
Driver
Thread Starter
Thanks for the reply, Percy.
I discovered that Mark Levinson has a support portal for its products:
http://www.marklevinson.com/support/
Since Lexus is listed, I put in a support ticket. We'll see if this goes any better than it did with Lexus.
My initial complaint centered on the poorly-tuned sound and the player's inability to properly play many DVD-As. Lexus claimed they couldn't be responsible for disc incompatibilities. The sound quality issue, well, that's what the credit they gave me addressed. This 5.1 issue, however, is worse in my estimation -- claiming 5.1 performance where there is none amounts to misrepresentation.
What a shame Lexus has lost its high standards for sound in its vehicles. While not as powerful, the stock system in my '99 ES was just so natural and sweet -- I sorely miss it.
I discovered that Mark Levinson has a support portal for its products:
http://www.marklevinson.com/support/
Since Lexus is listed, I put in a support ticket. We'll see if this goes any better than it did with Lexus.
My initial complaint centered on the poorly-tuned sound and the player's inability to properly play many DVD-As. Lexus claimed they couldn't be responsible for disc incompatibilities. The sound quality issue, well, that's what the credit they gave me addressed. This 5.1 issue, however, is worse in my estimation -- claiming 5.1 performance where there is none amounts to misrepresentation.
What a shame Lexus has lost its high standards for sound in its vehicles. While not as powerful, the stock system in my '99 ES was just so natural and sweet -- I sorely miss it.
Last edited by bobsobi; 01-10-10 at 04:19 PM.
01-10-10, 05:31 PM
#4
Moderator - Electronics Forum
The misrepresentation can open up a can of worms, especially if people are serious enough to go for a class action lawsuit.
ML system took LOTS of shortcuts. Cram too much "value" into a package, then design it improperly. The pundits that were originally harping the ML system when it came out many years ago are now rightly silent.
"disc incompatibilities" is far different than "DVD-A" incompatibility. To me, a disc incompatibility is when a totally different dye or layer is used from the industry norm. That's not very common to find. This also tells me that they're using a pickup head which isn't supporting the industry norms. More cost cutting for a supposedly "high end stock system" from ML.
ML system took LOTS of shortcuts. Cram too much "value" into a package, then design it improperly. The pundits that were originally harping the ML system when it came out many years ago are now rightly silent.
"disc incompatibilities" is far different than "DVD-A" incompatibility. To me, a disc incompatibility is when a totally different dye or layer is used from the industry norm. That's not very common to find. This also tells me that they're using a pickup head which isn't supporting the industry norms. More cost cutting for a supposedly "high end stock system" from ML.
01-11-10, 10:14 AM
#5
Driver
Thread Starter
"Misrepresentation" is a word I don't use lightly. But in this case, it fits the bill as far as I can see. A player that can recognize and play DVDs of whatever flavor in stereo and a system that "provides discrete 5.1-multichannel playback via a 7.1-channel speaker architecture" are two different things!
When we were discussing the DVD playback issue, the Lexus technicians immediately questioned whether I was using discs I had burned myself. When I showed them nothing but commercially available DVD-As, they then tried to convince me that the older material (for example, an album originally recorded in 1970) might not be compatible. The fact that the 5.1 remix was released in 2001 didn't seem to matter to them.
I know there have been tweaks to the initial DVD-A specification, but any incompatibilities are typically related to navigating menus, not actual playback! I have never found any of my DVD-As to have any problem on any player capable of reading DVD-As until this ML system. As a few discs also lose their surround channels, I suspect the issue is with the firmware, or the chip set doing the LPCM decoding, but you may be right -- the hardware could have a hand in this mess as well.
I'm just hoping that the Mark Levinson support response will be better than the "it is what it is" BS I got from Lexus corporate.
When we were discussing the DVD playback issue, the Lexus technicians immediately questioned whether I was using discs I had burned myself. When I showed them nothing but commercially available DVD-As, they then tried to convince me that the older material (for example, an album originally recorded in 1970) might not be compatible. The fact that the 5.1 remix was released in 2001 didn't seem to matter to them.
