Music in surround, 4.1?

[RickH]

In case my heading didn't make sense, do you have the option to listen to a surround mix, SACD or DVD-A with just the four speakers & the sub, and not use the center? And if this is an option, is the center channel information then re-routed to a four-channel mix?

[Reginald]

Originally posted by RickH
In case my heading didn't make sense, do you have the option to listen to a surround mix, SACD or DVD-A with just the four speakers & the sub, and not use the center? And if this is an option, is the center channel information then re-routed to a four-channel mix?

I think a few receivers will do this but most likely the simple answer to your question is "no".

[BGLeduc]

This is usually a player issue, not a receiver issue.

There are hardly any receivers or pre/pros that use a digital connection from player to receiver or pre/pro to decode MC hi-rez (a few expensive Pioneer, Denon, and Meridians come to mind).

For the masses, the player handles DVD-A and SACD and outputs audio via the 5.1 analog outs.

So, if you can tell your player that you have no center, if it is designed correctly, it will redirect the center channel content equally to the left and right speakers.

Having said that, these players have all sorts of quirks with bass management, time alignment, and speaker selection.

I would not assume a given player will do this unless I tried it myself. If you have a player in mind, perhaps you can find users at the Home Theater Forum, The Spot, or AVS forums to try it?

I have a Pioneer 45A, but have not tried it.

BGL

[sgraham]

My SOny SACD/DVD(video) player will allow you to do this, as will my JVC receiver and also the Outlaw products.

I listen in 4.0.

[BGLeduc]

My SOny SACD/DVD(video) player will allow you to do this, as will my JVC receiver and also the Outlaw products.

But does your receiver apply this to the 5.1 analog inputs that are mandatory to listen to the hi-rez tracks?

If so, that would be a first, with the exception being the >$5,000 Pioneer/Denon/Meridian models mentioned that use a digital connection for SACD and/or DVD-A.

Normally, in a receiver or pre/pro, turning the center speaker Off does NOT affect the 5.1 inputs. You need to make the selection in the player.

RickH: What gear are you talking about?

BGL

[RickH]

Originally posted by sgraham
My SOny SACD/DVD(video) player will allow you to do this, as will my JVC receiver and also the Outlaw products.

I listen in 4.0.

So, what results are you getting in 4.0? Is this the "new quad"? :cool: I also have a Sony SACD player, the NSV500 model (or whatever those letters were in front), but I don't yet have a digital receiver, just a Sherwood w/ Dolby Pro Logic I, although I'm getting ready to get the $123 digital Sherwood from Circuit City. So, I was curious if anyone had tried surround music without the center channel... I'm not wild about the idea of a center channel for music.

[RetroSmith]

Originally posted by Reginald


I think a few receivers will do this but most likely the simple answer to your question is "no".

>>>>>>The answer is just the opposite. Virtually all receivers will let you tell it that there is no center speaker and to put that info into the stereo front field. Ive had 3 surround recievers dating back to 1990, all 3 let me do this, including my current Denon 1803.

[BGLeduc]

The answer is just the opposite. Virtually all receivers will let you tell it that there is no center speaker and to put that info into the stereo front field. Ive had 3 surround recievers dating back to 1990, all 3 let me do this, including my current Denon 1803.

You need to re-read the original post. The guy is asking about SACD and DVD-A, which will most likely connect via the 5.1 analog outs. The receiver has no say in the matter.

There are but a handful of receivers and players in the world that process SACD and DVD-A digitally.

Unless I am completely wrong, the 5.1 analog ins on a receiver or pre/pro are direct pass through with only trm and volume control. They are not affected by speaker settings, BM, TA, etc.

The settings for 4.0 MUST be made in the player. That setting in a receiver or pre/pro will in most cases only effect internally processed sources.

BGL

[sgraham]

Oops. You are right, but my SACD player does allow me to do this.

I'm getting along with "the new quad" just fine. It would be nice to have the center channel for those times when I want to turn off the others and have a listen to what's going on there, but I can't say I really miss it. Then again, I've never had a real center channel, so maybe I just don't know what I'm missing.

But the balances are just fine with only a phantom center channel (and no sub).

[BGLeduc]

FWIW, there are a lot of hi-rez MC discs that don't use, or use very sparingly, the center channel.

You may get your wish without doing ANYTHING.

I am ambivalent about that, and can't say for sure which of the 25 or hi-rez discs I own use it or not.

Some reviewers complain about the lack of a center, others complain because there is one.

