• WANTED: Happy members who like to discuss audio and other topics related to our interest. Desire to learn and share knowledge of science required. 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!

Which surround receivers have the best upmix algorithms?

RayDunzl

Grand Contributor
Central Scrutinizer
Joined
Mar 9, 2016
Messages
13,204
Likes
16,985
Location
Riverview FL
I think the term "sweet spot" is as widely misused as the word "audiophile".
 

Kal Rubinson

Master Contributor
Industry Insider
Forum Donor
Joined
Mar 23, 2016
Messages
5,273
Likes
9,794
Location
NYC
Regarding sweetspot in multisetup: When walking around in the Genelec 11.1 showroom I think the sound was likable even in the corners. Maybe I’m not a picky guy...
Sure. Likable is true but not enough for when you are paying attention.
 

Kal Rubinson

Master Contributor
Industry Insider
Forum Donor
Joined
Mar 23, 2016
Messages
5,273
Likes
9,794
Location
NYC
I think the term "sweet spot" is as widely misused as the word "audiophile".
Yeah, I do hesitate when I use it but it is understood.
 

Wombat

Master Contributor
Joined
Nov 5, 2017
Messages
6,722
Likes
6,459
Location
Australia
The audio equivalent of the G-spot?? :D
 
OP
oivavoi

oivavoi

Major Contributor
Forum Donor
Joined
Jan 12, 2017
Messages
1,721
Likes
1,934
Location
Oslo, Norway
Too many variables.

Anything in particular you're thinking of, Kal? Mix quality in the original surround and stereo mixes is an obvious one, but given that he used about 10 different musical pieces I would think that it would even out...
 

svart-hvitt

Major Contributor
Joined
Aug 31, 2017
Messages
2,375
Likes
1,253
Anything in particular you're thinking of, Kal? Mix quality in the original surround and stereo mixes is an obvious one, but given that he used about 10 different musical pieces I would think that it would even out...

I would think that the thesis has undergone criticism regarding both method and content?
Is it a garbage-in-garbage-out piece of work?
 
OP
oivavoi

oivavoi

Major Contributor
Forum Donor
Joined
Jan 12, 2017
Messages
1,721
Likes
1,934
Location
Oslo, Norway
I would think that the thesis has undergone criticism regarding both method and content?
Is it a garbage-in-garbage-out piece of work?

All research can be wrong. That's just how it is. Lots of sources of error everywhere. But sometimes one can see red flags immediately, and other times it looks robust. To me, this study looks robust. But it is far outside of my actual field of expertise, so I have no way of really assessing it.
 
Last edited:

Kal Rubinson

Master Contributor
Industry Insider
Forum Donor
Joined
Mar 23, 2016
Messages
5,273
Likes
9,794
Location
NYC
Anything in particular you're thinking of, Kal? Mix quality in the original surround and stereo mixes is an obvious one, but given that he used about 10 different musical pieces I would think that it would even out...
Those two plus optimization of the playback system for each format. I have not read the thesis so I cannot see any more possibilities. As for the mix quality, how was that assessed for an experiment where the purpose is assessing the relative satisfaction of the two formats. Kinda circular.
 

Kal Rubinson

Master Contributor
Industry Insider
Forum Donor
Joined
Mar 23, 2016
Messages
5,273
Likes
9,794
Location
NYC
I would think that the thesis has undergone criticism regarding both method and content?
Is it a garbage-in-garbage-out piece of work?
Not necessarily. I have been a party to many doctoral theses, beginning with my own. Thesis development, analysis and criticism are seriously pursued in academia but by humans, all of whom have areas in which they are strong and areas in which they are weak. I do not know the institution here but institutional reputation is the best assurance of due diligence.
 

Sal1950

Grand Contributor
The Chicago Crusher
Forum Donor
Joined
Mar 1, 2016
Messages
14,073
Likes
16,609
Location
Central Fl
IIRC AJ of Soundfield Audio liked to use a proprietary implementation that older Yamaha receivers included. I heard him using it at one of his speaker demos a while back and it did do a good job of simple ambience extraction. Can't remember what Yamaha called it, maybe hit him with a email if interested.
A little bird whispered an update in my ear (A J is always watching guys :eek:)
The algorithm I was thinking of was actually from Harman (not Yamaho) called L7 or Logic 7 & and I believe an offshoot of work done by Lexicon. As I had said, used simply for ambience my short experience with it was a positive one. If someone wanted to experiment, it could be added simply by picking up an older Harman AVR plus 2 speakers and connecting it as A J had outlined here back in April 2016
https://audiosciencereview.com/foru...for-small-room-acoustics.286/page-8#post-9735

It just seems a little crazy to me to invest so much in a system's fidelity to the source, then overlay that with an artificial algorithm to create something not there in the original source.
Occasionally we do have to step out of our objective, pure to the source, high fidelity reproducing shoes.
This stuff is supposed to be fun sometimes. :D
 
Last edited:

j_j

Major Contributor
Audio Luminary
Technical Expert
Joined
Oct 10, 2017
Messages
2,267
Likes
4,759
Location
My kitchen or my listening room.
Well, all speakers must match, center included.

Upmixes can not provide the full range of sensation that independent channels can provide.

Having said that, I have to be quiet for now.
 

amirm

Founder/Admin
Staff Member
CFO (Chief Fun Officer)
Joined
Feb 13, 2016
Messages
44,376
Likes
234,497
Location
Seattle Area
The algorithm I was thinking of was actually from Harman (not Yamaho) called L7 or Logic 7 & and I believe an offshoot of work done by Lexicon.
Logic 7 has been the gold standard for simulated surround although admittedly, I have not kept up with the latest development. It is a lot of "fun" but I grew tired of it after a some usage.
 

