Head-Fi.org › Forums › Equipment Forums › Sound Science › Blu-Ray Audio: The latest gimmick?
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

Blu-Ray Audio: The latest gimmick? - Page 2

post #16 of 129
Thread Starter 
Quote:
Originally Posted by bigshot View Post
 

No. The center channel allows you to separate the front for a wider soundstage, and the rears mesh with the mains to create an ambience that pulls the front soundstage toward the listening position a bit, giving it depth and a slight ambience in the rear that creates the feeling of a larger room. It's a phase thing. The room isn't dead behind you. If fills in just enough to feel present, but not enough to shift the front stage.

 

My Yamaha AV receiver has a 7:1 Stereo DSP that takes stereo recordings and maintains the front stage and stereo placement, but opens it out to fill the room. Hard to describe, but if you cup your hands behind your ears while you listen to two channel, you'll sort of get the idea.

 

When you switch from mono to stereo on a 2 channel system the stage stays the same, but the phase fills in and opens it up. It's like that except all around you.


Sounds interesting. I hope I can try it out somewhere.

 

This morning I was also wondering about the way we make our transducers. The way I see it, most musical instruments that can produce sound unamplified will do so in a three dimensional manner.

I'm assuming the sound dispersion at won't be entirely uniform, but it will have a spherical spread.  Now, this means that the current speaker design we have doesn't exactly produce sound in a fully spherical space, more like a part of it. This will affect the reflections and hence ambience.

 

Does that mean there's no real replacement for a musical instrument?


Edited by proton007 - 10/14/13 at 1:31am
post #17 of 129

If you ever get to Los Angeles, I'd be happy to demo my system for you.

 

Directionality is the one aspect of sound reproduction that really isn't reproducible.

post #18 of 129
Thread Starter 
Quote:
Originally Posted by bigshot View Post
 

If you ever get to Los Angeles, I'd be happy to demo my system for you.

 

Directionality is the one aspect of sound reproduction that really isn't reproducible.

 

Well, who knows, maybe one day I will get to LA. Thanks for the offer.

 

Regarding directionality, I get what you mean. The musicians won't go out of work for a while.

post #19 of 129
Quote:
Originally Posted by bigshot View Post
 

Which is a shame, because 5:1 for music is as big an improvement over stereo as stereo was over mono.

Listening in 5.1 is the best way to listen to music....sadly, it's not caught on by the majority ! People don't know what they're missing out on....

 

On the subject of topic, I now have 8 Blu Ray Audio titles....another two on the way. I have to say that i'm very impressed with them ! I would prefer more titles in 5.1, but the stereo only discs are of a high quality fidelity, some slightly marginally better than others. In my opinion, it all comes down to the mastering, regardless of format....but as I said, i'm very impressed with this new format.

post #20 of 129
Quote:
Originally Posted by Rob49 View Post
 

Listening in 5.1 is the best way to listen to music....sadly, it's not caught on by the majority ! People don't know what they're missing out on....

 

On the subject of topic, I now have 8 Blu Ray Audio titles....another two on the way. I have to say that i'm very impressed with them ! I would prefer more titles in 5.1, but the stereo only discs are of a high quality fidelity, some slightly marginally better than others. In my opinion, it all comes down to the mastering, regardless of format....but as I said, i'm very impressed with this new format.

 

People don't know what they're missing out on? With 5.1? I think it was tried and just was not seen as a net positive for normal music listening.

 

Personally, I decided to experiment with multi channel sound at one point and found it essentially a waste of time and money for music listening, the only exceptions being intentionally gimmicked recordings where discrete sound sources were mixed into the rear channels (basically rock music). Personally, I can do without these gimmicky recordings being reproduced this way. But YMMV.

 

BTW, I heard a Sony demo at an audio show of 5.1 of a piece of Jazz music. The drummer was mixed into the rear channel (LOL) and all I could think of was why didn't he get up on stage with the other chaps.

