Looking for members that have (had, listened to) both.
Subjective commentary may have to do, but ideally from comparing closely in time.
-
Welcome to ASR. There are many reviews of audio hardware and expert members to help answer your questions. Click here to have your audio equipment measured for free!
Upmixing - where are we at? Have people compared upmixers?
- Thread starter dlaloum
- Start date
Subjective commentary may have to do, but ideally from comparing closely in time.
But still it will always come down to a personal preference, a personal opinion.
Since there is no definitive right or wrong.
The effects of one (with settings X, Y, or Z) that Joe X loves you may hate.
Yes, but I would still like to ask, if that's OK. Measurements are great, but if moot as here, opinions must carry even greater weight.
Some members I infer much greater credibility than others.
If Dr @Floyd Toole responded, I would celebrate and maybe then start to look out for secondhand units.
Some members I infer much greater credibility than others.
If Dr @Floyd Toole responded, I would celebrate and maybe then start to look out for secondhand units.
Thats the thing - all methods have some idiosyncrasies involved. We are dealing with vast array of different production techniques, huge perceptual problems with 2ch playback, etc.
The best one can hope for a blind upmixer is first to be built on solid psychoacoustic foundation and second - have some user adjustable parameters at hand. "Season to taste" (dr. Floyd Toole).
The best one can hope for a blind upmixer is first to be built on solid psychoacoustic foundation and second - have some user adjustable parameters at hand. "Season to taste" (dr. Floyd Toole).
Good question. Got 3hrs?
The info is scattered between universities, AES/JAES papers, patents. It is a vast array of research in psychoacoustics, acoustics, signal manipulation/DSP techniques, electronics etc. And of all things - perceptual audio coding was direct influence on this. So thanks, MP3! I guess..
All goes back to Steinberg and Snow. We are literally and figuratively standing on the shoulder of giants.
Funny anecdote. In the rendering stage, when you take account the current best panning method for the most stable direct sound for the lower freq. ERBs (a virtual mic ala PSR) you almost get the same coefficients as the Gerzon <700Hz matrix. But in the advanced implementation he used allpass filters (to approximate a Hilbert transform) instead of time delay. When ubiquitous DSP chips became available with proper memory, Griesinger used time delays. IIRC of course. Ancients really do have a habit of stealing our inventions.
Last edited:
For you it's DTS Neural:X (or X) but DPLIIx (Music) fit the bill too and I preferred it to DTS Neural:X;
Convenience is a huge deal. What appliance today has both HDMI (e)ARC, bitsream decoding (AC3/AC3+), customizable room correction (even a multiband PEQ would suffice) and customizable blind music upmixer in one device? Today we are lucky to still get Auromatic.
Chr1
Major Contributor
- Joined
- Jul 21, 2018
- Messages
- 2,684
- Likes
- 2,842
Reckon five years from now peeps looking at this thread will laugh.
So much circular dialogue and subjective opinion.
Perhaps we could start from the premise that the quality of upmixers is subjective. Possibly genre dependant too.
This relentless praise for what could be considered outdated and possibly obsolete technology comes across a bit like threads relating to vinyl playback. A tad opinionated and not particularly objective or factually based imho.
My 2c.
So much circular dialogue and subjective opinion.
Perhaps we could start from the premise that the quality of upmixers is subjective. Possibly genre dependant too.
This relentless praise for what could be considered outdated and possibly obsolete technology comes across a bit like threads relating to vinyl playback. A tad opinionated and not particularly objective or factually based imho.
My 2c.
Last edited:
Right on point! They will be begging for "Dolby to roll back to the coding of DS2025, this new stuff sucks."
For sure, upmixing is a preference of not only the code and date, but the settings used for each recording.
Many folks do seem to prefer the one that is most tweakable.
AMEN.
Chr1
Major Contributor
- Joined
- Jul 21, 2018
- Messages
- 2,684
- Likes
- 2,842
For sure. What I find particularly weird is that lots of people emphasise the importance of the ability to tweak, but then leave all prescribed upmixed channel volume levels completely untouched. I have always got best results when tweaking channel levels to taste.
Again, I guess this might be an upmixer/genre specific thing. Each to their own. Lol.
Again, I guess this might be an upmixer/genre specific thing. Each to their own. Lol.
Says the only guy here with a dedicated music mode on a modern upmixer
But seriously - modifying speaker gains is conceptually the same as modifying the diffuse-to-direct slider. 'Music' and 'Cinema' modes is like 2 different presets on a 'parametric-to-linear' slider.
