Friends like surround?

[emoxley]

I had a friend, that listened to my surround system, for years. He actually couldn't care less about surround sound. Movies or music.

He bought a 50" HDTV awhile back, and subscribed to DirecTv's HD package. At the time, he had to buy the HD sat receiver. I told him that all he needed now, was a good surround system, because HD channels broadcast in surround, and they'd enjoy their HD even more. He said he didn't want surround! His reasoning was: "I only have two ears!" I felt like slapping him, for being so stupid! It's fine if you don't want surround sound. Everyone has different likes and dislikes. Just don't use such a stupid excuse, for not wanting it. That response really came as no surprise. You'd have to know him..................

Any of you folks know someone like this?

[JBL 4645]

Well even Dolby would agree with this check out the video Dolby at CES 2007.

Dolby on "Into Tomorrow" at CES 2007
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_zwBgHHmYQU

[Dusty Chalk]

My ex said she doesn't like the rear channels, she finds them "distracting" (she found herself wanting to look over her shoulder during a movie). So it sounds like it was set up correctly, if it was good enough to make her believe there was something behind her, she just didn't like the concept of surround sound.

Oh, well, her loss...well, mine too, as I go over her place more often than she comes over mine...

[promp3]

my grandfather likes his old tv with blown speakers on full volume just fine.

[nickrobotron]

That's usually my excuse too.

[sleddogman]

Well even Dolby would agree with this check out the video Dolby at CES 2007.

Dolby on "Into Tomorrow" at CES 2007
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_zwBgHHmYQU
I personally find surround sound annoying, but you gotta love that trade show Marketing-speak...

[onepixel]

My surround only has 3 speakers.

[Jack G]

My ex said she doesn't like the rear channels, she finds them "distracting" (she found herself wanting to look over her shoulder during a movie). So it sounds like it was set up correctly, if it was good enough to make her believe there was something behind her, she just didn't like the concept of surround sound.

I actually agree with her. I don't care for surround sound either. At best I find it unnatural and distracting, at worst very annoying.
Jack

[Cosmic]

I like sourround for films that are actually mixed for it (no simulation.)

For music, I don't really need it, but I am into SACDs, and there, depending on the disc, you have all 6 channels going at times. It sounds impressive, but not necessarily "real."
An example is Mary-Chapin's album "Time, Sex, Love" which I just got in non-hybrid SACD. Recorded at Air Studios, it sounds absolutely stunning in SACD, but again, spreading info into the rear channels, I feel it should at most be some subtle reverb, not instruments.

Otherwise it becomes too much like the gimmicky Quad LPs that were released during that format's heyday.

Best,
C.

[madpioneer]

I stayed away from surround for many years and was strictly stereo even for movies. I had a problem with my receiver and the Tandy repair center was going under and they said parts were no longer available.
I replaced it for awhile with a Sony surround amp but only used it for stereo use for many years. After I got my SPEC rig I decided to see what the Sony sounded like in surround. Although the Sony turned out to be a lemon when it did work I was hooked.
I have since replaced it with a PIONEER VSX-5700S and then onto a VSX-9500S. The 5700 now runs surround in my master bedroom setup.
A friend of mine and I were watching a movie(can't remember the title) and in the scene it was raining and he said it sounded so real coming from the rears and the fronts.
To make the best of the mediocre gear I have I use Eq's to help dial in the center and the rear speakers. Since I have installed them the sound is much better and more balanced. Using the SPEC rig and the Mach Twos to run as the front during movies I needed more balance and definition.
Most people I know and my family included could care less about it.
A good buddy here has a small Sony rig in his apartment but two years ago I hooked him up with a PIONEER VSX-9500S as well after his High School graduation gift lower line PIONEER crapped out.
So I guess the long and short of it all besides my buddy and I most just want the big screen TV to watch the game and a descent DVD player not much more.:no:
For me I don't know if I could watch a really good movie like the Matrix, Lord of the Rings, and so on without it!

[gyusher]

HDTV's default audio is 5.1 that is the standard for HD

You might find some recorded 2.0 but the HD standard says 5.1

For those who find it distracting that is because it is not setup right. Setup correctly plus mixed properly you should never know its there. Everything should sound natural and correct.

