[timind]

That is a really good question. I chat in these forums with members who have hundreds of multichannel SACD's, DVD-A, Blue Ray's, and now immersive audio recordings in auro, atmos, and DTS.I never tried it yet. I stream most music and just use the auromatic upmixer. I prefer live concert recordings over concertvault.com and qello.com and also use Tidal.
My Sony UHPH1  can play any type of disc so I suppose I am due to get some of those multichannel recordings.
So, the music I listen to has been recorded in stereo so far. It is simple to upmix it, you just select auro 3D on the remote. I have tried the Atmos upmixer for music but it wasn't for me.
I have 2 rear speakers hooked up but my marantz processor doesn't engage them for auro. i would need to buy a processor by datasat, trinnov or storm to get auro in more than 10 channels.
It doesn't sound like 10 speakers, it just sounds like you are surrounded in a bubble of sound. With 5 or 7 channel I was always aware of the surround speakers, particularly when music emanated from behind you. Auro 3D avoids that. The performers just sound like they are in the front of the room, very natural. There are exceptions like when i play riders on the storm. The thunder in the beginning of the song comes from above you, like real thunder. But for the most part it just envelops you on typical recordings.

And how does the processor know to put the thunder above?

I remember a Sony receiver I had back in the 90s that had these settings such as "concert," "church," "hall," and the like. It was great fun to engage one of those settings once in a while, but it wore off.

[AJinFLA]

The basic premise is true and has been known for decades, as for example, summarized here http://www.aes.org/e-lib/browse.cfm?elib=9136

Here we are 17 years later and what was infeasible in 2000 is feasible now and for a sensible price too!

Actually, it was feasible then http://www.onhifi.com/features/20010615.htm
It's just that kind of reproduction isn't and hasn't been the goal of "high end" and so called audiophiles for decades http://www.stereophile.com/asweseeit/1107awsi/#L87yGDCgzHoIBaxB.97

Audio actually used to have a goal: perfect reproduction of the sound of real music performed in a real space. That was found difficult to achieve, and it was abandoned when most music lovers, who almost never heard anything except amplified music anyway, forgot what "the real thing" had sounded like. Today, "good" sound is whatever one likes.

I will definitely be looking into Auro.

cheers,

AJ

[witchdoctor]

And how does the processor know to put the thunder above?

I remember a Sony receiver I had back in the 90s that had these settings such as "concert," "church," "hall," and the like. It was great fun to engage one of those settings once in a while, but it wore off.

I have no idea of the science behind the algorithm or how it knows what to place where, it just works.
There are white papers on the Auro website if you are interested.

[witchdoctor]

Here we are 17 years later and what was infeasible in 2000 is feasible now and for a sensible price too!

Actually, it was feasible then http://www.onhifi.com/features/20010615.htm
It's just that kind of reproduction isn't and hasn't been the goal of "high end" and so called audiophiles for decades http://www.stereophile.com/asweseeit/1107awsi/#L87yGDCgzHoIBaxB.97I will definitely be looking into Auro.

cheers,

AJ

There are some good resources on youtube if you search and good white papers on the auro website.

[AJinFLA]

You heard it boys:  we can all sell our two-channel systems and buy a Marantz AVR and 9 bookshelf speakers.

Or just add the Auro AVR/bookshelfs to the dearly beloved two-channel system. Heaven forbid.
The Auro AVR with the "Off" button, on the remote too.

[WGH]

Check out the exhibits at upcoming audio shows to see if Ray Kimber is still demonstrating the IsoMike surround-sound. The 2013 RMAF demo featured 4 Sony SSAR-1 loudspeakers ($27,000 pair), Pass Labs X350.5 amplification, EMM Labs equipment connected to a Sonoma—32 super audio center, and Kimber Kabling. The discrete 4 channel recordings were immersive.

"IsoMike™ (Isolated Microphones) is an experimental acoustic baffle system, to address the interference of intrachannel sounds that results in compromised fidelity. For these 4-channel recordings, the microphones were suspended on four arms, separated by IsoMike™ baffles."


IsoMike sells music too, albums are $40
http://www.isomike.com/

Individual SACD Surround (4-Channel) downloads from their The Fry Street Quartet - Joseph Haydn String Quartets album (2.8MHz DSF) are available for $5 each.
http://isomike.downloadsnow.net/

[witchdoctor]

Check out the exhibits at upcoming audio shows to see if Ray Kimber is still demonstrating the IsoMike surround-sound. The 2013 RMAF demo featured 4 Sony SSAR-1 loudspeakers ($27,000 pair), Pass Labs X350.5 amplification, EMM Labs equipment connected to a Sonoma—32 super audio center, and Kimber Kabling. The discrete 4 channel recordings were immersive.

