Multi-channel Listening and Understanding Some Basic Concepts

[Trdat]

After listening to Audioholics take on multi-channel listening called "How many speakers do you need for good listening" I am keen to learn more about it. I have some questions and hopefully this could be a learning experience for the two channel guys. I know there are proponents in this forum who advocate multi-channel listening for music so keen to hear from them. Obviously Floyd Tool also advocates this so hopefully many readers of his book can break down the concepts.

Lets go with the mindset that multi-channel is the way to go.

1. Is up-channeling/up-sampling from the home theater receiver to your number of speakers a must?

2. So if we need a home theater receiver for multi-channel listening is there any preamps that measure well that are affordable? Doesn't seem like it...

3. Do all the speakers have to be the same? I know most of the time it does but its been thrown around that you don't need the same massive speakers for the back as you do for the front. I am just curious what the best experience is?

 

[Sancus]

1. Is up-channeling/up-sampling from the home theater receiver to your number of speakers a must?

2. So if we need a home theater receiver for multi-channel listening is there any preamps that measure well that are affordable? Doesn't seem like it...

3. Do all the speakers have to be the same? I know most of the time it does but its been thrown around that you don't need the same massive speakers for the back as you do for the front. I am just curious what the best experience is?

1. I would say yes, and Auro3D sounds pretty good. DTS and Dolby options not so good. Have not experienced Harman Logic7/Logic16 but some have said it's the best, but difficult/expensive to acquire.

2. Denon X3500h measures absolutely fine as long as you don't exceed 1.5v output, and even above that it's probably audibly fine. I would expect the same from most of their recent AVRs.

3. Nah. As long as you aren't mixing speakers with very different directivity or frequency response, it's fine.

There are existing threads with a lot of information on Multichannel:
https://www.audiosciencereview.com/...-for-music-standards-setup-thoughts-etc.3295/
https://www.audiosciencereview.com/forum/index.php?threads/denon-avr-x3500h-avr-review.10053/
General stuff in the HT forum: https://www.audiosciencereview.com/forum/index.php?forums/home-theater-forum.35/

 

[Kal Rubinson]

First, let me ask if you are talking about music or movies.. I will presume that we are dealing with music in my replies.

Lets go with the mindset that multi-channel is the way to go.

I am with you there.

1. Is up-channeling/up-sampling from the home theater receiver to your number of speakers a must?

IMHO, no but that depends on whether there is significant and useful availability of repertoire in the music that interests you.

2. So if we need a home theater receiver for multi-channel listening is there any preamps that measure well that are affordable? Doesn't seem like it...

??? There are some really good AVRs and prepros but you need not use them unless you require video playback as well.

3. Do all the speakers have to be the same? I know most of the time it does but its been thrown around that you don't need the same massive speakers for the back as you do for the front. I am just curious what the best experience is?

Do they have to be? No. Should they be? Yes, if you can do it. Ideally, they should be matched well and the best assurance that they are is if they are identical. That said, my front three are not the same as my surround but they are from the same manufacturer and quite similar acoustically.

 

[Kal Rubinson]

Hah! Now you have two perspectives.

 

[Sancus]

IMHO, no but that depends on whether there is significant and useful availability of repertoire in the music that interests you.

Well you're right about that, some genres like classic have quite a bit of multi-channel music. Unfortunately, other genres have very little... so I do agree that upmixing value depends on what you like and how much of it you have.

Unfortunately even the process of acquiring multi-channel music is more complicated and costly so I do think upmixing is important unless you already have a library of multi-channel music.

 

[Trdat]

100% we are talking about music.

None of my source recordings will be recorded in multi-channel and I am presuming this is for the foreseeable future as well. So I am presuming that an up-sampler is a must from what I have understood.

Don't need video playback, just an AVR that has preouts so I can use my amps and have the option of the suggested up-samplers such as Auro3D, DTS, Dolby etc.... Simple Pre amp, upsampler options pre out and thats it, no other fancy functions.

Ill take a look at the Denon thank you.

Regarding using same speakers yes, I mean I totally understand that using same speakers is beneficial and that it would be best option. I suppose I can experiment with different speakers till I become more versed with the whole multi channel thing then purchase the same speakers for the back and front.

One more question. Would 4 speakers be enough for a multi channel experience and is there a up-sampler format for only 4 speakers? Or is 5.1 the minimum?

 

[Sancus]

One more question. Would 4 speakers be enough for a multi channel experience and is there a up-sampler format for only 4 speakers? Or is 5.1 the minimum?

If you're using an AVR, it'll mix accordingly to whatever speaker setup you have. If you're not using an AVR, no idea, I'm guessing it would depend on the capabilities of whatever devices/software you're using.

 

[Mnyb]

I use a Meridian 5.1 system I’m listening to music in thier trifield or ambisonic modes all the time.
I think the center channel is very important and should not be omitted it should also be of the same quality as the mains.

I have some true 5.1 albums about 100 of them , but just like most of us the vast majority of my records are stereo.

 

[Putter]

After listening to Audioholics take on multi-channel listening called "How many speakers do you need for good listening" I am keen to learn more about it. I have some questions and hopefully this could be a learning experience for the two channel guys. I know there are proponents in this forum who advocate multi-channel listening for music so keen to hear from them. Obviously Floyd Tool also advocates this so hopefully many readers of his book can break down the concepts.

Lets go with the mindset that multi-channel is the way to go.

1. Is up-channeling/up-sampling from the home theater receiver to your number of speakers a must?

2. So if we need a home theater receiver for multi-channel listening is there any preamps that measure well that are affordable? Doesn't seem like it...

3. Do all the speakers have to be the same? I know most of the time it does but its been thrown around that you don't need the same massive speakers for the back as you do for the front. I am just curious what the best experience is?

