New Schiit SYN - Analog Surround Sound Processor

[Deleted member 48726]

For some people, 'getting as close to "the original" as possible' requires something like quad.
Particularly if one (such as myself) listens mostly to 'live' recordings that were done in some sort of concert situation, whether it be at a stadium, a concert hall, a Gasthaus (also called Gasthof, Landhaus, or Pension) or just outdoors somewhere.

I don't know a lot about it, but doesn't the recording contain "spatial cues" in it self so when played back on a correct setup stereo system the "three dimensional effect" is still there?

I mean a proper recorded concert album sound 3D to me on my two speakers so much that when I hear the crowd "hissing" when my eyes are closed it sounds like the sound is 360 °.

On the same system I also have proper center imaging as well so the one doesn't exclude the other.

 

[EJ3]

I don't know a lot about it, but doesn't the recording contain "spatial cues" in it self so when played back on a correct setup stereo system the "three dimensional effect" is still there?

I mean a proper recorded concert album sound 3D to me on my two speakers so much that when I hear the crowd "hissing" when my eyes are closed it sounds like the sound is 360 °.

On the same system I also have proper center imaging as well so the one doesn't exclude the other.

In an ideal world & room, you would be correct. But: IMHO the room reflections in our much smaller homes overpower that, as well as completely miss the delay of the venue, which, is 'fixed' by being over ridden by the more direct sound of the rear speaker of a quad system (in my case a 4.2 system). Since I have 3 systems, I can choose which seems to sound better to me (with my particularly compromised hearing.
Each to their own!

 

[kemmler3D]

For some people, 'getting as close to "the original" as possible' requires something like quad.
Particularly if one (such as myself) listens mostly to 'live' recordings that were done in some sort of concert situation, whether it be at a stadium, a concert hall, a Gasthaus (also called Gasthof, Landhaus, or Pension) or just outdoors somewhere.

I acknowledge that, but I'd also argue that a mid-side processor implemented without involving the artist or mixing engineer is more of a novelty than a step toward realistic live sound. It relies on the assumption that "rear" information will be more different across channels and "front" information will have more in common, but depending on how the recording is made, this assumption might be very wrong, and therefore sound very wrong.

 

[mhardy6647]

I acknowledge that, but I'd also argue that a mid-side processor implemented without involving the artist or mixing engineer is more of a novelty than a step toward realistic live sound. It relies on the assumption that "rear" information will be more different across channels and "front" information will have more in common, but depending on how the recording is made, this assumption might be very wrong, and therefore sound very wrong.

... and pretty soon we're on the slippery slope towards Googlephonics.
Steve Martin, of course, was way ahead of us.

 

[EJ3]

I acknowledge that, but I'd also argue that a mid-side processor implemented without involving the artist or mixing engineer is more of a novelty than a step toward realistic live sound. It relies on the assumption that "rear" information will be more different across channels and "front" information will have more in common, but depending on how the recording is made, this assumption might be very wrong, and therefore sound very wrong.

There are various implementations of this stuff, for various reasons. As you say, it can sound terrible. So can plain old stereo. And mono. Sometimes nothing can make it sound 'right'. That is a chance that one takes every time one tries to play anything that has been recorded. It also happens when attending live events (including un-amplified ones).
Well, however it works out (I have 3 various systems to play with various parameters) & attend many, many "live" events all over the musical spectrum. For me, one of the most important things is at least having a way to do .2 (or more) BASS.
And that is true for almost anything that I have heard that has been recorded "live". A single bass module ALWAYS sounds just "wrong" to me.

 

[sthomper]

On topic -- I feel compelled to mention something that the old hands here know, but y'all youngsters might not know.
The "trick" being exploited here is to recover out of phase information "between" the stereo channels. There's nothing fake about this information -- it's embedded (so to speak) in the two-channel master. It's inaudible unless it's 'extracted', which is a trivial task. It is the difference of the L and R channel signals.

See, e.g.., page 218 of https://worldradiohistory.com/UK/Everyday-Electronics/70s/Everyday-Electronics-1975-04.pdf for a discussion of unearthing the "ambience" information in a two-channel recording.

