Article: Upgrades To My Immersive Audio System, Plus One Deep Question

[The Computer Audiophile]

View full article

[The Computer Audiophile]

1 minute ago, bbosler said:

a pair of Submerge SW

I’m out of room or I need a smaller desk 🙃

[The Computer Audiophile]

16 minutes ago, ecwl said:

Wow... Super excited for @The Computer Audiophile. Getting perfectly coherent surround speakers definitely improves the sound based on my experience with various friends and dealers. That said, I don't know what happens when you are already running really well-designed convolution filters although I can tell you my old speakers don't sound like my current ones with convolution filters.

 

I wonder if @mitchco might have some suggestions in terms of optimal placement for two Submerge at your place. Although they might not be the most aesthetically pleasing place for you, but I'm sure you'll get a sonically satisfying experience.

I’ll be working with Mitch on the system for sure. 

[The Computer Audiophile]

35 minutes ago, El Guapo said:

I personally prefer 2 subs.

One more option you might consider: room correction + upsampling to DXD thru HQPlayer. In my testing, DXD streams feed to Merging DACs has the lowest noise floor, even better than DSD. 

Thanks for the info @El Guapo

[The Computer Audiophile]

48 minutes ago, PeterG said:

I vote 1 Submerge.  Based on the dimensions, I'm pretty sure it will move more air than 1 Loke; though maybe one of our engineering friends can opine here.  Plus, it's reaching lower, isn't it?  The Loke is designed for Wilson's more modest speakers, you need (haha) the big boy 

I’m leaning that way, but my wallet is leaning the other direction 🙂

[The Computer Audiophile]

26 minutes ago, ted_b said:

Chris,  The room is quite magnificent, and the move to a more timbre-matched set of drivers is a big deal.  I have a functioning 7.x.4 setup (and installed but not activated top middles to get me to 7.x.6) whose bed channels are made up of all Aerials (20Ts as mains, LR5s as center and surrounds) with identical drivers.....and when I decided to not only move my ceiling-based heights/tops from the classic Atmos 45/135 to a more Auro-3D-style 30/150 (hence the "need" for something top middle maybe) I switched out my wonderful but not quite cutting it SVS Prime Elevations up top and invested in two pair of the larger and driver-identical-to-my-bed Aerial 5Ts.   Big improvement, just in the driver compliment, let alone then the move to 30/150.  And once you do the prerequisite speaker pair "spatial renditioning" (getting delays perfect so imaging appears midway between speaker pairs) the results of all the drivers in synch is a wonderful aural thing.  :)

 

I mentioned 7.x.4 cuz I don't really know how to signify my subwoofer setup.  I have 3 right now, with one being a dedicated LFE channel and the other two bass managing all the bed channels.  I am thinking of going multiple LFEs but not sure yet. 

 

Anyway, more is better.  :)

 

Happy Holidays!

Hi Ted, your are definitely one of the people who I thought about when considering the upgrade. I remember you telling me the benefits of matching drivers. 
 

Hope you can spend a lot of time listening this holiday season :~)

[The Computer Audiophile]

1 hour ago, phusis said:

Definitely agree on the pricing of those Wilson subs (sorry to say, but those prices are insane), as well as adding a LoKe for a pair of them instead of going with a single Submerge - all depending on the intention of use here; is it about the Submerge digging deep re: in the aid of movie effects in particular, or other? I might add that for infrasonics to really matter one needs serious displacement, and from my chair a single 12" woofer isn't going to cut it here. 

 

@The Computer Audiophile Where are you low-passing the one LoKe you have (or two by now?), and are your Wilson Audio main speakers high-passed or run full-range? I'm assuming the latter. Placement of subs is vital, not only with regard to how they may interact with room modes for an acoustically smoother response, but also - depending on how high in frequency you're running them - where they're placed relative to the main speakers, and not least symmetrically or not. I use a pair of subs (tapped horns, 20cf. each) flanking my main speakers, each placed in their respective corners. Being they cross over to the mains at ~85Hz (where the mains are also high-passed) it's vital with symmetry-to-the-mains placement close to the mains, and being they're outboard actively configured (like the mains) I can use, and do use what's essentially the same amps top to bottom, which is important for overall coherency. As you no doubt know, tonality is very much affected by the lower octaves, and having similar amps in the subs range as used elsewhere is another way to have it all fall into place. It's a rabbit hole indeed.. :) 

Hi @phusis, a rabbit hole indeed, but it’s a fun one. 
 

Using Audiolense and filters created by @mitchco I have the ultimate in flexibility. I can offload bass from each of the 12 channels at whichever frequency I need, individually. I need to write an article about the system now that I’ve upgraded the 8 surrounds and center channel. The front L and R and Center are now running full range because they are full range speakers. 
 

There is no screen allowed in my room, so music only :~)

 

I still haven’t decided which route to go with subs. 
 

Here’s an article with some info about the filters and frequency response.