Multi channel audio from Stereo

Drumingman · February 2006

I like to use the sound processors built
into the modern equipment of today that
take a stereo recording and make it into a
psuedo surround sounding piece.
I notice that a lot of you like regular stereo.
Given the technology available to extract more
sound from the limited stereo format, including
ambience and reflections from the studio or arena
where the recording made, why do you choose the
2 channel format?

Just wondering

Shizelbs · February 2006

Surround sound is gimmicky. I don't want some lamed assed computer chip to tell the source where to send the sound. I want the musicians and the pros doing the recording and mixed to determine how my system will reproduce the sound.

I really don't like surround music. I am 'this close' to saying I hate it. I totally lose my aural boner when the snare is behind me and to the left, the bass drum, well, you never know where its coming from, and each cymbal seems to have its own speaker. Maybe if I ever attended a concert and literally got to sit on the drum set, it would be okay, but until then, I want a well recorded piece of music to be played in front of me.

reeltrouble1 · February 2006

Most surround receivers are mechanical sounding to my ear. The chip in your example is matrixing tracks, nothing discreet, the music lacks, well, musicality. Little stage, depth, heighth, crazy imaging. I tried the multi-format SACD when if first came out, it had some cool factor for demo and so on, but after a bit, eh, I can deal with DSOTM on SACD and Alison Krausse Union Station Live is done well. But I only use them for multi demo's to folks who want to hear it.

Back in the day I played on stages, never sounded to me like what I hear that receiver. Of course those bands did not exactly become legends or even footnotes for that matter.

Surround for movies, yea, I like that. Some here dont, and I have no beef with them.

Music--viva 2channel, forever.

RT1

Ricardo · February 2006

It is normal for people to think that multi channel music is cool/sounds good, until they hear a GOOD stereo rig....and I don't mean a $10,000 rig; just the right speakers with the right separates.

I can speak for that

ohskigod · February 2006

I tried that route with the pro logics and whatnot. Just couldnt get the sound I wanted. not bad mind you, just not hwta I wanted. went with a seperate 2 channel for music and never looked back. I started small and grew it slowly by buying and selling used equipment. speakers, amps, pre's, whatever. the CD player and my current LSi9's were bought new.

John K. · February 2006

Drummer, you raise a good point, and my own view is that I'd never again voluntarily limit myself to using two speakers with two-channel material when a surround speaker setup and a receiver with good ambience extraction processing are available. Sometimes there's a misconception about this and it's confused with the processing(e.g. Jazz Club, Beergarden, Sportin' House, etc.)that arbitrarily adds artificial reverberation to what's contained on the recording. The best ambience processors, such as DPLIIx and Logic 7, add nothing but instead do a very good job of detecting the out-of-phase ambience that's naturally present(in varying degrees)in all two-channel recordings. This is reflected ambience coming from the sides and other directions other than the front which was picked up by the microphones. This then had to be mixed into the two front channels not because of any "intent", but simply because there was no other place to put it.

Except for someone within a few feet of the musicians(e.g. the conductor)the majority of sound at a performance doesn't come at us directly from the the front, but rather as reflected sound from other directions. When processing such as DPLIIx or Logic 7 removes this from the front speakers and steers it to the surrounds where it belongs we get a little closer to reality in our listening. If we have the speakers and receiver to do this, we should use all the capabilities that we've paid for, not throw them away.

dorokusai · February 2006

I thoroughly enjoy 5.1 audio.

ohskigod · February 2006

Like Doro, I like to DVD audio, particularly concert dvd's (recorded well). I just assume its because it is recorded in 5.1. I like that, and movies, enough to have invested in a pretty good (if I say so myself) theater system. SO trust me when I say the points above are not falling on deaf ears. I love my theater system and it aint going anywhere.
but the 2 channel recordings? I just like themn in 2 channel, not DPL2 (dont know what logic 7 is, but i'm pretty retarded when it comes to all of the surround modes, maybe thats my problem.)

doesnt make anyone right or wrong, just preference

ND13 · February 2006

HTrookie wrote:

It is normal for people to think that multi channel music is cool/sounds good, until they hear a GOOD stereo rig....and I don't mean a $10,000 rig; just the right speakers with the right separates.

I can speak for that

EZ!!

It's now time to officially change your monicker. You have graduated and are no longer a rookie!!!

dorokusai · February 2006

HTrookie wrote:

It is normal for people to think that multi channel music is cool/sounds good, until they hear a GOOD stereo rig....and I don't mean a $10,000 rig; just the right speakers with the right separates.

I can speak for that

I should just set my 2CH rig on fire then eh?

Ricardo · February 2006

dorokusai wrote:

I should just set my 2CH rig on fire then eh?

Or you could give it on a Karma.

shack · February 2006

MC music sucks.

heiney9 · February 2006

dorokusai wrote:

I should just set my 2CH rig on fire then eh?