Now, here's the problem. A minimially mic'd, carefully recorded, mixed and mastered recording (e.g., a symphony orchestra recorded "live" in a concert hall without using too many microphones or tracks to mix to get to a stereo master) will have quite "real" spatial information embedded in the two-channel mix. Such recordings should produce a "convincing" spatial... umm... "image" when subjected to ambience recovery.
The real world of "modern" (say, late 1960s onward) recordings is that very few are thus made. Virtually all "pop" recordings since those days (and, sadly, many recordings of "serious" music, too) are "multi-track mono", with instruments and vocals recorded separately (often in very "dead" acoustic enviroments) and then mixed together into (e.g.) a two-track "stereo" (remember that "stereo" derives from the Greek for solid) master. There is no spatial information from the recording venue. Any "ambience" in the final mix is artifactual and thus it will be what it will be if subjected to ambience extraction a la Hafler. Thus @Holdt's "weird sounds [and] weird levels".

To my way of thinking, this "feature" of modern recording tactics just makes Schiit's development (and marketing!) of their little box even more bizarrely tone-deaf. As I love to say, I think this is Schiit's way of making a little fun (maybe a lot) of its customers. "You want multichannel? OK, we'll give you multichannel! Heh-heh-heh...". Just as their SOL made fun of the vinylista.

Sort of the Frank Zappa school of countercultural marketing. "Hateful, repugnant, and a waste of money" was his description of one of the Mothers' early albums (probably We're Only in it for the Money -- his Sgt. Pepper's parody).

To yank this screed back on-topic Sgt. Pepper's Lonely Hearst Club Band will probably sound really odd through a Dynaco Dynaquad 'decoder' -- or the Schiity SYN.

doenst the product allow for simple un-schitty processing for tracks that the schiity processing wont benefit? ie, a avolume control of each mode - main, center or surround? are there recordings where the volume and tweaking of the syn might be delightful? i have carefully increased my tv volume in-between my stereo speakers on some youtube music tracks...fool in the rain by LZ stands out - as i achieved a better central vocal sound and higher soundstage in concert with dual polk subs and bookshelves. i a and b-ed several times and lost nothing. the syn allows for unmolested 2 channel where it fits and can enhance with width...if desired. my endtable where my gear sits wont allow too many more large AVRs from ebay.

 

[sthomper]

Yeah. So exactly of 0 (zero) use the last many decades. That makes the SYN a gimmicky cashgrab. A lure. A test of waters.

Oh well. I shouldn't be riled up, there's plenty of that in the HiFi market.

OH! Almost forgot. How in the world do they get away with putting this cheap schiit in the box. I mean, it looks exactly like the cheap remotes that comes with cheap LED lights for children from alibaba.. -Can the disposable nature of the product be more obvious?

View attachment 278810

if its a niche product they expect niche sales?

 

[Srrndhound]

I’d like to offer some comments about upmixers, having been a participant in the availability of a couple of them over the years.

Structurally, there is a commonality in that they accept 2-ch audio and output “5.1” signals. The universe of upmixers can be divided into 3 broad types:

1) Passive (no active channel separation): e.g., Hafler, original Dolby Surround (early 1980s), Schiit SYN, TAG McLaren Surround, AnthemLogic-Music, AuroMax 2D

2) Active broadband logic steering: e.g., Fosgate 6-Axis, Shure HTS, Lexicon Logic7, SRS Circle Surround, Dolby Pro Logic, Dolby Pro Logic II

3) Frequency-selective steering (multi-band signal separation): e.g., DTS Neo:6, DTS Neural Surround, DTS Neo:X, Lexicon Quantum Logic, Dolby Surround upmixer

Even within each of these 3 types there are vast operational and audible differences among them – even in the passive category. The Dolby, TAG and Auro all have audio delays, the others do not. The TAG and Auro have forms of delocalizing processes, phase shifters or decorrelators to enhance spatial properties. Dolby has a 7 kHz low-pass filter in the mono surround output; Schiit appears to have a 5 kHz low-pass in the stereo surrounds. Only the Schiit, TAG and Auro have a center output.

There are no industry standards for grading surround processor effectiveness – there is no test equipment that will tell you which one will sound best. That is all subjective, the domain of the listener’s brain.

The more aggressive an algorithm becomes in the game of separating not just channels but isolating specific voices or instruments, the more chance of creating side effects, sometimes sounds not found in nature – unrelated harmonics, or dynamic artefacts not present in the source and insufficiently hidden by psychoacoustics.

From what little I know of the SYN unit, one thing seems certain – it is incapable of doing processing harm to the source audio, and in the world of surround upmixing, that is by no means guaranteed.