 

The concert hall ambience is already present in two channel and is not perceived at all as coming from behind in a live concert situation. Experimenting with varying the level of the rears, the sound was most "concert hall like" to me when the rear channels were at minimum, eg. turned off! Excepting, of course, for the applause at the end of the concert which truly can be perceived as coming from behind in the live context (how much depending on where in the hall you are sitting, of course). I decided to live with the applause not partially coming from behind :evil:

 

Better to invest in 2 truly excellent channels than 5 mediocre channels. Of course, if you have the bucks, purchase 5 excellent channels, knock yourself out. You can always turn them off when not needed (which is most of the time)...

 

Kevin

post #21 of 129
Quote:
Originally Posted by k3oxkjo View Post
 

 

People don't know what they're missing out on? With 5.1? I think it was tried and just was not seen as a net positive for normal music listening. Personally, I decided to experiment with multi channel sound at one point and found it essentially a waste of time and money for music listening, the only exceptions being intentionally gimmicked recordings where discrete sound sources were mixed into the rear channels (basically rock music).

 

You didn't get your channels balanced if that's the case. 5:1 isn't about stuff coming at you from all sides, it's about creating a coherent sound field with enveloping phase all around you. It's very hard to balance and EQ all the channels and it takes good speakers and a decent sized room, but the improvement is great, even on two channel stereo recordings.

 

The problem is, most 5:1 and 7:1 systems are designed for movies, not music. Which is a shame, because a system that is tweaked to work well with music sounds better for movies too. But any good system starts with really good speakers up front... mains, center and sub. The rears are less important because they are basically filling in phase, not presenting instruments directly. The soundstage is up front, but there definitely is sound coming at you from the rear at a concert hall. That's what gives you the feeling for the hall itself.

 

People who think multichannel sound doesn't sound good have never heard good multichannel sound.


Edited by bigshot - 10/18/13 at 10:17am
post #22 of 129
I also use a 7.1 system and music never has caught on for me. If Yamaha has done some magic tinkering cool. But we are used to hearing a band in front of us. Stereo has done that. Center channels will either take the vocals out of the stereo mix and present them separately or they mix the left and right channels to offer another presentation. The sides and rears have no purpose other than offering the crowd noise and possibly any venue reflections. I got the DSofM 5.1 and was really imagining a wild ride. All they did was run sounds around and cross channels from front to back. It wasn't what I thought it might be.

If anyone has a 5.1 mix that I should try that offers a different presentation that's more in line with what the technology offers, please suggest one.
post #23 of 129

Until you get the channels to mesh properly, things just sound like they're coming from various directions with different sound quality. The purpose of the center channel in music isn't to split off vocals. It's to allow you to move your mains further apart without having the soundstage disappear in the middle. The only way for that to work is for the center channel to be perfectly level matched to hand off properly, and for it to be EQed to perfectly match the mains in sound.

 

Next is doing the same thing with the subwoofer. You need to exactly balance the volume and crossover, so when a bass line descends below 80Hz (or whatever your crossover point is), it won't change volume at any point in the descent. That is a LOT harder to achieve than it sounds.

 

Once you get the fronts all balanced, then you introduce the rears and do the same level/EQ balancing on them to get the sound field to mesh from the center listening position. Odds are that as you adjust the rears, you'll need to readjust the fronts. The whole process is like parallel parking, with progressively smaller and smaller corrections. It took me several months of tinkering.

 

When you're done, the soundstage is rock solid in front, but it extends out into the room a little with depth. The whole room has a live feel with no dead spots, even when you move away from the center listening position. It's like the difference between mono and stereo, except the phase fills all around you instead of just in front. Sound doesn't seem to come from the speakers directly, but from points within the soundstage in three dimensional space.

 

It's a lot of work to set up 5:1 for music and most people don't have the space to do it right. I see photos online of 5:1 setups in tiny basement rooms set up as home theaters, and I know it just isn't possible to pull it off in a room like that. I would bet that most surround setups are setup wrong, so it's not surprising that people haven't heard what a good one can do.

post #24 of 129
Quote:
Originally Posted by k3oxkjo View Post
 

 

People don't know what they're missing out on? With 5.1? I think it was tried and just was not seen as a net positive for normal music listening.