Where is Rodney King when you need him. (Actually, I can answer that. He is in jail. Again.).

BGL

[Taurus]

I didn't know exactly where to put this so........

Dolby Labs "5.1-Channel Music Production Guidelines" (http://www.dolby.com/tech/Multichannel_Music_Mixing.pdf)

And check out page 4-6, under "Bass Management"......:eek:

[T]

[chrischross]

Interesting question -- and I'll ask a variation. Isn't the ITU recommendation a 5.0 system w/o the center channel? Does one really need the center channel given 5 equally matched, high quality speakers?

[BGLeduc]

Interesting question -- and I'll ask a variation. Isn't the ITU recommendation a 5.0 system w/o the center channel? Does one really need the center channel given 5 equally matched, high quality speakers?

I think the ITU calls for 5 truly full range speakers, Center, L/R, and Surround L/R. I don't think it calls for a sub.

That is the holy grail, but for most users, 5 full range speakers are a financial impossibility, not to mention we don't have rooms that allow for proper placement of said speakers.

The guys at WSR magazine have a dedicated room that has 6 big-*** Dunlavy speakers (the 6th is a back surround that is not part of the ITU spec, I do not think).

These ARE full range. You will note that there is ONE and ONLY ONE prime listening position. The Chair, they call it. It is equidistant from each speaker. As such, they do not need any time alignment, nor any bass management.

Back to the question. If you have a 4.0 or 4.1 system, you have to sit dead-nuts between them, or you will not get a proper phantom image between any two speakers. A hard center allows you to sit somewhat off of the prime spot, and still perceive a more or less correct front soundstage.

FWIW, I have a 6.1 arrangement. I am not able to do proper ITU positions, but do have a symmetrical array. When I am doing any serious listening, I sit in my version of "The Chair".

BGL

[Taurus]

I truly don't think the surround mixers intend for us home listeners to literally have five huge speakers in our living rooms (i.e. Dynaudio Temptations, Klipsch Reference 7's or Nautilus 801's). They would have to be total morons to think like that, because then practically no one would adopt surround music.

I personally think that for a "normal" living room (i.e. something you would see in a $200K suburban home) that speakers that used at least a 10" woofer would work quite well. Heck, my Bostons with just an 8" woofer go down to 42Hz (+/- 3dB scale) and in my little apartment living room they sound very full to me (and the thin walls preclude the use of anything larger anyway!).

I figure the surround gurus are reccomending "full-range" speakers knowing full well hardly anyone will/can buy five huge speakers--they are just saying that to sort of scare people into using the largest speaker they possibly can. Because when was the last time STEREO experts said only two full-range speakers will work with their format???

[T]

[Steve Hoffman]

Originally posted by Taurus
I truly don't think the surround mixers intend for us home listeners to literally have five huge speakers in our living rooms (i.e. Dynaudio Temptations, Klipsch Reference 7's or Nautilus 801's). They would have to be total morons to think like that, because then practically no one would adopt surround music.

I personally think that for a "normal" living room (i.e. something you would see in a $200K suburban home) that speakers that used at least a 10" woofer would work quite well. Heck, my Bostons with just an 8" woofer go down to 42Hz (+/- 3dB scale) and in my little apartment living room they sound very full to me (and the thin walls preclude the use of anything larger anyway!).

I figure the surround gurus are reccomending "full-range" speakers knowing full well hardly anyone will/can buy five huge speakers--they are just saying that to sort of scare people into using the largest speaker they possibly can. Because when was the last time STEREO experts said only two full-range speakers will work with their format???

[T]

Oh come on. Every engineer I ever see mix anything in 5:1 uses five identical full range speakers.

The voices in front and the voices in back have to match in tonality and weight or the whole mix is pointless! You can't use good speakers in front and little tweeter boxes in back and expect to hear a good mix. It might work for classical music ambiance, but nothing else.

[Metralla]

Originally posted by Taurus
Because when was the last time STEREO experts said only two full-range speakers will work with their format???[T]
That's surely the way to go. What other arrangement did you have in mind?

Regards,
Geoff

[sgraham]

Originally posted by Taurus
I didn't know exactly where to put this so........

Dolby Labs "5.1-Channel Music Production Guidelines" (http://www.dolby.com/tech/Multichannel_Music_Mixing.pdf)

And check out page 4-6, under "Bass Management"......:eek:

[T]
Made me laugh!:

Because many of the popular consumer 5.1-channel speaker packages
direct all of the bass from the main channels to the sub, however, combining it with
any LFE information that may be present, it is important to at least check the effect
bass management has on a mix while still in the studio. For example, in one known
case, the combined bass from the main speakers was out of phase with the LFE
channel, virtually eliminating the low end of the program when played back through a
consumer, bass-managed system.