Since this thread is about the SYN processor, I will offer that I have found the Auro upmixer to be a very pleasant and listenable mode for stereo music. The SYN could, theoretically, mimic much of what the Auro is doing in terms of deriving center and surround signals from the L/R inputs. However, since the SYN does not have delays or the decorrelator/reverberator of the Auro, I’m guessing that the 5 kHz filter in the surrounds was the only reasonable option to soften the edges of the surround channels so that they draw less attention and impart a sense of distance.

Bottom line, if you want to get a taste of what the SYN process sounds like, don’t bother with getting a Dynaco box or a pair of APT-1 processors. If you’ve heard an Auro 2D upmixer that might be relevant, but only to a point. There really is no way to psychoanalyze the effect you will perceive from reading a description or even from seeing the schematic.

Aside from the Anthem, TAG, and Auro processors, I know of no AVRs, past or present, that have a passive mode akin to the Schiit, so don't look there either for relevant insights as to what this unit does.

I hope this was helpful to the discussion.

 

[sthomper]

I never liked music in any of the dsp modes of an avr, they truly sounded fake: small hall, big hall, stadium... it's laughing stock.

there was one called 'bar bathroom stall' it added just a muffled boomy sound to the track.

 

[jbattman1016]

there was one called 'bar bathroom stall' it added just a muffled boomy sound to the track.

Creative had the EAX push back in the day.

 

[Thorskin]

I'm actually thinking about getting this to go with my Genelec active speakers as a nice simple low energy setup. I could probably even attach it to the back of the TV along with my Nvidia Shield and get rid of my TV cabinet.

I hate having to turn my Denon AVR on to watch or listen to anything, it uses so much energy, even with powered speakers. It pumps out too much heat too, especially in the summer.

I have been waiting for something like this so I'm glad it was made.

If any of you have an idea that would be better for me then I'm all ears.

 

[Chrispy]

I'm actually thinking about getting this to go with my Genelec active speakers as a nice simple low energy setup. I could probably even attach it to the back of the TV along with my Nvidia Shield and get rid of my TV cabinet.

I hate having to turn my Denon AVR on to watch or listen to anything, it uses so much energy, even with powered speakers. It pumps out too much heat too, especially in the summer.

I have been waiting for something like this so I'm glad it was made.

If any of you have an idea that would be better for me then I'm all ears.

Why would you compare using speakers for 2ch tv audio vs that of an avr? Different animals....I hate using tv speakers myself, and it has nothing to do with the miniscule difference in energy consumption.

 

[Thorskin]

Why would you compare using speakers for 2ch tv audio vs that of an avr? Different animals....I hate using tv speakers myself, and it has nothing to do with the miniscule difference in energy consumption.

Hmm i think there may be some confusion.

At the moment I'm using my Denon AVR with my 5 Genelecs speakers. Even though the speakers are powered the AVR still uses a lot of energy and pumps out a lot of heat. Energy prices in the UK are crazy right now.

What I meant by attaching it to the back of my TV, I meant that I could mount it on the back (unless it needs to be placed horizontally) which is definitely not something I could do with a big honking AVR

 

[Cawafuoshi]

I got me a Syn the first week they were released. I was the perfect prey: I never have owned a dedicated surround system, I loved the idea it was never going to become obsolete as their marketing speak, it’s small, relatively affordable, and looks decent enough.

I had accumulated a variety of speakers and amps throughout the past years. I just “needed” a center plus amp.

I thought I would like it enough, so I did not bother to return it.

But over the course of the weeks and months, my experience is the following; for music, it is mostly decent. But I did not necessarily hear much difference between its surround mode versus its “all speakers on, no processing“ mode, or a simple A+B setup. I am sure there must be a difference, but I do not really discern it.

In addition, some music (esp. Jazz), produces lots of artifacts in the surround speakers. The only way to listen to it is without processing.

For movies, it adds enjoyment to just plain old stereo, but not enough.

Especially the bleeding of the stereo signal through the surround speakers does create a distraction in my brain. So, in action scenes, I never had the experience something was moving from, let’s say, front right to left behind. But this is probably the allure of true surround, to be able to position the sound discretely. I can’t drink enough beers as recommended by Schiit to stop noticing the Syn’s shortcomings from my point of view.

Everyone’s mileage will vary, but I am eager now to try out a discrete A/V Dolby/DTS setup to see if that’s a better experience.

In short, Syn yeah for music, nay for movies.

 

[jbattman1016]

I got me a Syn the first week they were released. I was the perfect prey: I never have owned a dedicated surround system, I loved the idea it was never going to become obsolete as their marketing speak, it’s small, relatively affordable, and looks decent enough.