Too many people think you should be able to hear all the speakers. . . Truth is about 80% go to center and about 15% to front effects with very little actually going to the rears.

My wife is guilty of saying I can only hear this speaker or I can't hear this speaker when in reality nothing is being sent to the speaker she is complaining about not being able to hear.

To me a good system just sounds right and natural. I mean when a plane flys right to left the sound should follow him. Front to rear same thing. Sending sound to speakers just to send sound to them is not what it is all about.

Not a thing wrong with stereo either. Some do prefer 2 channel, more power to them. It was not that long ago when it was HiFi and only one channel on one speaker. There was just as many saying stereo was not natural. . .

[ponderbear]

i've been tempted to add speakers to the three currently plugged into my surround receiver (surround only because we want to play dvds and I wanted a tuner and amp built in, you try to find a two-channel dvd receiver). But not very. I've watched movies in full surround sound at other people's houses and it's like being a ride at Disney World. Or those old ping-pong percussion albums. Boing! Splat! And the gut-churning bass! Why? Nothing in nature sounds like that. Since it's a medium in its infancy, there's this exaggerated aspect similar to the what's happening in computer animation- because hard plastic reflective surfaces render so well, EVERYTHING has to look like that. Blech.

One of these days they'll get that effect down right, and it won't be so obvious and fun-house sounding to me. it will be subtle and natural. then I might bite, or more likely, one of my kids will have already decided for me.

[bsoko2]

HDTV's default audio is 5.1 that is the standard for HD

You might find some recorded 2.0 but the HD standard says 5.1

For those who find it distracting that is because it is not setup right. Setup correctly plus mixed properly you should never know its there. Everything should sound natural and correct.

Too many people think you should be able to hear all the speakers. . . Truth is about 80% go to center and about 15% to front effects with very little actually going to the rears.

My wife is guilty of saying I can only hear this speaker or I can't hear this speaker when in reality nothing is being sent to the speaker she is complaining about not being able to hear.

To me a good system just sounds right and natural. I mean when a plane flys right to left the sound should follow him. Front to rear same thing. Sending sound to speakers just to send sound to them is not what it is all about.

Not a thing wrong with stereo either. Some do prefer 2 channel, more power to them. It was not that long ago when it was HiFi and only one channel on one speaker. There was just as many saying stereo was not natural. . .

DITTO

[willyrover]

Many people are clueless. For example, they describe a stereo receiver with A & B speaker connections as "4-channel". Or they hook up 20 sets of speakers to the same outputs and place them all over the room. It's surround sound!

They spot a cheap plastic pair of speakers from an old boom box and they say, "Those would make good surround speakers!"

I know people who think anything that is too loud is surround sound.

Anyway, I don't think technology is limiting surround sound. You take good speakers with good sound and nice imaging and combine them with 4 or 5 or 6 quality amplifiers and there is no reason why you shouldn't be able to create a soundstage that wraps around you. Unless you have a dedicated room, speaker placement is the problem. We know that moving a speaker even a fraction of an inch in a stereo setup can affect the soundstage. Add on the fact that the more speakers you have, the more precise (and difficult to find) the sweet spot becomes.

[walkandtalk]

Anyway, I don't think technology is limiting surround sound. You take good speakers with good sound and nice imaging and combine them with 4 or 5 or 6 quality amplifiers and there is no reason why you shouldn't be able to create a soundstage that wraps around you.

That is the same conclusion I came to. After being a two-channel purist for a long time, even for movies, when I bought my SACD player I began to look for an amplification solution. I didn't want to buy a new surround receiver when I had plenty of two-channel amps. So I use the 6channel outs from the SACD, split between 4 amps (mains LR, surround LR, center mono and LFE mono). This was the bliss I was looking for! Friends think it's crazy, b/c there's no remote control tying it all together, but being able to tweak each discrete channel for volume and frequency allows me to make up for deficiencies in recording levels and even out the sound so it's how I want it to be. And to really freak people out, I have the mains parallel with my seating position, while the surrounds are along the front wall with the monitor. Most movies don't have enough "behind" effects to make a real difference, but when listening to music it makes the soundstage feel more realistic to me, like echoes off the back wall behind the performer.

