Multichannel Sound Systems using stereo recordings

[Ralf11]

41 minutes ago, Kal Rubinson said:

Stereo recordings will play over the L/R speakers as stereo and, therefore, will sound no different from the way they sound now.

 

 

True.  But besides your def'n above, do you think up-mixing will add much to a recording done in stereo?

[Kal Rubinson]

2 minutes ago, Ralf11 said:

 

True.  But besides your def'n above, do you think up-mixing will add much to a recording done in stereo?

Hard to answer.  I have not been satisfied with any of the up-mixers I have tried.  Some like them.

 

OTOH, I said what I said because some people seem to think that multichannel systems are inherently inferior to stereo systems in their playback of stereo material but there is no reason to expect that.

[Axial]

1 hour ago, Fitzcaraldo215 said:

I have in excess of 4,000 to 5,000 of discretely recorded on my NAS.  It is mainly classical, and it encompasses SACD and some downloads plus BD-A and -V.

 

I am thrilled to own it.  I find it to be a substantial upgrade in sonics to my previous attempt at recording collection - previously vinyl and CD over many years, I have thousands of each. I have not bought a CD in over 10 years or certainly and not an LP.  I listen avidly to almost nothing but Mch music, and it indeed is very satisfying.

 

 

 

 

That's a sizeable amount of multichannel music. 

I bet a good percentage of it would fit many Audiophile's lifestyle right here and beyond ...

[Axial]

5 hours ago, Ralf11 said:

Thx - I found a few more.  But am curious as one was George Benson's Breezin' album.  So it must have been multi-tracked in the studio and mixed ot 5.1 - so ...  how well was it done?

I have no clue, I don't have that selection. Someone else might ...

[Axial]

1 hour ago, mansr said:

Isn't it funny how just about everybody who has responded failed to comprehend this simple sentence?

Just about everybody have an expanded vision. It's good for the mind, the soul and the exploration. 

[Ralf11]

Thanks, Kal.

 

BTW, "expanded vision" is good, and while there was a lot of that at CES, this thread is about sound...

[esldude]

In regards to upmixers.  I took a recording of a small group I'd done.  Recorded up close one mike per musician in a small damped room.  I made a stereo mix of it which is what the group wanted.  I also made a 5.1 mix just playing with it.  The ridiculous kind where you are in the middle of the group as a listener.  Because as the recordist I was in the middle and heard it just that way.  In trying upmixers on the AV gear on hand, none sounded like the surround at all.  None created what I considered an improvement over the stereo mix. Some could do something beneficial creating the center channel in a way that was helpful.  Mostly on vocals (possibly because they are summing left and right with EQ for the vocal range?).  I've noticed these also sometimes help with dialog in stereo movie sources. 

 

I also recorded a practice session done in a moderate sized church.  It was recorded as surround, and stereo, and a couple of mike pairs far back just for ambiance.  I liked the surround mix best.  Stereo was good.  Trying upmixing on this stereo gave an effect on some sources like Logix 7 that was similar to stereo combined with the ambiance or room sound pickups.  I never quite liked that as much as a stereo recording that had some room sound in it.  Think closely spaced pairs.  But the upmixing was a little like that only the room sound didn't match well.  Though had I not done the recording you might not notice.  It gave a bigger sound spatially, but was a bit foggy for my tastes. 

 

So on movies some upmixes of stereo movie sound helped with cleaner dialogue in the center channel.  It might help with poorly done vocals on some stereo music to tease out vocals better.  Otherwise I just haven't heard an upmix algorithm I like for very long.  

 

 

[STC]

6 hours ago, Kal Rubinson said:

I have no idea.  Almost all my recordings do not have any applause on them.  There are some "recorded-live" BluRay concerts with applause and a very, very few derived from SACD/DVD-A.  For the life of me, I cannot recall which channels the applause is on because I don't pay any attention to it.

 

The audience applause is the key to see how much space information was captured to justify 5.1 multichannel for classical music.This is a key weakness in recreation of 3D space when the applause direction comes from the front stage. But this is OT.

 

The option to use stereo with multichannel is to send the same signal convoluted to the surround/rear. The concept is available with DTS Virtual X. A similar option is available with a different name in Denon or Marantz AVR, IIRC. The only way you to demonstrate which of these going to sound better is when unadulterated neutral listeners evaluate both options in blind tests. You should try this with some stereo recording in your multichannel system.

[Axial]

1 hour ago, Ralf11 said:

 

It's the internet...