NorthSky

Major Contributor
Joined
Feb 28, 2016
Messages
4,998
Likes
937
Location
Canada West Coast/Vancouver Island/Victoria area
What the title says.

I've been intrigued by multichannel audio for some time. I will probably not invest in a multichannel rig in the near future, but nevertheless I remain intrigued. My listening is about 30 percent classical, 30 percent jazz, 40 percent rock and pop, and 10 percent electronica (since this one goes to 11). For classical, there's a lot of multichannel releases. For all the other genres I listen to, not so much. I am therefore curious about whether any surround receivers have good upmixing capabilities. A recent PhD by a German chap involved listening experiments on upmixing algorithms, and the best ones seem to do fairly well. https://d-nb.info/1128906503/34

Looking briefly into the research, it seems to me that SOTA upmixing algorithms involve elaborate ways of separating "ambient" from direct sound, etc.

So: Which surround receivers do this well? I would assume Harman has some know-how on this, but what brands in the Harman family is it worth looking into? How about other companies, like NAD or Emotiva? Oppo? Emotiva offers very good value for money and has dirac live on their hardware, but I guess they don't have the resources inhouse to research upmixing and stuff like that?

And a further question to the resident multichannel gurus, @Fitzcaraldo215, @Kal Rubinson and @j_j (if I may): Do other considerations apply when buying loudspeakers for multichannel rigs, or do the same rules apply as with loudspeakers for two-channel systems? To phrase it in a slightly different way: Will loudspeakers which are ideal for a stereo setup in a given room also be ideal for a multichannel setup in the same room - or are there other things to think about?

Yamaha receivers are fun to experiment with music in surround.
They have music modes from real venues, with adjustable parameters.
Their calibration setup is reasonable, YPAO.

Marantz and Denon receivers are another consideration, with Audyssey MultEQ XT32, their top setup flavor for acoustic calibration.

And yes all speakers should be timbre matched for best performance.
If using five for strictly multichannel music listening, the exact five same speakers would provide the best results from say multichannel SACDs. ...Five full range loudspeakers, or smaller non-full range with two subwoofers...the speakers with response down to say 40Hz and crossed over @ say 80Hz.

Budget?
 

svart-hvitt

Major Contributor
Joined
Aug 31, 2017
Messages
2,375
Likes
1,253
I could say that about almost every up-mixing system I have tried. The others were no fun at all.

If you turn off most of the speakers in a multisetup, leaving only 2 of them activated, a multisetup will play stereo. The funny multioption thus becomes a bonus.

;)

Disclosure: Readers are right to assume that I am fascinated by multi (but I don’t own one) and will use every opportunity to find positives about said setup...
 
OP
oivavoi

oivavoi

Major Contributor
Forum Donor
Joined
Jan 12, 2017
Messages
1,721
Likes
1,934
Location
Oslo, Norway
Logic 7 has been the gold standard for simulated surround although admittedly, I have not kept up with the latest development. It is a lot of "fun" but I grew tired of it after a some usage.

Thanks Amir. The only thing that concerns me about logic 7 is that it seems to be old technology by now, not updated for a while, which probably hasn't incorporated the latest SOTA algortihms. Here are a some recent articles I found, written by different researchers, who all claim that different ways of separating out the ambient sounds can provide superior results with upmixing:

https://www.ntnu.edu/documents/1001201110/1266017954/DAFx-15_submission_9.pdf

https://www.degruyter.com/downloadpdf/j/aoa.2015.40.issue-4/aoa-2015-0057/aoa-2015-0057.pdf

http://www.apsipa.org/proceedings_2015/pdf/277.pdf

It might be that this is already the way Logic 7 operates, though. But it would seem strange to me if no advances have been made in this area since it was introduced.

(Ps: I really liked AJ's contributions while he was still on the forum!)
 

Kal Rubinson

Master Contributor
Industry Insider
Forum Donor
Joined
Mar 23, 2016
Messages
5,273
Likes
9,794
Location
NYC
Thanks Amir. The only thing that concerns me about logic 7 is that it seems to be old technology by now, not updated for a while, which probably hasn't incorporated the latest SOTA algortihms.
Yes but Harman has announced that there will be some new Lexicon processors out soon. Surely, they will have Logic7 but no one knows whether it has been updated.
 

Fitzcaraldo215

Major Contributor
Joined
Mar 4, 2016
Messages
1,440
Likes
632
I think the term "sweet spot" is as widely misused as the word "audiophile".
True. I misuse it, sometimes referring to the single point, central main listening position. But, here, I think we are referring to an area around that where an "acceptable" image can be heard. The main reason I think it is somewhat larger laterally for Mch than for stereo is because of the center channel and its ability to anchor the frontal image better than stereo when heard somewhat to the side. I am more OK in all 3 of my side-by-side listening seats in Mch than I am in stereo, FWIW.
 

NorthSky

Major Contributor
Joined
Feb 28, 2016
Messages
4,998
Likes
937
Location
Canada West Coast/Vancouver Island/Victoria area
The new top Marantz and Denon receivers come with Auro-Matic Music listinening mode. ...From Auro-3D decoding. @ no extra charge.
That, is another path to exploration into the world of music listening immersion.
Only for true multichannel audiophiles with a serious daredevil addictive style, and a scientific attitude.

(((•))) https://www.auro-3d.com/

Do you have an open mind? ...Open ears? ...Open ceiling? ....High level of stuntman manners?
 
Last edited:
Top Bottom