Quote from Toole's book on upmixers: "I choose to add moderate up-mixing to most of my stereo music, finding the adjustable Auro-3D implementation in the SDP-75 to be quite pleasant." and "subtly embellish the overall spatial impression from spatially-deprived stereo recordings". Sorry for the appeal to authority.
Oh and all the modern upmixers are 'outdated' tech having roots in the beginning of 2000s. They just are tweaked along the way some. (not always for the better)
Would y'all consider LARES enhanced concert halls (80s tech) 'outdated tech'?
But seriously - modifying speaker gains is conceptually the same as modifying the diffuse-to-direct slider. 'Music' and 'Cinema' modes is like 2 different presets on a 'parametric-to-linear' slider.
Quote from Toole's book on upmixers: "I choose to add moderate up-mixing to most of my stereo music, finding the adjustable Auro-3D implementation in the SDP-75 to be quite pleasant." and "subtly embellish the overall spatial impression from spatially-deprived stereo recordings". Sorry for the appeal to authority.
Oh and all the modern upmixers are 'outdated' tech having roots in the beginning of 2000s. They just are tweaked along the way some. (not always for the better)
Would y'all consider LARES enhanced concert halls (80s tech) 'outdated tech'?
Newman
Master Contributor
- Joined
- Jan 6, 2017
- Messages
- 5,106
- Likes
- 7,231
Nope.
In my book there is no such thing as outdated, there is only obsoleted. And if it hasn't been obsoleted by something better, it is thoroughly up-to-date!Same goes for research. People sometimes look at the date and judge. But if it has not been surpassed thus far, for all we know its findings could be eternal knowledge!
cheers
Recorded music is "fake" compared to real people playing music in your presence
So is electronics compared to pure acoustic.
Whatever floats your boat, intolerance is the main thing needs banning from an open and tolerant community.
Except AI, that's where I draw the line...
So is electronics compared to pure acoustic.
Whatever floats your boat, intolerance is the main thing needs banning from an open and tolerant community.
Except AI, that's where I draw the line...
I dont think it's a uwarranted leap into subjectivity, to assume that different upmixers will do different things to the same input.
After that, of course, it's preference all the way down.
Hmm, yeah, no, I'm not that ana....er, I mean, discriminating.
With DPLII, you could adjust a range of center spread (and iirc, 'dimension' and 'panorama' too).
Personally, I just set those once and forget.
But you could have a field day..
A pity the 'real thing' isn't always better than an upmix.
For the work of certain wizards, it's a real crap-shoot.
I do find it unfortunate that the current DS on my AV20 only has the sole option turning center spread on or off. I would think there could be some areas where a little tweaking might give a better over outcome? I consider Speaker Virtualizer a useless option, trying to create a height dimension when no height speakers exist in the system.
Ah, Mr Negativity again, funny how most everyone in the multich world love 90% of their engineering work.
YMMV.
Qutoed for emphasis.
When original stems are not available, only finished masters, then a 'Penteoed' remix it is mostly. That is a compliment. There are myriad ways to mess up the immersive mix (ages ago we even had a discussion where 'Sean Olive was not impressed with MC mixes'). There are (were) proper solution for the 'artist' to not mess up panning+reverb, channel decorrelation and rendering. Sadly that venture went belly up. So bass guitar in the LFE it is. Lets even give an award for that, just for laughs.
It seems loudness war is at least toned down with multichannel mixes.
DSU does not collapse stage without centre spread, as PL2 with 'centre width 0' does (neither does Logic7). DSU with centre spread on is mostly PL2 'width 3'. We are lucky to even have this option. Remember how Dolby forced the firmware 'upgrade' couple years back? What I personally would like to see is something that transforms the 2ch material to a time-intensity panned multi-speaker render with a sensible primary sound steering and 'leaky' objects, with a user adjustable slider. I really think 'Neo:X Music' was it. So was Logic 7 Music with '5 speaker enhance'. Both deprecated.
Newman
Master Contributor
- Joined
- Jan 6, 2017
- Messages
- 5,106
- Likes
- 7,231
Okay, that's interesting. Even somewhat encouraging.
How do you think it would go if we tell the AVR it doesn't even have a centre speaker, and save that system setting, and use it specifically for playback of 2-channel recordings with upmixing? Dumb idea?
cheers
I'm not in a good position to comment, personally can't stand regular 2 (frontal)speaker listening. Firmly in the 'stereo meant 3ch right from the beginning' camp.
If not possible using an (identical) central speaker, then I would prefer a narrow L R speaker angle coupled with low frequency (<500-700Hz) M-S stage widening solution. For the next venture would try Griesinger's 2ms? crossfeed for the high frequencies in combination with time-intensity trading, but not in a hurry.