Are three channels better than two for stereo reproduction?

[LowShelfFilter]

Well in that case, I would be completely wrong, wouldn't I?

What if your speakers are not well suited for a time/intensity trading configuration? That seems to be the case. I have never known speakers nearly as small as yours to work well in a time/intensity trading configuration.

The secret to time/intensity trading is this: The near speaker's output must fall off RAPIDLY and SMOOTHLY as we move further and further off-center. This way, for off-centerline listeners, the FAR speaker is louder than the NEAR speaker by a large enough margin to approximately offset the earlier arrival time of the near speaker.

Below is a photo of the home theater room of one of my customers, and those speakers were designed for time/intensity trading. Underneath the grille is a 12" woofer and a 12" wide constant-directivity horn whose horizontal pattern (90 degrees) matches the woofer's pattern in the crossover region (about 1.4 kHz). When he received the speakers he was using a center-channel speaker. I don't remember what it was, but it was similar in price to one of my speakers, so ballpark 2 grand fifteen years ago. I suggested he try phantom center mode, and when he did, he preferred it to using the center-channel speaker. He sold his center channel speaker. With eyes closed, the dialogue is coming from the screen from the location where the photo was taken. Several weeks ago a friend of his who works for a company that makes high-end DSP processors came over to watch a movie, and after the movie as the motorized screen went up his friend had a moment of cognitive dissonance because he was expecting to see a center channel speaker behind the screen. Of course there was none.

View attachment 388703

Can you please show me a speaker in this list with the qualities you describe?

Ranking table of speaker's measurements

www.spinorama.org

 

[Duke]

Can you please show me a speaker in this list with the qualities you describe?

The DB Audiotechnik Max2 looks the most likely to me. This is not a recommendation, just an observation.

 

[LowShelfFilter]

The DB Audiotechnik Max2 looks the most likely to me. This is not a recommendation, just an observation.

Aren't point source speakers generally known to have the best imaging performance though?

 

[ernestcarl]

Can you please show me a speaker in this list with the qualities you describe?

Ranking table of speaker's measurements

www.spinorama.org

View attachment 388705

Previously mentioned this example before on this topic some time ago:

Another one not in the Spinorama DB:

AHC443

Big utilitarian PA horns... so not exactly fit for inside a home. HF fall-off might not be rapid enough? I dunno

 

[Duke]

Aren't point source speakers generally known to have the best imaging performance though?

What do you mean by "point source speaker"? I ask because the term has been used in different ways.

 

[dlaloum]

Aren't point source speakers generally known to have the best imaging performance though?

Point source acting as a "pulsing sphere" is one of the theoretical ideals...

The Quad ESL63 and its descendants achieve that virtually through the use of delay lines on the electrostatic panel (achieving a similar dispersal to a pulsing sphere about 1m behind the speaker... from memory.

(and yes they do image very well!)

The Bose 901's were aiming to achieve something similar... but the overwhelming use of reflected sound tends to smear the image (very popular in the psychedelic rock era... and suits that music!)

There are a number of omni designs that do similar things and are very very well regarded

 

[LowShelfFilter]

What do you mean by "point source speaker"? I ask because the term has been used in different ways.

Where sound emanates from a single point per "localizable" channel, like Genelec 8361A.

 

[Duke]

Where sound emanates from a single point per "localizable" channel, like Genelec 8361A.
View attachment 389007

That type of speaker tends to image very well.

 

[LowShelfFilter]

Lowering my subwoofers crossover frequency from 100 Hz to 70 Hz improved imaging in exchange for tactility. I can still blind localize 70 Hz crossover frequency, but I think the trade-off between point source sound and visceral sensation is interesting. A week ago, I heard a saxophone player playing in a train station, and it sounded better than anything I've heard from a speaker system, but point source sound seems to be the closest to that ideal.

 

[ooheadsoo]

I was a stereo purist for decades. Today, I am enjoying my 7.4.4 system with upmixers. At the moment, I really don't see myself going back to 2.1, especially because I rarely ever listen in the stereo sweet spot. Finding an upmixer you really enjoy will be your next challenge, should you commit to exploring this path.

 

[LowShelfFilter]

I was a stereo purist for decades. Today, I am enjoying my 7.4.4 system with upmixers. At the moment, I really don't see myself going back to 2.1, especially because I rarely ever listen in the stereo sweet spot. Finding an upmixer you really enjoy will be your next challenge, should you commit to exploring this path.

With the amount of atmos mixes being released nowadays on platforms like Apple Music, you may not even need to use upmixers that much.

 

[PHD]

With a center channel or anything other than 2 speakers properly placed using the folder rule, you would never get a true holographic soundstage where the speakers themselves disappear. In some recordings, the lead vocal sounds far deep between the two speakers, and some sounds even sound as if they come from above the speakers.


This isn't easy to achieve in a small room.

If you only want to get a clearer center image that won't have any depth, you can simply try the latest Dolby Surround upmixer, preferably with center spread turned on.

The new DSU is just as good as the older DPLII and even Logic7.