Audiophile style ...

 

1 hour ago, fas42 said:

 

 

I might as well add the obvious answer ... if the rig is working well, then the experience conjured up going multichannel will "barely touch the sides" in terms of "being better" - MCH merely makes the job of having the brain perceive an immersive, full scale experience much easier, for the gear.

 

Since much of the really interesting music is not MCH, one's options are vastly extended by getting the stereo playback right ...

That plus some music stereo recordings have an immersive quality to them.

And some, like Roger Waters - Amused to Death, are spooky in stereo (pleasantly immersive with the QSound process). Too bad that there are not too many of them, I would have like to see QSound taking off on a larger scale, personal preference from stereo recordings. 

 

* It is my assumption that the vast majority of audio people from the WWW (World Wide Web) who frequent audiophile forums, like here, are setting their stereo hi-fi rigs right. 

 

1 hour ago, Miska said:

 

I have for example Genesis SACD + DVD box sets that have 5.1 mixes. Then for example Pink Floyd - DSOTM and WYWH SACD 5.1 mixes (IIRC, originally these were quad mixes thoug).

 

Just to list few interesting multichannel studio mixes.

 

For psychedelic rock and such, multichannel mixes work very well.

I agree that for psychedelic rock music genre (The Doors, Pink Floyd, Iron Butterfly, Beck, Yes, Black Sabbath, Emerson, Lake & Palmer, Jimi Hendrix, etc.) Multichannel is fun in immersive ways. 

 

Short of only having stereo music recordings in a multichannel setup I would dare to explore with some of the better stereo music upmixers, like one I mentioned before...Auro-(((3D))) music mode. ...Some Marantz and Denon components are equipped with it. 

 

Music matters and sound exploration counts. ...From mono to stereo to 3-channel to 5.1 and to infinity and beyond (Buzz Lightyear from 'Toy Story' Quadrilogy). 

[Axial]

56 minutes ago, Ralf11 said:

 

True.  But besides your def'n above, do you think up-mixing will add much to a recording done in stereo?

It is a personal sound exploration in my opinion. 

The freedom to explore our stereo music recordings beyond two channels could be exhilarating, unproductive, enriching, destructive, ... It's a vast ocean, a liberating experience for some, or not. 

 

A different but expensive alternative ...

 

[Axial]

42 minutes ago, Ralf11 said:

Thanks, Kal.

 

BTW, "expanded vision" is good, and while there was a lot of that at CES, this thread is about sound...

Exactly, surround sound. ...Expanded from two-channel stereo. 

[Kal Rubinson]

57 minutes ago, STC said:

The audience applause is the key to see how much space information was captured to justify 5.1 multichannel for classical music.This is a key weakness in recreation of 3D space when the applause direction comes from the front stage. But this is OT.

Ah.  I now recall no more than I did before but I am almost certain that having applause eminate from the front would have surprised and annoyed me.  It's likely I would recall and I do not.

 

59 minutes ago, STC said:

The option to use stereo with multichannel is to send the same signal convoluted to the surround/rear. The concept is available with DTS Virtual X. A similar option is available with a different name in Denon or Marantz AVR, IIRC. The only way you to demonstrate which of these going to sound better is when unadulterated neutral listeners evaluate both options in blind tests. You should try this with some stereo recording in your multichannel system.

I have tried the dts, Dolby and Auro options as well as several others.

[Kal Rubinson]

29 minutes ago, Axial said:

A different but expensive alternative ...

Not it is not.  The Beolab 90 is a highly successful effort to make an ideal speaker with a controlled and relatively narrow dispersion and its development has little or nothing to do with multichannel or immersive playback.  I  know them well:  https://www.stereophile.com/content/bang-olufsen-beolab-90-loudspeaker

 

FWIW, I've had a pair in my living room.  Having 5 would be more than formidable.

[esldude]

21 minutes ago, Kal Rubinson said:

Not it is not.  The Beolab 90 is a highly successful effort to make an ideal speaker with a controlled and relatively narrow dispersion and its development has little or nothing to do with multichannel or immersive playback.  I  know them well:  https://www.stereophile.com/content/bang-olufsen-beolab-90-loudspeaker

 

FWIW, I've had a pair in my living room.  Having 5 would be more than formidable.

Were I you Kal, I'd immediately ask to do a full review of a full Auros 3D setup using those, some Dutch 8&8 C's and Kii Threes.  A shootout of the new DSP speakers if you will.  That voice of god position for the Beolab 90 should be something if nothing else. 