I know there have been tweaks to the initial DVD-A specification, but any incompatibilities are typically related to navigating menus, not actual playback! I have never found any of my DVD-As to have any problem on any player capable of reading DVD-As until this ML system. As a few discs also lose their surround channels, I suspect the issue is with the firmware, or the chip set doing the LPCM decoding, but you may be right -- the hardware could have a hand in this mess as well.
I'm just hoping that the Mark Levinson support response will be better than the "it is what it is" BS I got from Lexus corporate.
01-13-10, 06:39 AM
#6
Driver School Candidate
Join Date: Mar 2009
Location: CA
Posts: 35
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I think I know why this is happening. Probably the Mark Lev DSP is downmixing the 5.1 content to stereo, and then regenerating the 7.1 discrete channels with Harman's Logic 7 algorithm. The philosophy here is that discrete 5.1 recordings are made for home theater environments, and simply pointing the discrete channels from the disc to the C+F+S+Sub in the car will not have the desired effect. So instead the DSP regenerates 7.1 in a way that it thinks will approximately re-create the proper intended imaging for each passenger in the radically different car interior.
It probably works pretty well with regular 5.1 recordings (or as well as can be expected in a car), but with your specialized test disc it has strange effects. For example you'll hear FL coming out of the back speakers, so that the rear passengers can also hear the FL sound appropriately.
It probably works pretty well with regular 5.1 recordings (or as well as can be expected in a car), but with your specialized test disc it has strange effects. For example you'll hear FL coming out of the back speakers, so that the rear passengers can also hear the FL sound appropriately.
01-13-10, 10:43 AM
#7
Driver
Thread Starter
I think I know why this is happening. Probably the Mark Lev DSP is downmixing the 5.1 content to stereo, and then regenerating the 7.1 discrete channels with Harman's Logic 7 algorithm. ...the DSP regenerates 7.1 in a way that it thinks will approximately re-create the proper intended imaging for each passenger in the radically different car interior...
While your conjecture certainly makes sense, there is a DSP option, and it's not unreasonable to expect that the "ML Surround" (DSP on) mode would be useful specifically for enabling all seating positions in the cabin to hear a balanced "surround" mix, while discrete 5.1 (DSP off) would be appropriate for the driver alone. After all, that's the one seat in the cabin that will always be occupied while the car is in operation.
Trending Topics
01-13-10, 01:10 PM
#8
Driver School Candidate
Join Date: Mar 2009
Location: CA
Posts: 35
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
True, it shouldn't be called "discrete 5.1". Certainly this would be an innacurate description of the system, if the DSP function is non-defeatable.
At the same time, I suspect that the downmix/upmix process produces better surround imaging in-car than a simple discrete mapping--for both multi-seat- and single-seat-optimized modes. Does the ML system give you the option to specify "driver only"?
At the same time, I suspect that the downmix/upmix process produces better surround imaging in-car than a simple discrete mapping--for both multi-seat- and single-seat-optimized modes. Does the ML system give you the option to specify "driver only"?
01-14-10, 11:11 AM
#9
Driver
Thread Starter
I just stopped by my Lexus dealer with my test disc in tow. While they did not have an ES equipped with ML on site, they were kind enough to let me audition an LX in the showroom. (Yes, it's the 19-speaker, 450W version, but the head unit is essentially the same -- they all "provide discrete 5.1-multichannel playback via a 7.1-channel speaker architecture", so it has nothing to do with the number of speakers or amp power.)
The verdict: there's something wrong with my ML. In the LX, as I cycled through the six tracks that solo each channel, the system played the disc perfectly -- each channel played from its correct position while the remaining channels remained completely silent.
The service rep assisting me admitted that he wasn't quite following what I was saying, so I would have to discuss it with the service manager, who was at lunch at the time. Since I've already been in contact with Lexus corporate over related issues, I said I'd follow up with them first. So, I've called and now I wait for their response.
