Dvd-audio & sacd are true multichannel formats: a DSP is NOT the same thing! (1 Viewer)

[Rich Malloy]

I've never had the opportunity to hear Lexicon/Meridian DSPs in action, but that caveat aside, I have to completely agree with Lance here. I've never, ever been impressed with DSPs, and have only ever used them for very compromised recordings (to provide a bit of "reverb" for exceptionally "dry" live bootleg recordings, for example). Otherwise, I find that they tend to diminish the focus of the soundstage and reduce the perceived resolution of the individual instruments. Basically, I only use DSPs to ameliorate the worst elements of very poor recordings.

SACD and DVD-A are, in my experience, wholly different animals than these DSP-derived surroundstages. The best mixes (and of course a good mix is crucial) provide the widest, deepest soundstages I've ever heard and pinpoint imaging of instruments anywhere within the "surroundscape". Highly artificial soundstages (say, Peter Gabriel's "Up" or Beck's "Sea Change") sound extraordinary, wholly unlike any DSP I've ever heard. Realistic soundstages (like just about any classical music recording or live performance, say Vaughan Williams "A Sea Symphony" or Alison Krauss+Union Station's "Live") provide the best "you are there" experience I've ever heard, seeming to reproduce perfectly the acoustics of the hall/cathedral/club in which the performance took place... right in my own living room!

I'm totally won over to multichannel music, and I have to shake my head when I hear people declare "STEREO FOREVER!". I used to be one of those folks to some degree, at least to the degree that I turned up my nose at the very notion of artificial digital processing. I still dislike DSPs in all but the most limited circumstances, but I am so on the true multichannel bandwagon. It really is that good.

CAVEAT: it ain't easy mixing a great stereo track, and it's even harder to setup a two-channel system in most of our listening rooms. Compromise is often the order of the day, and few of us can dial our systems in perfectly. Multichannel makes this process even more difficult. But, my friends, it's worth it. Take the time - and it will take time - to get it just exactly right and don't fret over the occasional lousy multichannel mix. There've been plenty of lousy stereo mixes, particularly at its inception, so it's not as though this is a new problem. And the mixers are really getting the hang of it by now...

 

[JeremyFr]

I'm on the fence on this one to me it really depends on the recording whether or not I like to apply DSP to it or not I really enjoy the Quad Field DSP my Yamaha features and for some musics (especially classical/Jazz) I really enjoy the sonic characteristics it can add to it. For the most part I enjoy listening to 2 channel in 2 channel. and for the few Multi channel discs I have they sound great and were recorded specifically for that format. I've found though that with multi channel recordings most engineers surpass the idea of what its intended for a pan the full music around you etc thus really not fullfilling the whole more enveloping sound field with more accurately reproduced acoustics from the recorind yada yada yada. Trust me I've got no problem listening to the Police with each of there voices coming from different speakers around the room etc and guitars panning from far front left to far rear right etc but this is not how it sounded when they originally recorded the song I doubt that Sting ran around the studio with his bass guitar and around the engineers head etc. My point is that yes SACD/DVD-A may in some peoples minds be sonically superior to other formats but as for being any more of a faithful reproduction of what it sounded like when they played it live it couldn't be farther from.

 

[Shawn Fogg]

Rich,

"I've never had the opportunity to hear Lexicon/Meridian DSPs... "

You need to. The difference between well done and poorly done surround is just as great as the difference between two bad speakers thrown in a room and a pair of great speakers properly setup for stereo listening.

Shawn

 

[LanceJ]

never mind!

LJ

 

[Lewis Besze]

Lance,
I don't think anyone suggests that DSP based "surround" is the same as MC DVD-A or SACD,at least not in this thread,yet you still beating this dead horse.In essence we agree with you,but suggest that some of these DSPs are really good,and can enhance the enjoyment of listening.That's all.

 

[JeremyFr]

Hehe I think we pissed Lance off!

 

[Jason Brent]

How does Bob Carver's DSP compare to Lex and Meridian?

I really would like to hear the L7 on the Lex. I must admit, I'm not totally crazy over the L7 on my HK 525, but on a few things it's pretty good.

 

[Shawn Fogg]

Jason,

What DSP mode on the Sunfire?

The L7 on the H/K is similiar to the version that is in the MC-1. The latest versions in the MC-8/12 is improved over that version. Just as importantly the H/Ks L7 doesn't offer the adjustable parameters that the Lexicons do. Those let you really tweak the sound to your tastes.

Shawn

 

[Phil_DC]

I to agree DSP based "surround" is not nearly as good as MC DVD-A & SACD. However I do prefer 2 channel using my Pioneer 49TX in 7 channel Advanced Concert mode. Even though it's not quite as good as MC DVD-A & SACD it's better than plain 2 channel, to me anyway. Then again I am a die hard multi-channel music fan. In fact I have not purchased a single CD since I got a DVD-A / SACD player. I am so spoiled now if it's not on DVD-A or SACD it's not worth listening to, is my new motto. Unless it's in the car, then I don't have a choice at least for now anyway.

 

[RichardHOS]

Lance,

If you read my first post carefully, you'll see that I am clearly advocating the advantages of discrete multichannel music formats, and there are many to be sure.

However, the rest of my post was addressing the reality that "stereo" is, for all practical purposes, taking its last breath as the highest fidelity reproduction format. And to be more precise, DSP based ambience recovery can and will sound better than a "good stereo listening room."

 

[Jason Brent]

Shawn,

Bob Carver has something called "holographic imaging"
I've never heard it, but was wondering how well it does.