 

 

[STC]

29 minutes ago, Kal Rubinson said:

ot it is not.  The Beolab 90 is a highly successful effort to make an ideal speaker with a controlled and relatively narrow dispersion and its development has little or nothing to do with multichannel or immersive playback.  I  know them well:  https://www.stereophile.com/content/bang-olufsen-beolab-90-loudspeaker

 

 

I am guessing they used crosstalk cancellation with their DSP. There is no way you could get deep soundstage (fig 5.4) or moving the image as shown in fig 1.2 in their whitepaper without XTC.  In your review you mentioned about the lack of focus when the stage was wider which is understandable as XTC requires narrow arrangement.

[Kal Rubinson]

34 minutes ago, esldude said:

Were I you Kal, I'd immediately ask to do a full review of a full Auros 3D setup using those, some Dutch 8&8 C's and Kii Threes.  A shootout of the new DSP speakers if you will.  That voice of god position for the Beolab 90 should be something if nothing else. 

Let me ask my wife about that.😎

[Axial]

2 hours ago, Ralf11 said:

 

Delete 

_____

Fresh: Stereo Upmixers (to multichannel surround sound).

 

• https://www.soundonsound.com/reviews/surround-sound-stereo

 

• https://www.axemusic.com/68920/Pro_Audio_Recording/Recording_Software/Nugen_Audio/Halo_Upmix_-_Stereo_to_5_1_and_7_1_Upmixer_-_Download.htm

 

• https://www.gearslutz.com/board/post-production-forum/1063422-stereo-music-5-1-mix.html

[Axial]

• http://perfectsurround.com/penteo-7-pro-suite/

 

 

[fas42]

Something I just across,

 

 

I would be extremely hesitant about anything from this company, Bang & Olufsen - I experienced close to a Abbott and Costello comedy routine in their showroom, trying to hear something from their equipment without it failing to work, or the gear directly malfunctioning - value for money? ... ummm , perhaps they push a Style button or two, .

 

Technology on the "bleeding edge", that hasn't been thoroughly debugged, is a bit fat pain for the consumer - you don't want a latest version of Windows, so to speak, using you for the last round of QA.

[Axial]

3 hours ago, Kal Rubinson said:

Not it is not.  The Beolab 90 is a highly successful effort to make an ideal speaker with a controlled and relatively narrow dispersion and its development has little or nothing to do with multichannel or immersive playback.  I  know them well:  https://www.stereophile.com/content/bang-olufsen-beolab-90-loudspeaker

 

FWIW, I've had a pair in my living room.  Having 5 would be more than formidable.

Cool...that emoji you put @ the end; "Having 5" of them.  🎶

[STC]

And here is one more reason why stereo can be better with more channels. This is not a typical 5.1 or Auro 3D but stereo via specialized retrieval done correctly. The words of a professional Tonmeister ....... click here.......

[Axial]

I like it, nice aroma (Auro-Matic).

 

* Who's Tonmeister?

[STC]

22 minutes ago, Axial said:

Who's Tonmeister

 

Jeremy, who wrote the article unless you meant something else. 

 

http://www.jeremykipnis.com/About_Us.html

[Axial]

I got it now, it's a title (German origin).

 

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tonmeister

[audiobomber]

On 1/14/2019 at 7:12 PM, Ralf11 said:

Let's say you only have stereo recordings in your collection...

 

How much better will a multichannel sound system sound?

Here's what you want, surround  for stereo without phony matrix effects: 

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hafler_circuit

 

I tried multi-channel for a couple of years but gave up on it. I had no real interest in building a collection of m/c music due to limited choice, higher cost and sometimes poor recording technique. A mastering engineer who puts the horn section behind me does not understand what I value. Multi-channel did not consistently enhance movie viewing either. Foley effects were more obviously phoney, because they drew too much attention. Someone knocking on a door behind me just pulls me out of the story.

 

Hafler was the only way that I consistently enjoyed m/c, both for music and movies. Immersion and impact are beyond what stereo can deliver,. With proper setup, it never sounds or phasey or phoney. The rear channels don't suddenly go silent or make sounds out of nowhere. You can add the required front/rear delay by the "speaker to listener" distance or electronically. I never used a front center speaker because I didn't have one that matched, not sure whether adding one would have been an improvement. 

 

Unfortunately the layout of my current listening room is not conducive to a Hafler setup, or I would definitely do it again. It sounds to me like it would match what you are looking for.