New Schiit SYN - Analog Surround Sound Processor

[Settembrini]

Nope -- but I cannot grok thinking that there's any mixing, up down, or sideways going on with the Hafler circuit -- at least in terms of ambience recovery.
Although, to David Hafler's credit, the three-gang rheostat to adjust the mix -- ahem -- levels was clever.

cheers, now that is a knowledge-based answer sir!
jajajaja I am just an ignorant trying to understand, but hey, I hope that (in a while, after some reading) I could grasp what this diagramm means

PS: Is this the same process that the Sansui encoding devices performed?

 

[Sal1950]

Do these upmixers sound considerably better than (for instance) an Sansui QS-1 for upmixing from stereo to 4.0?

What upmixer sounds best is an argument that can go on forever, everyone seems to have a fav.
Personally the DS, Auro, and DTS options in my Denon mostly satisfy me, I may quickly switch between them to see which
I find works best with any one particular recording. Mostly as of late I find DS with "center spread" engaged is very good.
I don't see any sense in going crazy over things, they all are just trying to fake discrete surround and that's not possible.
Thankfully I have hundreds of real quad, 5.1, Atmos, etc to play.

 

[mhardy6647]

cheers, now that is a knowledge-based answer sir!
jajajaja I am just an ignorant trying to understand, but hey, I hope that (in a while, after some reading) I could grasp what this diagramm means

PS: Is this the same process that the Sansui encoding devices performed?

The bottom line for the simplest ambience recovery schemes is to send out of phase signal to the rear speakers.

amusingly, this graphic (albeit originating in Everyday Electronics) was lifted from another thread here at ASR.

Brian Eno 3 speaker setup, Hafler circuit, etc.

I just watched a new video from Paul/PS Audio () regarding Brian Eno's suggestion to use a 3rd speaker connected to the positive terminals of your amp, placed behind, to play the uncommon audio from both channels, potentially playing audio not heard with a standard 2-speaker setup. Does anyone...

www.audiosciencereview.com

Does the Syn do anything else technological? Maybe even upmixy? For the price, I sure hope so!

Those who don't learn from old "techologies" are doomed to repeat them.
EDIT: Oh, @Settembrini if you're interested at all in the brute force approach to "surround sound", this might be of interest:

Quadraphonic Musings

 

[Sal1950]

LOL

What do you say about this beauty (Syn's granma)? Still worth it? Or way too vintage to give it a try?
And which price would be a non ripoff?

Are you a collector of vintage gear?
Do to it's age the likelihood of failing cap's etc: and the need for service is high.
Cosmetically it looks terrific.
As to value, etc; you might ask one of the guys at Quadraphonic Quad where many collectors hangs out.

Quadraphonic Hardware

Demodulators, Decoders, and Shibata...plus a whole lot more!

www.quadraphonicquad.com

 

[Blumlein 88]

The bottom line for the simplest ambience recovery schemes is to send out of phase signal to the rear speakers.
View attachment 420620
amusingly, this graphic (albeit originating in Everyday Electronics) was lifted from another thread here at ASR.

Brian Eno 3 speaker setup, Hafler circuit, etc.

I just watched a new video from Paul/PS Audio () regarding Brian Eno's suggestion to use a 3rd speaker connected to the positive terminals of your amp, placed behind, to play the uncommon audio from both channels, potentially playing audio not heard with a standard 2-speaker setup. Does anyone...

www.audiosciencereview.com

Does the Syn do anything else technological? Maybe even upmixy? For the price, I sure hope so!

Those who don't learn from old "techologies" are doomed to repeat them.
EDIT: Oh, @Settembrini if you're interested at all in the brute force approach to "surround sound", this might be of interest:

Quadraphonic Musings

Those who don't learn from old "techologies" are doomed to repeat them.

I may have to steal that. Too cute.

 

[Blumlein 88]

I'll try a written explanation of the Hafler circuit which might help someone understand how simple it is.

Let us start with stereo speakers. Send a mono signal to the pair. Connect a third speaker with one connector on the PLUS connector of the left speaker, and one connector on the PLUS connector of the right speaker. With a mono signal the signal to both speakers is the same and nothing will happen with the third speaker.

Now play a stereo signal where each channel is different. The voltage across that third speaker is no longer zero and that third speaker will make sound. The sound you are hearing is the difference between each channel or the difference signal. Run long speaker cables and put that third speaker well behind you so the difference signal comes from the rear.

Now do the same connection with a 4th speaker and put it behind you, but in opposite phase to the third speaker. You how have two speakers well behind you playing a non-correlated difference signal. That is what the Hafler circuit does. Add a little delay by putting them further behind you than the front speakers are in front of you and you have the simple surround matrix.

That is why calling this "up-mixing" is humorous.

 

[Sal1950]

That is why calling this "up-mixing" is humorous.

Yep, maybe more properly called ambiance extraction, but even that is a misnomer.
I played around with a couple options back in the 70s but to me the weird freq response balance they added to
the sound was unacceptable.

 

[Blumlein 88]

Yep, maybe more properly called ambiance extraction, but even that is a misnomer.
I played around with a couple options back in the 70s but to me the weird freq response balance they added to
the sound was unacceptable.

I played with it in the 1980s. At one time had a very long listening room. Had Acoustat Two ESLs up front, and pair of Maggie MG2s in the rear. It did something, but it just wasn't satisfying with most music. If I remember rightly, I had a Mark Levinson ML-9 on the ESLs and a Carver receiver playing the rear Maggies.

 

[Settembrini]

With a mono signal the signal to both speakers is the same and nothing will happen with the third speaker.

Now play a stereo signal where each channel is different. The voltage across that third speaker is no longer zero and that third speaker will make sound.

If I understand correctly, when using mono the third speaker won't sound because phase and counter-phase are the same and therefore cancel each other, right?

 

[Blumlein 88]

If I understand correctly, when using mono the third speaker won't sound because phase and counter-phase are the same and therefore cancel each other, right?

Yes.

 

[Settembrini]

Yes.

Cheers, and thanks for the helpful explanation!