The verdict: there's something wrong with my ML. In the LX, as I cycled through the six tracks that solo each channel, the system played the disc perfectly -- each channel played from its correct position while the remaining channels remained completely silent.
The service rep assisting me admitted that he wasn't quite following what I was saying, so I would have to discuss it with the service manager, who was at lunch at the time. Since I've already been in contact with Lexus corporate over related issues, I said I'd follow up with them first. So, I've called and now I wait for their response.
02-04-10, 12:51 PM
#10
Driver
Thread Starter
I just got off the phone with Lexus "Customer Satisfaction".
In the interim, I managed to find someone at Harman Becker (the ML amp and speaker manufacturer) who told me that the digital input on the '07 - '09 amp has a throughput limitation, so while the system can do DD and DTS discretely in 5.1, DVD-A, with its much higher data rate, is mixed down to stereo. The 2010 amp, however, can now deliver discrete 5.1 from DVD-As.
Ironic, the way I see it. DD and DTS, both being lossy formats, are more suited to video soundtracks, while DVD-A is truly for high resolution sound. Since the screen lock-out prevents DVD viewing while driving, the ML’s primary use would have to be to listen to music. But the ML’s equalization of multi-channel playback seems to be optimized for movie soundtrack playback -- the boominess that ruins music reproduction actually gives movie soundtracks greater impact. Is this ***-backwards, or what?
Anyway, Lexus was unimpressed by my argument, and they refused to go any further than the $500 service credit they already offered me. I fired off a letter to the VP of Customer Services to let him know I'm not happy. You would think that, especially these days, they’d be more concerned about the loyalty of their customers.
In the interim, I managed to find someone at Harman Becker (the ML amp and speaker manufacturer) who told me that the digital input on the '07 - '09 amp has a throughput limitation, so while the system can do DD and DTS discretely in 5.1, DVD-A, with its much higher data rate, is mixed down to stereo. The 2010 amp, however, can now deliver discrete 5.1 from DVD-As.
Ironic, the way I see it. DD and DTS, both being lossy formats, are more suited to video soundtracks, while DVD-A is truly for high resolution sound. Since the screen lock-out prevents DVD viewing while driving, the ML’s primary use would have to be to listen to music. But the ML’s equalization of multi-channel playback seems to be optimized for movie soundtrack playback -- the boominess that ruins music reproduction actually gives movie soundtracks greater impact. Is this ***-backwards, or what?
Anyway, Lexus was unimpressed by my argument, and they refused to go any further than the $500 service credit they already offered me. I fired off a letter to the VP of Customer Services to let him know I'm not happy. You would think that, especially these days, they’d be more concerned about the loyalty of their customers.
02-04-10, 02:47 PM
#11
Moderator - Electronics Forum
How far up the chain did you talk to? Was it a "typical" customer "service" person or was it someone in middle management?
If the VP has any sense, he or she will do something positive about the situation. At the very least, imo, the ML system is being misrepresented.
Or maybe it'll take a "flaming arrow/flaming attorney letter" to wake them up. From the situation as of now, it seems they don't want to get off their chairs to do anything.
If the VP has any sense, he or she will do something positive about the situation. At the very least, imo, the ML system is being misrepresented.
Or maybe it'll take a "flaming arrow/flaming attorney letter" to wake them up. From the situation as of now, it seems they don't want to get off their chairs to do anything.
02-05-10, 07:03 AM
#12
Driver
Thread Starter
Sensing that this meant a negative disposition, I was determined to have my say. After some Googling, I called the Torrance location using their main 310 number, and the receptionist put me through to her phone. The first couple times it went to voicemail, but yesterday she picked up. When I introduced myself, her first question was, "What number did you call?" Obviously, she was not too happy that I managed to reach out and touch her!