[gyusher]

One of these days they'll get that effect down right, and it won't be so obvious and fun-house sounding to me. it will be subtle and natural. then I might bite, or more likely, one of my kids will have already decided for me.


Many do get it right right now. Not all are carnival rides although the right time and the right place they can be fun too. . .

There is plenty of serious material out there that does it right and when it is right it is wonderful. . .

I've listened to way too many high dollar systems that weren't setup right and that I agree with you on. Makes me ill. Just because someone has a bunch of money in one means nothing unless it was calibrated properly.

I seldom tell anyone what my setup is about. I enjoy the look they get on their faces. . . Often followed by a subtle remark like "nice speakers". It doesn't run you around the room unless it is supposed to run you around the room.

The wiz-bang days are over. Its time for serious listening along with a HD picture to match. It is nice. . . Real nice.

[RadShak1251]

Some of the main causes of bad surround sound experiences (sometimes the movie or music surround mix itself was done badly, so no matter what you do it will sound crummy!):

1) incorrect speaker placement, particularly the rear channels

---> For music, for best sound the rear channels need to be *behind* you and to the sides, which is different than what is advised for movies.

And despite what Dolby advises doing for movie soundtracks, IMO having surround speakers at my sides is distracting and unrealistic (though I realise not everyone can place them behind their listening position). I mean, if a jet is supposed to be coming up from behind me, how can it do that if the speakers aren't also back there?

2) incorrect distance settings.

Not measuring & setting these accurately can make one or more speakers "stick out", resulting in a less-than-cohesive soundfield.

3) using tiny satellites with 3 or 4 inch "woofers".

This can result in a thin sound, since such small drivers cannot reproduce midbass well at all. Watch/listen to what even a 8 or 10 inch woofer does at the standard 80Hz xover point, and you'll see/hear what I mean! And setting the sat/sub crossover point higher to compensate can cause the sub to become boomy and its location may also become apparent, both negatively affecting the overall soundfield and the "suspension of disbelief" thing.

4) for music, using dipolar or bipolar speakers for the rear channels is a major no-no which can seriously screw up the surround soundfield.

That's because surround music creation standards require that surround mixing engineers use monopole monitors i.e. conventional speakers to help build their mixes, and since di/bipolars "spray" their sound in various random directions in the customer's listening room that the 5.1 engineer never envisioned.....:( Personally I like using monopole speakers for movies too. Directional effects are more accurate and ambience in inside scenes like churches etc still come through fine (actually I have yet to see di/bipoles being used in movie mixing suites either).

Also for music: allowing a receiver to re-process a 5.1 track into a 6.1 or 7.1 one could also alter the engineer's and musician's artistic intent by having sound emanate from locations not originally envisoned.

5) center channels

Not being at the same (physical location) level as the mains, again disturbing the soundfield's cohesiveness. Plus the fact that center channels, mostly because of their almost-always lousy mounting location (acoustically speaking), can end up sounding quite different than the other speakers even if it is *identical* to the other speakers. This is why so many mixing engineers won't use the center channel at all for their mixes.

If anyone wants to read about surround music creation and playback without too much in-depth technolingo, go here (http://www.grammy.com/Recording_Academy/Producers_And_Engineers/Guidelines/) and download the .pdf file labled "Recommendations for Surround Sound Production". Tons of great info in there. And on page 2-5 is a diagram of how a homeowner should set up his speakers for surround music playback. Many of the most respected 5.1 music engineers helped write this paper.

[RadShak1251]

BTW: as far as a 5.1 mix always being used for HD broadcasts, I wouldn't get too excited about that. Because according to quite a few customer reports I've read over the years (I don't have HD yet myself) even though the left rear/right rear indicators may be lit on your receiver, there won't actually be any *sound* coming from those channels. And if there is, it is because the studio took a stereo signal, ran it through a DSP system like your receiver's hall or stadium effect buttons and.......ta da! a "surround" signal is born. :rolleyes: This kind of fake reverb-filled surround, also used on certain dvds, is I think why so many people are unimpressed now when they see the word surround mentioned on a commercial or a program listing (or on an DTS-CD, a dvd-audio disc or an sacd).