Actually, at the next Polk-Fest we could do a 2 channel audio burning, like a book burning. Man, so glad they opened my eyes and ears to pseudo-multi channel ambient, reflective, circular, all emcompassing, right in the middle, what was I thinking before sound.

Ah, what the hell I'll just take my rig down to the local Goodwill

H9

P.S. For those with thin skin, this was meant to be humorous not to crap on peoples gear or preferences.

ND13 · February 2006

I must have misread HTR's post or something.

I didn't read "let's all go out and burn our good 2-channels rigs" into it....quite the opposite is what I gathered.

bobman1235 · February 2006

HTrookie wrote:

Or you could give it on a Karma.

In....

george daniel · February 2006

bobman1235 wrote:

In....

heiney9 · February 2006

ND13 wrote:

I must have misread HTR's post or something. I didn't read "let's all go out and burn our good 2-channels rigs" into it....quite the opposite is what I gathered.

My comments were in general, not aimed at a particular person, certainly not HTR as he seems to agree with my POV. Basically my post was useless in answering the original posters ?.

H9

Ricardo · February 2006

Noel, H9.... Right on!!

dorokusai · February 2006

"It is normal for people to think that multi channel music is cool/sounds good, until they hear a GOOD stereo rig...."

So MC is cool UNTIL they hear a GOOD stereo rig, then it's not cool anymore?

heiney9 · February 2006

John K. wrote:

Drummer, you raise a good point, and my own view is that I'd never again voluntarily limit myself to using two speakers with two-channel material when a surround speaker setup and a receiver with good ambience extraction processing are available. Sometimes there's a misconception about this and it's confused with the processing(e.g. Jazz Club, Beergarden, Sportin' House, etc.)that arbitrarily adds artificial reverberation to what's contained on the recording. The best ambience processors, such as DPLIIx and Logic 7, add nothing but instead do a very good job of detecting the out-of-phase ambience that's naturally present(in varying degrees)in all two-channel recordings. This is reflected ambience coming from the sides and other directions other than the front which was picked up by the microphones. This then had to be mixed into the two front channels not because of any "intent", but simply because there was no other place to put it.

Except for someone within a few feet of the musicians(e.g. the conductor)the majority of sound at a performance doesn't come at us directly from the the front, but rather as reflected sound from other directions. When processing such as DPLIIx or Logic 7 removes this from the front speakers and steers it to the surrounds where it belongs we get a little closer to reality in our listening. If we have the speakers and receiver to do this, we should use all the capabilities that we've paid for, not throw them away.

Just curious, how do you take a cd mixed for left and right channels, feed the signal into and HT receiver and not call it processing? It's a matrix algorithm that simulates, eg; the 7 channel setting, club, stadium, etc. Ambience extraction is what I just described, how is it more realistic? It's still just L & R channel info. It's fake. It brings you no closer to the real expericence. It's pseudo effect to make you think it's recreating the real thing. It's no different than a 2-channel system where the mixer/engineer is placing instruments, varing delay's, using unorthodox recording methods to recreate a sound-field. IMO, a very well recorded and mixed 2-channel recording on an excellent 2-channel rig is much closer to the real thing, than some pseudo matrixing algorithm that processes everything the same way. Is 2-channel the perfect answer to reproducing sound as it would be live? NO.

I agree stuff that's been mixed well for 5.1 audio on the right system, set-up properly, with excellent components (ie; seperates) with an excellent quality processor (not and AVR) sounds damn fine. But I'm not willing to spend that kind of coin yet on a 5.1 setup. Until then an excellent 2-channels set-up optimally will always sound better than a pseuo-processed multi-channel set-up.

Just IMHO

H9

aaharvel · February 2006

i'm no longer a fan of logic 7. after listening closely, it adds serious coloration and unnecessary volume to the left rear/side surrounds.

DPLIIx, on the other hand is very well done. I'm ready to get a stand-alone 2ch. music system as well whenever I get the room/funds, but until then, DPLIIx on my mediocore spkrs. sound better imo than straight 2ch. for music. Just make sure the 'centerwidth' parameter is set to 4 or higher. It's default "3" bleeds too much into the center speaker and that drives me nuts.

As for SACD M.C., i like that very much. I don't have a disc yet that utilizes the center speaker any louder than the surrounds. From a volume standpoint, it's still a primarily 2.0 format. Good mixing from the studios if you ask me.

F1nut · February 2006

shack wrote:

MC music sucks.

Amen!

danger boy · February 2006

I like some DVD-A/SACD music.. some of it's fun to listen to if it's mixed well. Alot of it bites terabytes.

I wouldn't try listening to a stereo recording in any kind of DSP mode.. such as DPLIIx, or any of the other mondo processed modes. That's why I, like many other have a seperate 2 ch. only rig. The HT doesn't sound very good at all for stereo music listening.

wingnut4772 · February 2006

I am a reformed multichannel music girl. Stereo done right is just so much more absorbing and involving. 2 channel rules for music ..I do love my PLIIx for movies though.