I know, accidents happen...

[Taurus]

Steve: I meant all five speakers of a home 5.1 system that use a 10" woofer should provide a decent listening experience.

Metralla: I'm speaking of grey areas here. Sure a pair of Klipschorns or a $80K Infinity IRS system is the BEST way to hear a recording, but with smaller speakers one can still generate a pretty darn realistic listening experience.

I'm sure Betty Crocker wants everybody to use a handmade silver platter to serve her cakes on for the ultimate gastronomic experience, but a ten dollar plate from Target still results in a pleasant eating experience. :)

[T]

[Metralla]

Originally posted by Taurus
I'm speaking of grey areas here. Sure a pair of Klipschorns or a $80K Infinity IRS system is the BEST way to hear a recording, but with smaller speakers one can still generate a pretty darn realistic listening experience.
Well, I don't think they would be "the BEST" at all, but that's not important. I do like small speakers.

I interpreted your statement as follows: stereo experts have been saying for quite some time that two small monitors with a sub-woofer can produce as good an experience as two full-range loudspeakers.

I would not agree with this statement.

However, if I have misunderstood your point, then I do apologize.

Regards,
Geoff

[quadanasazilands]

Some one correct me if I'm wrong here but mixing down to 4.0 or 5.0 with in the player is dependent on the disc. For example in my Pioneer 655A (sim to the 45A and a step above the 653A) , Yes's "Fragile" will mix down to 4.0 but Queen "Best Of", ELP "BSS", Alice Cooper "BDB" will not, the player defaults to the HR stereo layer when trying to mix down in the player and I beleive this could be true for all SACD's. So if you are running vintage gear then you would need a center channel amp and speaker to get the mix as intended. This sez that a standard still needs to be set for the formats as far as mix down capability goes.

[sgraham]

On my Sony SACD/dvd-v/CD player all disks that I have used could be downmixed to 4.0, whether SACD, dts, or Dolby Digital.

As to the defaults, that is probably dependent on the player.

I have not yet tried mixing down the DVD-a's that I have using the high res DVD-A tracks, on the Pioneer 563? 653? whatever it is.... I'll report back when I have. The instruction manual does say that not all DVD-A disks can be downmixed to two-channel. If they cannot then you can only hear the front channels, if you don't have a multichannel rig. Very annoying for headphone listeners.

[therockman]

mixing for 5.1 surround (http://www.modernrecording.com/articles/soundav/link43.html) I found this article and I think it has some information that pertains to this thread. Anyway, I enjoyed reading it.

[quadanasazilands]

Originally posted by sgraham
On my Sony SACD/dvd-v/CD player all disks that I have used could be downmixed to 4.0, whether SACD, dts, or Dolby Digital.

As to the defaults, that is probably dependent on the player.

I have not yet tried mixing down the DVD-a's that I have using the high res DVD-A tracks, on the Pioneer 563? 653? whatever it is.... I'll report back when I have. The instruction manual does say that not all DVD-A disks can be downmixed to two-channel. If they cannot then you can only hear the front channels, if you don't have a multichannel rig. Very annoying for headphone listeners.

Yes report back I would like know , The only SACD I tried it with was DSOTM. Maybe just the way the 655A does it. I have not bothered to play around since I did the mix down fiddling when I first got it, just run it 5.0 now. I thought also at the time that I read some thing in the manual that very vaguely stated that some disc's won't let you mix down . Has any one with the 45A tried this? Dave64?

[sgraham]

I made the experiment just now. I have four DVD-Audio disks: Hotel California, Elv1s, Harvest, and the Naxos disk of Vivaldi's Four Seasons. I had no trouble downmixing them either to two-channel stereo or to "quad" (4.0) I also had no trouble downmixing dts. Dolby did sound odd when downmixed. On Harvest, for instance, in sounded out of phase and put Neil's voice over on the right (Out on the Weekend).

Also a gripe about Harvest: It upcut the beginning of some tracks, in the high res. multitrack mix, including the first one which is highly annoying. The dts multitrack version doesn't have this problem

But no problems with the downmixing (other than the Dolby weirdness) so far. I'm sticking with 4.0 for the time being.

[quadanasazilands]

Steve, how bout any of the disc's I mentioned?