Surround Sound - Input 7.1 users - Speakup!

scottvamp

http://forum.ecoustics.com/bbs/messages/34579/129023.html

http://www.audioholics.com/techtips/setup/loudspeakers/hometheaterspeakerlayout.php

http://www.dolby.com/consumer/home_entertainment/roomlayout.html

http://www.cnet.com/4520-7386_1-6214422-7.html

http://www.connectedhomemag.com/HomeTheater/Articles/Index.cfm?ArticleID=41924

ben62670

HTrookie wrote:

Interesting how this 2 channel vs. 5/6/7.1 discussion shows up so often.


What I will never understand is why some people say that they like to listen to multi channel material with two speakers. It's like buying a high end SACD player, only SACD's, and use two speakers; you would be missing so much. Same with DD or DTS movies through two speakers

If you set your SACD player to 2 channel then all the material is there in "hi def audio" its just 2 channel. When I bought Stings SACD A Brand New Day it was neat hearing audio coming from all directions. You would hear sounds like a bell, or a knock. With a clean system it makes you look to see who is there. After the initial technological bliss the music just didn't seem natural. I prefer to listen to good quality music in 2 channel. An SACD is better than a standard CD. So I will continue to use the 2 channel option that the record companies have included in their DVDA, and SACD's. When company comes over I will put back to 5.1 for the wow factor, and when they are ready to sit down, and enjoy high quality music I will set it back at 2.0 . Now if I had a dedicated HT room I would have the room treated to control sound reflections. Then I might enjoy the 5.1 a little more. To me without the proper listening environment having 6 to 8 channels running with all those speakers running there is just to many sound waves going in 90 different directions. If you could see the sound waves bouncing off of all those walls, furniture, floor, and the ceiling you might be able to understand where I am coming from.

Any way to each his own

Ben

Ricardo

ben62670 wrote:

Any way to each his own

Ben

Agree; if everyone did the same and liked the same, it would be so boring

wingnut4772

What I was told and have experienced, is that if your system is set up properly , 2 channel sounds better than multichannel for music. A really good cd to test your speaker placement is Roger Waters 'Amused to Death'. He experiemented with the illusion of surround while only in 2 channel. If your speakers are set up properly in the room you will swear your surrounds are active even though it's in stereo. I bought this cd just to dial in my speakers and have not moved them since. The HT sound has benefitted as well.

wallstreet

Gaara wrote:

7.1 Question for all those reading, what formula do you use for separation of the rears? I have read some keep them 3 ft apart or less as per THX spec, some do equilateral triangle like the fronts, and some do 1.2 x distance to rear wall. Just wondering where everyone falls between these three.

Also, how much info does actually get sent to the rear surrounds using PLIIx? I am upgrading my surrounds and am not sure if it is worth it to upgrade the rears. I currently do not have a pre that can do PLIIx, and was planning on upgrading that in the next 6 months or so; perhaps once the new Dolby and DTS formats settle in.

Jared

No formula other than placing close together to take advantage of THX's Advanced Speaker Array (http://www.thx.com/mod/products/speakermodes.html. I can't comment on PLIIx as I haven't upgraded my B&K for the new surround modes.

frodaddy

I just went from 5.1 to 7.1; like 5 minutes ago. I'm completely blown away by it right now, to me it made a huge difference. It's not exactly like going from 2d video games to 3d, but more like 2.5d to 3d. Still, it's a big difference and got me REALLY excited after watching the pod race scene. When things pan from the front to the back, they really DO GO FROM THE FRONT TO THE BACK. Before the L/R surrounds were creating a stereo image that sounded like it was coming from above me, so the sound would go halfway through my living room and skyrocket 180 degrees up once it got to me. (Yes, I was well within dolby spec for 5.1.) I got used to it, but wow I'm never going back to 5.1 again. Everything sounds like it should now.

Even though the rear is matrixed together, when things pan to the right middle it sounds like it goes there. This is because the right surround is playing loudly, and the matrixed rear quiets somewhat to create a believable discrete rear channel. The stereo image that a L/R surround used to create is sent to the matrixed rear, but it also leaves some sound in the L/R. This is where you get the "more enveloping" sound that people talk about the most. But, the pans really do trick your mind into thinking more is going on back there!

I gotta get back to some listening I set my two rear speakers up to be almost directly behind me, but just far enough out that my brain doesn't interpret the sound coming from above me. They are 5ft apart, but there is a ratio there that you'd want to consider. All of my surrounds are 5-6ft away. I've got a Denon AVR-4800 which uses THX-EX processing (later renamed to dolby-ex IIRC) to matrix the rear. My friend has a more advanced setup than I do and has both dolby pl2x and dolby-ex and can't tell a difference between the two.

Anyway, back to the listening :cool:

Frank Z

http://www.hometheaterforum.com/htf/showthread.php?t=17262&highlight=dts-es

Dennis Gardner

Thanks for the list again Frank. I had it in my favorites, but lost it in the last HTF software upgrade. I looked for it for half an hour last night and all my searches came up empty.

Frank Z

Keyword search for DTS-ES in titles only and there it was.

scottvamp

Thanks for the input Frodaddy. That is what i was looking . Congrats on the upgrade. Really sweet setup you have.
The big difference for me was the rolling sound from front to back and vise versa. With 5.1 one there is a large void, espescially in a larger room. It goes from point A to B. But with sides and rears it rolls perfectly.......

henryhbk

What is the general feeling about bipole vs. dipole modes in each speaker. It seems that one would want dipole on the surrounds and bipole on the rears, but didn't know if there is a "correct" answer for this. I am using fxi5's for both sets.

Dennis Gardner

henryhbk wrote:

What is the general feeling about bipole vs. dipole modes in each speaker. It seems that one would want dipole on the surrounds and bipole on the rears, but didn't know if there is a "correct" answer for this. I am using fxi5's for both sets.

This is a standard for 7.1 surround, dipoles on sides and bipoles for rears. I found mine to work best this way when in my longer room in my last house.

sterling bug

after a month and a half with 7.1 surround sound I would never go back to 5.1. If you have the room and the money its a no brainer which way to go.