a/v processor

Thinking of replacing Mcintosh 122 a/v processor.  Need some help on brands and models to meet my needs.  I live in Alaska so high end stuff non existent in the state, as is the tech advise.  I currently have basic 5.2 system with fronts driven Mcintosh 611s, to be replaced with Luxman m99us.  Center channel driven by Mcintosh 302 and rears driven by Mcintosh 452.  I have 2 subs.  Here is my criteria;
High quality 2 channel playback
Ability to decode all major formats, Imax DTS pro Dolby etc.
Superior DAC chip
Future HDMI 2.1 upgradability 
Anything other than Audisey room correction.  
More than 9 channels.
All advise suggestions welcome.
Dear guy t we sell manyof the best processors

Please reach out we can be of some guidance 
We sell Audio control, Anthem, Nad Masters and others

Dave and troy

Post removed 
If 2-channel is important I wouldn’t leave it to an AVP to handle it, even a good one.  I’d suggest getting something like the Yamaha CX-A5200 from accessories4less.com for $2200 and a good stereo preamp and standalone DAC as you’ll get much better 2-channel performance for the $ that way IME.  Hook the front L/R pre outs from the AVP into the stereo pre and you’re good to go — the AVP will be completely out of the signal path for critical 2-channel listening.  Just my $0.02 FWIW, and best of luck. 
I have a Lyngdorf AV-Pre on the way.

So I’VE no concrete idea yet on its 2-channel performance, but I report in a couple of months if you have not gotten to a solution by then.
You are a bit limited in higher end gear choices.(I chose he Lyngdorf over a Mc solution on cost... but it is not exactly a budget AV.)
no problem on the wait.  The longer the wait the more likely some of the better brands will be supporting HDMI 2.1.
The "Future HDMI 2.1 upgradability" is going to kill you.  There are only a few processors that would fall into this range:

Theta Casablanca
Bryston (maybe, but it is a very small maybe)

The NAD is the cheapest up-gradable processor in this list.  However, I don't know if you realize that HDMI 2.1 doesn't really give you much.  The main new features are only support for high frame rate 4K (120hz) and 8K video.  I am of the opinion that 4K is already overkill and 8K really doesn't give you much.  I actually still run a 1080p projector filling a 105" diagonal screen.  While I can easily see that 4K would be an improvement, 8K is just not needed (but it's the next marketing item for mass market consumer electronics).

There may be a small number of processors that support HDMI 2.1 already.  However, pretty much all new processors support HDMI 2.0 and HDCP 2.2 (which is what you really want anyways).

If you really want HDMI 2.1, you will likely wait at least 4-5 years for some of the higher end brands to support that.  8K is very new and I wonder if it will actually end up a dead-end (like 3D video did).  It really doesn't add to the videophile results.  It is mainly used as a filming and editing format for Hollywood where extreme resolution is important when you are doing complex editing and graphic effects.  Once it's mastered, the down-convert to 4K or 1080p will be just fine. 
Ok take 2.1 out of the equasion and focus on two channel play back.
I can bypass the a/v processor with connection directly to the tv and get the 48 gps bandwidth for PC games etc.  What a/v processor has significantly superior audio resolution and s/n ratio compared to the Mcintosh mx 122 a/v processor.

Is the DAC chip the limiting factor?

Any opinion/experience with Anthem 90, Datasat, JBL etc, having an audio advantage over the mx122 Mac?
Thanks again.
The type of DAC chip itself has very little to do with the sound (maybe about 5% impact).  In my opinion, the important sections are power supply architecture/parts (about 55%) and the I/V and analog stages (about 35%).

Others have said Audiocontrol has good stereo sound.  It is very hefty at 27 lbs, which indicates a good size linear power supply and supporting circuitry.  However, I don't know if anyone here has direct experience.

I know that McIntosh processors (including your MX122) have very excellent power supply sections.  I think moving to a different processor will really only give you a slightly different sonic signature.  The more expensive MX160 or MX170 processors will likely improve on the sonic signature of your MX122 and will contain the Lyngdorf digital section (which is better) instead of the Marantz digital section.

The Datasat has massive amounts of ASIC DSP chips (4 big ones) for a large amount of DSP processing.  It does have good power supplies, but it use a 25-pin computer plug for all audio outputs.  This means you have the use the 25-pin to XLR break-out cable for audio connections.  I did read one review where the guy said there was no significant improvement over his current Meridian 861.
I have narrowed down my selection to replace the mx 122 between the Audio Control Maestro X9 and the Lyngdorf MP-60 2.1.  The Audio control was selected because of the DACs, ESS, for two channel audio quality and the Lyngdorf because of the HDMI 2.1 ability related to video 120 fps at 4K.  Anyone have any experience/knowledge  with either of these processors to help me make a educated decision.
Look at the Lyngdorf MP-60 2.1. It is the only high end processor that I know of that has 2.1 now, and includes all the formats you listed. I’ve had the MP-50 in the past, if felt it was a very excellent receiver.  It is VERY easy to set up and calibrate.  I’m now waiting for my MP-60 2.1 to arrive. Until then, I have a Datasat RS20i. This is an incredible sounding pre-pro as well and I haven’t even take the time to calibrate it.

Look at the Lyngdorf MP-60 2.1. It is the only high end processor that I know of that has 2.1 now, and includes all the formats you listed. I’ve had the MP-50 in the past, if felt it was a very excellent receiver.  It is VERY easy to set up and calibrate.  I’m now waiting for my MP-60 2.1 to arrive. 
Where are you at?