I had accumulated a variety of speakers and amps throughout the past years. I just “needed” a center plus amp.

I thought I would like it enough, so I did not bother to return it.

But over the course of the weeks and months, my experience is the following; for music, it is mostly decent. But I did not necessarily hear much difference between its surround mode versus its “all speakers on, no processing“ mode, or a simple A+B setup. I am sure there must be a difference, but I do not really discern it.

In addition, some music (esp. Jazz), produces lots of artifacts in the surround speakers. The only way to listen to it is without processing.

For movies, it adds enjoyment to just plain old stereo, but not enough.

Especially the bleeding of the stereo signal through the surround speakers does create a distraction in my brain. So, in action scenes, I never had the experience something was moving from, let’s say, front right to left behind. But this is probably the allure of true surround, to be able to position the sound discretely. I can’t drink enough beers as recommended by Schiit to stop noticing the Syn’s shortcomings from my point of view.

Everyone’s mileage will vary, but I am eager now to try out a discrete A/V Dolby/DTS setup to see if that’s a better experience.

In short, Syn yeah for music, nay for movies.

This should be the same experience for every user of the device. I think it would make a better 3.1 system instead of attempting surround 5.1, with just a stereo input.

 

[Cawafuoshi]

This should be the same experience for every user of the device. I think it would make a better 3.1 system instead of attempting surround 5.1, with just a stereo input.

Not en expert on the subject matter, hence I bought into the concept of the Syn, but some sort of steering and delaying would have elevated the experience to something like Dolby Pro Logic II if I am not mistaken.

I get Schiit’s boutique design and marketing, and this was my first device from them, so I did not fall victim to fanboyism. I am eager to compare it to a dedicated home theater receiver before passing final judgement, but I have a hunch the Dolby or DTS experience will be more immersive.

 

[617]

I got me a Syn the first week they were released. I was the perfect prey: I never have owned a dedicated surround system, I loved the idea it was never going to become obsolete as their marketing speak, it’s small, relatively affordable, and looks decent enough.

I had accumulated a variety of speakers and amps throughout the past years. I just “needed” a center plus amp.

I thought I would like it enough, so I did not bother to return it.

But over the course of the weeks and months, my experience is the following; for music, it is mostly decent. But I did not necessarily hear much difference between its surround mode versus its “all speakers on, no processing“ mode, or a simple A+B setup. I am sure there must be a difference, but I do not really discern it.

In addition, some music (esp. Jazz), produces lots of artifacts in the surround speakers. The only way to listen to it is without processing.

For movies, it adds enjoyment to just plain old stereo, but not enough.

Especially the bleeding of the stereo signal through the surround speakers does create a distraction in my brain. So, in action scenes, I never had the experience something was moving from, let’s say, front right to left behind. But this is probably the allure of true surround, to be able to position the sound discretely. I can’t drink enough beers as recommended by Schiit to stop noticing the Syn’s shortcomings from my point of view.

Everyone’s mileage will vary, but I am eager now to try out a discrete A/V Dolby/DTS setup to see if that’s a better experience.

In short, Syn yeah for music, nay for movies.

That's the use case I'd get it for, Music ambiance. Thanks for chiming in.

 

[jbattman1016]

Not en expert on the subject matter, hence I bought into the concept of the Syn, but some sort of steering and delaying would have elevated the experience to something like Dolby Pro Logic II if I am not mistaken.

I get Schiit’s boutique design and marketing, and this was my first device from them, so I did not fall victim to fanboyism. I am eager to compare it to a dedicated home theater receiver before passing final judgement, but I have a hunch the Dolby or DTS experience will be more immersive.

yes, dedicated audio channels are a step in if they are mixed/mastered well. Enjoy the audio journey.

 

[ta240]

I have never been able to stand playing regular music through an AVR surround setup when it has to fake the surround channels. It just so often sounded just enough off to be distracting. As cool as I thought it would be to have sound coming from all over, there was always too much of "that sound shouldn't be coming from back there right now" to use it.
To me this seems like it would be a fun toy to play with. I wouldn't replace my setup for movies but in another room it would be great for messing with music or a second small TV setup.
It seems like it wouldn't be that hard for someone to create a DIY schematic and board for a similar product either.

I do realize that with an AVR music that is mixed specifically for surround with them deciding in advance where the sounds would go is a completely different thing from the pretend surround coding off a two channel recording.

 

[ta240]

This thread is becoming a fine demonstration of Brandolini's law.

Is there a 'law' about some people liking different things?