[thedelihaus]

I love surround, when the film is done to benefit from it. It's a real treat, especially on suspense and action films- which only make up 20% of my viewing. But when done right, it's great!

Many aren't done right, and sound just as good in stereo, if not better.

A good surround mix is lots of fun.

Just wish there were lots more of 'em.

I find myself switching to stereo and getting the same effect, or better.

a shame that there's no real 7.1 mixes, and only a handful of 6.1, at this juncture in time.

[gyusher]

BTW: as far as a 5.1 mix always being used for HD broadcasts, I wouldn't get too excited about that. Because according to quite a few customer reports I've read over the years (I don't have HD yet myself) even though the left rear/right rear indicators may be lit on your receiver, there won't actually be any *sound* coming from those channels. sacd).


Dolby Digital is the standard sound track for HD. Not all DD is 5.1. It may be 1.0 or 2.0 but stll for the most part it is 5.1.

5.1 doesn't mean you will hear all 5 speakers. Each of the 5 speakers will play only if there is content there for that speaker. It is concievable that you could watch the entire program using only the center channel.

Virtually all of Dolby ProLogic is a stereo sound track where your surround decoder adds the center and rear effects or ambiance. HT receivers have enough sound fields that anyone can make a mess out of a decent audio stream. Generally I leave mine on "Auto" where it operates as the program was recorded. Either that or DPLIIx those are the only 2 soundfields I use.

Now with DDHD/EX/etc I may end up buying a new receiver with the newer soundfields. . .

I agree with you about the types of speakers used for rears to a point. In the old ProLogic days when only effects were sent to the rear it was very important to put them behind you and high up on the wall however today's 5 or 7 full range channels sound better using the exact same speakers at all positions with the rears now almost along side of you. If they are distracting they are not setup properly. There are too many people who think you should be able to hear them all the time.

Just as a poorly setup subwoofer sounds like crap so will surround speakers. Both are wonderful when right and crap when they are not.

Regarding poorly done sound tracks. . .switch to stereo or use DPL instead of 5.1/7.1 for that program. Just like tone controls a little goes a long way. Used properly they can be very effective but done wrong . . . crap. . .

[mhconley]

BTW: as far as a 5.1 mix always being used for HD broadcasts, I wouldn't get too excited about that. Because according to quite a few customer reports I've read over the years (I don't have HD yet myself) even though the left rear/right rear indicators may be lit on your receiver, there won't actually be any *sound* coming from those channels.

I watched an HD presentation on Mojo of a 3 Doors Down concert I have on DVD the other night. The DVD, by Monster Music, is the best mixed 5.1 concert DVD I have ever experienced. When watching the HD presentation the picture was fantatstic as the concert was filmed with 14 HD cameras. The sound however was cr@p. I thought there was something wrong with my receiver - all 5 speaker plus LFE indicators were lit up but sound was only coming out of the front pair. I checked on another station and my receiver was OK. For whatever reason Mojo decided to show the concert in stereo - really disappointing.

Back to the DVD - one really cool feature is that it allows you to choose between two different mixes - one places you in the audience, the other, on stage with the band. They both sound utterly realistic and provide completely different experiences.

Lastly, I think one of the main requirements to make surround sound truly work is to have all 5 or 7 speakers properly matched. Using speakers that sound different from one another will definitely affect playback. After all, what would stereo sound like using a pair of speakers comprised of two completely different models that sound nothing alike?

Martin

[merrylander]

Since we mainly listen to orchestral broadcasts the only thing in the way of realism surround could deliver is having some coughing in the rear speakers.

[RadShak1251]

Since we mainly listen to orchestral broadcasts the only thing in the way of realism surround could deliver is having some coughing in the rear speakers.Not to sound like a surround fanboy, but if you ever get the chance to hear a classical surround recording where the hall's ambience was recorded with its own set of microphones - with no extra processing afterwards - played back on even a modest $1500 system, the startling realism and "hugeness" of the sound you will hear can be breathtaking. The walls of your room almost literally disappear.

This type of mix is known as an "ambient" mix. Many jazz recordings use this mixing style too.