 

Personally, I decided to experiment with multi channel sound at one point and found it essentially a waste of time and money for music listening, the only exceptions being intentionally gimmicked recordings where discrete sound sources were mixed into the rear channels (basically rock music). Personally, I can do without these gimmicky recordings being reproduced this way. But YMMV.

 

BTW, I heard a Sony demo at an audio show of 5.1 of a piece of Jazz music. The drummer was mixed into the rear channel (LOL) and all I could think of was why didn't he get up on stage with the other chaps.

 

The concert hall ambience is already present in two channel and is not perceived at all as coming from behind in a live concert situation. Experimenting with varying the level of the rears, the sound was most "concert hall like" to me when the rear channels were at minimum, eg. turned off! Excepting, of course, for the applause at the end of the concert which truly can be perceived as coming from behind in the live context (how much depending on where in the hall you are sitting, of course). I decided to live with the applause not partially coming from behind :evil:

 

Better to invest in 2 truly excellent channels than 5 mediocre channels. Of course, if you have the bucks, purchase 5 excellent channels, knock yourself out. You can always turn them off when not needed (which is most of the time)...

 

Kevin

Can you explain how you "experimented" please ? What equipment & format ( sacd ? dvd-a ? ) were you using ?

post #25 of 129

There are a lot of classical and opera blu-rays that have spectacular 5:1 sound. I have a lot of surround recordings, and the only 5:1 disk I have that has instruments mixed to the back channel is Roy Orbison's Black and White Night.

post #26 of 129
Quote:
Originally Posted by bigshot View Post
 

 

You didn't get your channels balanced if that's the case. 5:1 isn't about stuff coming at you from all sides, it's about creating a coherent sound field with enveloping phase all around you. It's very hard to balance and EQ all the channels and it takes good speakers and a decent sized room, but the improvement is great, even on two channel stereo recordings.

 

The problem is, most 5:1 and 7:1 systems are designed for movies, not music. Which is a shame, because a system that is tweaked to work well with music sounds better for movies too. But any good system starts with really good speakers up front... mains, center and sub. The rears are less important because they are basically filling in phase, not presenting instruments directly. The soundstage is up front, but there definitely is sound coming at you from the rear at a concert hall. That's what gives you the feeling for the hall itself.

 

People who think multichannel sound doesn't sound good have never heard good multichannel sound.

I totally agree with you. I must admit I've never tweaked my set up, and all I can say is, that I've never been anything but impressed with 5.1 surround sound. Some mixes better than others, A "coherent sound field with enveloping phase all around you", is an excellent description. "Surround sound" is exactly what it is, in simple terms. I appreciate what you're saying about the use of rears, but disagree with your statement, "not presenting instruments directly"....well done mixes, have more than ambient sound from the rears.....but I guess what you're saying is that the "main body of sound is from the centre & fronts

Some people may think of surround sound music as gimmicky ( perhaps they've never really heard it properly ?? ) but I never fail to be blown away by it, or tire of listening to it.

post #27 of 129

I mostly listen to classical and jazz and those always have a front soundstage. It's probably different with pop music.

post #28 of 129
Quote:
Originally Posted by bigshot View Post
 

I mostly listen to classical and jazz and those always have a front soundstage. It's probably different with pop music.

Yes, I have some classical & soundtrack titles, and they only have ambient sound in the rears.

post #29 of 129
My room is 13' 6" by 26' and is setup with a DVD cal. disc volume matched through electrostatic speakers so again I ask, what blu ray discs do you recommend?
post #30 of 129
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:
  Return Home
  Back to Forum: Sound Science
Head-Fi.org › Forums › Equipment Forums › Sound Science › Blu-Ray Audio: The latest gimmick?