She was clearly resisting any further discussion of the issue. Whether it was her call, or someone higher up, their position was the service credit already issued was sufficient for my trouble (I was again asking for my original request, a cash refund for the approximate amount of the ML option on my 3-yr lease, about $750, which I believe is reasonable.) Anyway, I made her say it -- "Lexus is declining your request."
I immediately composed a letter to Albert A. Smith, who is Toyota Motor Sales USA VP of Customer Services, Lexus Division. Depending on what happens, another one will go to Mark Templin.
I wonder if I'm suffering from bad timing -- perhaps they're so distracted with the recall and now the Prius issues, that they have no time for the "small" stuff.
05-03-10, 03:37 PM
#13
Driver
Thread Starter
Finally!
This thread has been dormant for nearly three months, but that's how long it took to finally resolve this with Lexus.
A little over six weeks after I sent my letter to Al Smith, I received a voicemail from an Executive Coordinator named Vaughn Wendelstadt, saying he wanted to discuss my concern. Upon calling back, he asked me to thoroughly explain the points I had touched on in the letter. After a half hour, he indicated he had a good understanding of the issue and my position, and told me to expect a call in about a week.
Two weeks later, I called him back, and he quickly apologized, saying that things had been quite busy, alluding to the safety recall circus. He then said that while the ML system wasn't offered as a stand-alone option, he figured the MSRP of the system was $1600. After a long pause, he said evenly, "So, we're going to send you a check for $1600. Would that be acceptable?" (Um, hell yeah!!)
He said it would take about two weeks -- three and a half weeks later, there it was in my mailbox today.
So a little persistence paid off. Certainly disconcerting that it took so much effort to be heard and get satisfaction, but they ultimately did the right thing. Plus, I still have the $500 service credit, so I'm pretty happy as a Lexus owner right now. (Now if I can only get that damn auto-intermittent wiper to work right...)
A little over six weeks after I sent my letter to Al Smith, I received a voicemail from an Executive Coordinator named Vaughn Wendelstadt, saying he wanted to discuss my concern. Upon calling back, he asked me to thoroughly explain the points I had touched on in the letter. After a half hour, he indicated he had a good understanding of the issue and my position, and told me to expect a call in about a week.
Two weeks later, I called him back, and he quickly apologized, saying that things had been quite busy, alluding to the safety recall circus. He then said that while the ML system wasn't offered as a stand-alone option, he figured the MSRP of the system was $1600. After a long pause, he said evenly, "So, we're going to send you a check for $1600. Would that be acceptable?" (Um, hell yeah!!)
He said it would take about two weeks -- three and a half weeks later, there it was in my mailbox today.
So a little persistence paid off. Certainly disconcerting that it took so much effort to be heard and get satisfaction, but they ultimately did the right thing. Plus, I still have the $500 service credit, so I'm pretty happy as a Lexus owner right now. (Now if I can only get that damn auto-intermittent wiper to work right...)
05-11-10, 06:54 PM
#14
Driver
Join Date: Aug 2005
Location: nc
Posts: 105
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Interesting that you posed this recently. My excitement with the ML system resolved quickly when I inserted my favorite, DVD-A, Steely Dan Gaucho, and it sounded like crap. Really couldn't hear the harmonizing vocals.
Really don't see much difference between the "ML surround" and the 3/2.1 recording. Both sound bad.
From what I understand from the above information, my DVD videos with DD will sound better than my DVD-A. Pisses me off...
Really don't see much difference between the "ML surround" and the 3/2.1 recording. Both sound bad.
From what I understand from the above information, my DVD videos with DD will sound better than my DVD-A. Pisses me off...
05-12-10, 08:32 AM
#15
Driver
Thread Starter
I did stumble upon a quick and easy partial solution to the frequency response issue, though. Regular CDs, when played with the MLS DSP enabled, lose most of the 250 Hz hump. It's not perfect, but it's tolerable, and definitely better than the crap sound quality of the stock 'premium' system. Now, this works in my '09 ES -- can't say how it will sound in the other models.