As far as L7 on the HK....if there were some adjustability, I do think I would love this format. I find my self comparing the DTS Neo, PLII and L7 on differenct sources, and usually I like PLII on TV programs, and L7 on music. But there are some recordings that I don't like L7 and listen in 2 channel. Ultimately I'm glad the DSP's are there, but having the choice for direct is nice.

 

[Shawn Fogg]

Jason,

You mean Sonic Holography?

That is a form of interaural cross cancelation. What it tries to do is literally increase the channel seperation of your two speakers at your ears. It does this by sending additional signals out both speakers such that the left speakers 'sound' is canceled at your right ear and vice versa for the right speaker. With proper speaker/listener setup the effect can be quite astounding... though you are limited to a *very* narrow sweet spot.

I don't know how Carver's latest version works but his previous versions of this required a very specialized speaker setup which was very much at odds with normal 2 channel listening. Your L/R speakers were supposed to be very close to each other.

Lexicon's (excepting for a time the MC-12) have a similiar mode called Panorama. Panorama is very nice compared to Carver's earlier versions in that you adjust the processing to your existing speaker layout... not adjust your speakers to the processing. The Lexicon processing is also a higher order correction system and is of course done in DSP. Carvers original setups were analog so you gained more noise and distortion there. You can read about Panorama in a MC-1s 'Theory and Design' handbook. Anyone reading this thread that has even a passing interest in surround sound for music should read that book, it is a very good read.

Download it here:

http://lexicon.com/mc1/downloads.asp

As far as how Panorama/Sonic Holography sounds you can actually sort of get a taste for it yourself... though you are going to feel foolish doing it. Take a cushion off your couch and play something with decent imaging on your system in 2 channel mode. Be sure to be seated directly in the sweet spot. Hold the cushion so its long edge is facing front/back in your room. Now hold it up against your nose in the middle of the cushion. Such that looking forward it seems to be dividing your room. Listen to how the imaging in your system changes... it should get considerably more dramatic as you are basically increasing the channel seperation at your ears. Ambiophonics uses this method (on a much greater scale) for much the same effect.

Panorama will also take advantage of the center,sides and rear speakers to add additional fill.

"....if there were some adjustability, I do think I would love this format."

The tweakability of L7 for music can make dramatic differences in the presentation. It is a shame the H/Ks don't offer any of them.

"Ultimately I'm glad the DSP's are there, but having the choice for direct is nice. "

Having options is always a good thing.

Shawn

 

[Shawn Fogg]

"Listen to how the imaging in your system changes... it should get considerably more dramatic as you are basically increasing the channel seperation at your ears."

Forgot to mention... the more nearfield you are the more of a change this makes.

Shawn

 

[Phil_DC]

Bob Carver has something called "holographic imaging"

That has been around since the mid 80's I have and old Carver 2000 receiver with it built in, it's for enhancing two channel playback in 2 channel. It adds a unique richness to music that is hard to describe with words you really have to hear it.

Unless Bob Carver has implemented it for multi-channel in the Sunfire receivers/pre amp's. Which is not likely because I don't not think the holographic sound field could be properly created using multi channels, but I could be wrong.

 

[Phil_DC]

Shawn you are to fast, and your explanation is a lot better than mine.

 

[Jason Brent]

You're right...upon looking futher at Sunfire's info, it is for 2 channel, and on his new processor it is done in DSP.

Gonna have to listen to a Lex some day....

 

[Shawn Fogg]

Jason,

"Gonna have to listen to a Lex some day.... "

If you do go listen to one at a dealer sometime if at all possible get them to lend it to you to try in your system. There is just so much to them it would be nearly impossible to get a good grip on all they can do in a showroom.

Shawn

 

[Mark C.]

I'm one of those who purchased a universal player, but returned it weeks later because SACD and DVD-A, while wonderful to listen to in multi-channel, is not IMO the sonic advance that many around here proclaim.
I refuse to repurchase my redbook CD collection just for the multi-channel effect. Two-channel SACD sounded no different on my high-end system than redbook. Several of my friends couldn't tell the difference either.
If I want surround music, there's DTS CDs or DSPs. But I don't have time to listen to surround music, which requires one to actually sit and listen. I'll do that when listening to my two-channel system, but at least I can get up and move around without losing the effect.

 

[LanceJ]

This place needs a "delete post" option! When I wrote "never mind!" I wasn't directing that to anyone as a "I'm mad" post. Here's the deal: I had been writing on two other different forums & forgot when I posted on this forum; thought my second clarification post had somehow been placed back in the middle of the thread; wrote a third post asking about that; then realized my mistake; erased the question post and wrote never mind to explain the edit.

Trust me--I don't get that much into audio to write such a whiny message!

So everything is cool now (except why would Harmon/Kardon build a dvd-audio car deck that downmixes and then REprocess the signal? ).

LJ

 

[Brett DiMichele]

In time these multi channel formats will progress and it
will become a recording studio standard to always mix with
the multiple tracks direct to disk rather than downmix back
into 2 channel. And as time goes on I am sure the technology
will advance and the master's will get better at what they
do.

I am not against Multichannel I am just not ready for it
yet. Maybe in 5 years when one of these formats becomes the
clear winner and the other falls by the way side perhaps
then I will take the plunge. It's bad enough having to deal
with DVD,CD,HDCD and now SACD and DVD-A? It's just too much.

There needs to be ONE FORMAT, ONE STANDARD not TWO. Only
when that happens will I make the move.

As for room treatments, my room is constructively acousticaly
treated for the reflection points. Not exactly aneochoic but
it is still very dead sonicaly. And my 2 channel sounds
fantastic and it's always improving.