The type of surround music that bothers a lot of people are the mixes that place you in the middle of the band or symphony, usually known as immersive mixes (I love these!). The Moody Blues' sacds are good examples of this. And mixes that are immersive and include moving elements are usually called aggressive mixes (I like these too, if not overdone - Beck's two 5.1 albums are like this).

[uofmtiger]

Not to sound like a surround fanboy, but if you ever get the chance to hear a classical surround recording where the hall's ambience was recorded with its own set of microphones - with no extra processing afterwards - played back on even a modest $1500 system, the startling realism and "hugeness" of the sound you will hear can be breathtaking. The walls of your room almost literally disappear.Yep, some of the Telarc (among others) titles are fantastic.

Skeptics should read a copy of this month's Absolute Sound that discusses surround sound in modern concert halls and on disc ("Recording High-Res Surround") if you do not believe that surround helps the experience.

To quote a small part of the article:

"Multichannel..provides the sense of spaciousness you experience in the hall when the music is taking place. You just can't do that with activity only in front of you - the brain simply doesn't allow for that suspension of disbelief. When you have cues coming from behind that are part of the acoustical event, the brain can close the equation and believe it...."

The article also talks about how 5.1 has not been successful in formats like SACDs. Their (Peter McGrath's) main point on this issue was that surround sound has not been marketed for music. I agree. Most people have no clue that SACD or DVD-A even exist. Of course, most people are happy with 128kbps mp3s.

They are also quick to say, in the article, that this does not mean that 2-channel is bad. They mentioned that they even like mono recordings. However, they feel this is the next step to put you right in an individual hall from your home.

As far as movies are concerned, going to the theater has always meant that the sound had the potential to blow you away as much as the huge screen. Bringing surround to people's homes was intended to give them another part of the movie experience without leaving the couch. Personally, I am not distracted by being immersed in a movie. It can make you want to jump out of your seat when watching a movie like "Saving Private Ryan", but I feel that it normally adds to the overall expereince and gives watchers/listeners a better idea of what the movie maker intended.

[RaymondLeggs]

my grandfather likes his old tv with blown speakers on full volume just fine.

Tell him to stop playing walker texas ranger so loud on his TV! :lmao:



I like Surround sound and everything I have a Cheap Durabrand 5 speaker package hooked up to a durabrand DVD Player and It sounds fine to me Its not real surround though but it does have lots of bass.

Movies sound good piped through an old stereo and 2 bookshelf speakers too.

I did this for almost a year until i got a JVC stero with CD/DVD changer that broke and ate DVD's affter a month of having it. I went back to the old system and then i got the Durabrand system as a christmas gift.

[saltwater]

I hate surround never have liked it, i prefer the 2 channel setup sound good decent imaging how can you go wrong

[sleddogman]

Since we mainly listen to orchestral broadcasts the only thing in the way of realism surround could deliver is having some coughing in the rear speakers.
LoL! That or their cell phone going off... :D

[Luckyman]

I love surround, but the availability of programming is very limited in HD.
I was told by DirectTV that I will be getting about 35 more channels in hD later this week. I normally use my home theater setup only when watching a dvd.
I recently read somewhere that very few people who are buying all these flat panel televisions lately will ever hook them up to even a modest home theater
in a box type system. That's why I like my rear projection so much, the speakers in the cabinet sound fairly decent.

[mhconley]

I recently read somewhere that very few people who are buying all these flat panel televisions lately will ever hook them up to even a modest home theater in a box type system.

I run my home theater surround sound receiver and speakers constantly - it is the only way I'll ever listen to TV. Nothing like cranking the system when watching the start of an F1 race on Speed. Sure, it's not surround sound but it sure beats the hell out of the speakers that came with my plasma. (They've never even been out of the box.)

Most NBC, CBS, HBO, Showtime and Discovery HD shows are broadcast in 5.1 DD. Most of the other HD channels are hit and miss although I have seen a lot of good surround sound content on PBS and MHD, also.

Martin

[junkaudio]

i like 5.1 but you need a good preamp and these are not cheap !
also like sacd multichanel with the right equipment
don´t miss it but it s not the cheap things sold in bestbuy....

[RaymondLeggs]

Do they have integrated amps at bestbuy?