Head-Fi.org › Forums › Equipment Forums › Cables, Power, Tweaks, Speakers, Accessories (DBT-Free Forum) › Active Speakers/Monitors: Dispelling the ignorance, confusion and myths
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

Active Speakers/Monitors: Dispelling the ignorance, confusion and myths - Page 10

post #136 of 140
Quote:
Originally Posted by Chris J View Post

 

I'm not ignoring your other posts. I've read them.

 

 

FWIW, I have mixed live and recorded music, and I've been practicing Electrical Engineering for approx. 25 years.

 

Thank you for your patience in answering these questions.

post #137 of 140
Quote:
Originally Posted by Chris J View Post

If a scene is set in the jungle (for example) then you may hear different jungle sounds coming from all 5 speakers to simulate the sound of being in the jungle. The 5 channels may all have some variety of jungle sound, but the 5 channels will all have a slightly different perspective. Since they are all slightly different they will not cancel each other out. When you are in a forest, obviously you can hear sound all around you, no?

 

The rear speaker does make sense to me. Although the sound from the different speakers will effect each other nonetheless(you don't need the exact same frequency for interference). But in a same way the sounds in 'the jungle' would effect each other so this would make up for natural 'jungle sound'.

 

It also makes sense a centre speaker would define the middle of the soundfield, or dialoges. However, in my experience, speakers recreate the soundfield of the recording rather than 'sound' themselves. In my setup voices tend to disappear behind the screen even when positioned away from the middle of the speakers. Maybe not exactly centred I feel a centre would do more worse(destroy the imaging of the fronts) than good. But I am no expert concerning centre speakers. Thanks for the insight.

 

 

 

Quote:
Apparently some directors do not like surround sound (they feel it is too distracting) and like virtually all the sound to come front the front 3 speakers only.

 

I agree with those directors and find myself in that philosophy. 

post #138 of 140
Quote:
Originally Posted by kixxit View Post

Thank you for your patience in answering these questions.

 

Hey, thanks!

 

Quote:
Originally Posted by mcmalden View Post

 

The rear speaker does make sense to me. Although the sound from the different speakers will effect each other nonetheless(you don't need the exact same frequency for interference). But in a same way the sounds in 'the jungle' would effect each other so this would make up for natural 'jungle sound'.

 

It also makes sense a centre speaker would define the middle of the soundfield, or dialoges. However, in my experience, speakers recreate the soundfield of the recording rather than 'sound' themselves. In my setup voices tend to disappear behind the screen even when positioned away from the middle of the speakers. Maybe not exactly centred I feel a centre would do more worse(destroy the imaging of the fronts) than good. But I am no expert concerning centre speakers. Thanks for the insight.

 

I agree with those directors and find myself in that philosophy. 

 

This is probably very obvious to everyone reading this stuff, but keep in mind surround sound movies are mixed in mixing studios with 5.1 monitors.

 

Another thing:

Like most surround sound systems, my speakers are all the same brand and all part of the same model line.

However, like most surround sound systems...............the speakers are not all the same:

The front left and right are full range, with (1) 8" woofer each,

The centre must be crossed over at 80 Hz (it is not full range) and it has two 5.25" woofers,

The rears use (1) 6.5" woofer each and must be crossed over at 80 Hz,

And the mid/tweeters are all slightly different.

So, in reality it is hard to create a truly coherent soundfield from 3 different speakers.

 

Here's director who really doesn't like surrund sound:

Apparently Woody Allen mixes all his movies into MONO.  LOL!

post #139 of 140

The active route also benefits minimalists, those who prefer efficiency of function and form-factor.  Elac has some ribbon monitors with digital input (including optical/toslink) and channel selection.  Take a look at the AM 180 (38-50k hz).

 

elac.com/en/products/Active/AM_180/index.php

post #140 of 140
Quote:
Originally Posted by scalar vortices View Post

The active route also benefits minimalists, those who prefer efficiency of function and form-factor.  Elac has some ribbon monitors with digital input (including optical/toslink) and channel selection.  Take a look at the AM 180 (38-50k hz).

elac.com/en/products/Active/AM_180/index.php

I'm loving the sound and minimalist setup it allows me to focus on the upstream digital signal.
My tube preamp dac has transformed the neutral monitor sound nicely. The
biggest diff I think is at low volume where passives needed big amplification to have that low volume sweetness. My old audiophile rig I used bi-amp towers to achieve that low vol fullness. I agree that actives will always be my speakers for the future.
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:
Head-Fi.org › Forums › Equipment Forums › Cables, Power, Tweaks, Speakers, Accessories (DBT-Free Forum) › Active Speakers/Monitors: Dispelling the ignorance, confusion and myths