1. Not Really. Up sampling, for me, works well on instrumental tracks, but not as well on many vocal tracks where the singer sounds like they're singing out of a tunnel. This is with Dolby PL2. It's a matter of preference.

2. Agree with the Denon recommendation. Used and refurbs are also a possibility.

3. While using the same speakers all around are ideal, my experience is that different speakers can be used particularly if they're designed to measure reasonably flat and using an Auto Eq program which will try to give a similar response. If matching speakers the front 3 are the most essential.

 

[Sal1950]

Definitely go multich is my thinking.

1. A must, no, simply a preference. There have been many upsampling codex over the years, with the most modern gear there's mainly 3. Dolby, DTS, and Auro, switch between them and pick the one you prefer, or none. I would say the general consenses is for Auro being the best, it's what Floyd Toole, I, and I think Kal uses (when he upsamples).
2. Don't grind yourself up over the specs. Unless you have $10k in speakers and aren't doing any upsampling or room correction (which changes the sound in many known and unknown ways), you won't hear a difference between any of the quality gear. I use Marantz.
3. I would suggest to definitely use identical speakers in the four corners and a center from the same manufacturer designed to work with the corners.
4. You can get away with 4 but I'm not sure how well any of the upsamplers will work that way. I believe most expect to be feeding a 5.1 channel system I highly suggest having a center channel speaker.
Not sure why you say none of your source material will be multich? There's a world full of excellent surround recordings in all genre's available to you and you'd really be missing out to not take advantage of any of them. For most all it takes is a simple Bluray or DVD player that are available used for pocket change.

 

[Blumlein 88]

I've not heard up-channeling that seems an improvement to me. At best some like Logic 7 isn't too bad, and may sometimes help.

A number of people say the Atmos and Auro up-channeling are very beneficial, but I've not had the chance to hear those.

In my opinion, if you are fairly sure your sources are 2 channel and will stay that way, put the extra effort into improving the two channel system.

Going from mono to stereo was more than twice as good. Going from stereo to 5.1 is helpful and worthwhile, but not twice as good (and this with 5.1 sources). Going 5.1 with stereo sources is at best something of an improvement, but not a huge one. Improve your two channels I'd say.

Now if your sources are at least 5.1, yes go multi-channel. The main problem is multi-channel music recordings are not as prevalent as I'd like.

 

[Sancus]

I'm very interested in the JBL SDP-55's new Logic16, alas it comes at a price.... so would need to be confident it is quite a bit better than Auro3D to bother.

 

[Trdat]

I've not heard up-channeling that seems an improvement to me. At best some like Logic 7 isn't too bad, and may sometimes help.

A number of people say the Atmos and Auro up-channeling are very beneficial, but I've not had the chance to hear those.

In my opinion, if you are fairly sure your sources are 2 channel and will stay that way, put the extra effort into improving the two channel system.

Going from mono to stereo was more than twice as good. Going from stereo to 5.1 is helpful and worthwhile, but not twice as good (and this with 5.1 sources). Going 5.1 with stereo sources is at best something of an improvement, but not a huge one. Improve your two channels I'd say.

Now if your sources are at least 5.1, yes go multi-channel. The main problem is multi-channel music recordings are not as prevalent as I'd like.

1. Interesting to take another point of view on upsampling.

2. I am an old skooler most if not all of my music is old, I only listen to 90's 00's music and Greek/Oriental music. Although most Greek album recordings live or studio are sublime and very well recorded I don't think they will be using multi-channel anytime soon. So, most of my music is stereo.

3. This is very interesting as well. To be honest I will be upgrading to massive high end PA speakers so yes, I am concentrating on my stereo set up with it being my main goal. But taking a look at the possibilities of multi-channel just in case I am convinced on the concept. And obviously learning so I can start the modeling in my head.

So Blumlien it seems what your advocating is that if your sources are 5.1 go for it, if I am listening to stereo stick a stereo set up!

 

[Trdat]

I'm very interested in the JBL SDP-55's new Logic16, alas it comes at a price.... so would need to be confident it is quite a bit better than Auro3D to bother.

So this seems like a preamp only right? I would love for it to be measured by Amir....

 

[Hipper]

https://www.audiosciencereview.com/...-for-music-standards-setup-thoughts-etc.3295/

 

[Kal Rubinson]

Unfortunately even the process of acquiring multi-channel music is more complicated and costly so I do think upmixing is important unless you already have a library of multi-channel music.

If you think it is generally tolerable, yes. I find that it works better for the types of music I don't care much for and not so well for the types that I do care for. Of course, my musical preferences affect my standards.

 

[Kal Rubinson]

3. I would suggest to definitely use identical speakers in the four corners and a center from the same manufacturer designed to work with the corners.
4. You can get away with 4 but I'm not sure how well any of the upsamplers will work that way. I believe most expect to be feeding a 5.1 channel system I highly suggest having a center channel speaker.

One addition: I would suggest that, for music particularly, identical L/C/R speakers is extremely advantageous and more important than having identical speakers in the surrounds. Most (horizontal) dedicated center speakers are designed to stay clear of the video screen and are acoustically compromised designs. Opting for such a center speaker means finding the few and, usually, more expensive ones that are not compromised.

 

[Kal Rubinson]

The main problem is multi-channel music recordings are not as prevalent as I'd like.

I am with you on that!

 

[Sal1950]

I am with you on that!

Unfortunately a chicken/egg situation. Supply/Demand

 

[Costas EAR]

1. Yes, upmixing.

2. No, expensive. Trinnov...

3. Yes, it is the absolutely best thing you can do. I have 11 pcs of Neumann 310. It's the best thing in my setup...