"IsoMike™ (Isolated Microphones) is an experimental acoustic baffle system, to address the interference of intrachannel sounds that results in compromised fidelity. For these 4-channel recordings, the microphones were suspended on four arms, separated by IsoMike™ baffles."


IsoMike sells music too, albums are $40
http://www.isomike.com/

Individual SACD Surround (4-Channel) downloads from their The Fry Street Quartet - Joseph Haydn String Quartets album (2.8MHz DSF) are available for $5 each.
http://isomike.downloadsnow.net/

Wow, the sample sounds amazing, I will get the download, thanks!

[Doublej]

You could hold an open house and let folks come over and decide for themselves.

[witchdoctor]

You could hold an open house and let folks come over and decide for themselves.

That's what dealers are for . At least there are enough speaker manufacturers with in home auditions so you can try it out. I waited until I wanted to upgrade my processor and then made sure I chose one with immersive audio. Then I added two front height channels for use with DTS Neo-X and Audyssey DSX. Eventually I got the other two height channels and it seemed Auro was the best setup for music and movies. I can still enjoy Atmos even though my setup isn't what Dolby prescribes. This article compares them-

http://ce-pro.eu/2016/12/3d-audio-dolby-atmos-auro-3d-dtsx/

[Folsom]

Don't get me wrong, there is plenty of room for old school vinyl with tube amps and the like. It just confirms how much 2 channels sucks when you need tech from the fifties to try and make it suck less.

One has to ask, have you even heard a good 2 channel setup?

[thunderbrick]

Don't get me wrong, there is plenty of room for old school vinyl with tube amps and the like. It just confirms how much 2 channels sucks when you need tech from the fifties to try and make it suck less.

And, people are searching like crazy for LPs from the 50s, or they are being re-issued in pricey vinyl or HR downloads. Why, one might ask?

Because it sucks?

[witchdoctor]

And, people are searching like crazy for LPs from the 50s, or they are being re-issued in pricey vinyl or HR downloads. Why, one might ask?

Because it sucks?

Well compare two channel stereo to video, would you use a TV from the fifties or even one from the nineties? We have gone from black and white video to 4K and on the other hand we have gone from two channel vinyl audio with tubes to an MP3 with earbuds on an iphone. not what i would describe as progress.
So yes, I would say if 0 progress has been made from the fifties that stereo technology sucks. Not to say it doesn't have nostalgic appeal just like old songs do but this goes back to post #1 in this thread, that a good two channel rig costs way too much because the technology is so "underwhelming" to begin with to be polite.
I do enjoy two channel in the near field with my JBL's. I think it brings me closer to what the engineer heard in the mastering room. But it doesn't create the live experience as well as my big rig.

[AJinFLA]

One has to ask, have you even heard a good 2 channel setup?

Have you ever heard a live orchestra?

[Austin08]

Fair question, and yes I think my current Paradigm Active 40 speakers sound amazing in stereo (I have 6 of them as bed channels but can listen to them in stereo when i want). I have used a Sunfire TG3 processor in stereo and my Marantz 7702 in pure direct stereo.just read the beginning of this review if you want.

http://www.soundstage.com/revequip/paradigm_active40.htm

Folsom I see Industry Participant in your handle, what does that mean? What axe do you have to grind may i ask? Are you subtly trying to promote your 2 channel wares?

Imo, surround proc/ HTreceiver are Loudsy when it comes to 2 channel stereo. (Their design goal is to produce multichannel application. Stereo is just an option or an after though). It is odd that You haven't had any long experience of listen or owning any "true quality" 2 channel set up yet so what is a point of saying 2 channel suck?

[witchdoctor]

Imo, surround proc/ HTreceiver are Loudsy when it comes to 2 channel stereo. (Their design goal is to produce multichannel application. Stereo is just an option or an after though). It is odd that You haven't had any long experience of listen or owning any "true quality" 2 channel set up yet so what is a point of saying 2 channel suck?

I think HT processors can be amazing two channel preamps. I am not using a receiver, I am using separates. This is a review of the Sunfire TG3 I used for many years. The author states:

In conclusion, Bob Carver has done something very special and has come up with a full surround sound, solid state, processor that has a truly enjoyable hi-end sound, rivaling the qualities of tube electronics. One can feel quite comfortable with this unit as your system controller for both high quality audio and home theater.
Kudos, Mr. Carver.” -Martin Appel

http://stereotimes.com/post/the-sunfire-theater-grand-processor-iii

As for the Marantz 7702

I cannot point to anything I heard as a specific flaw, or a specific virtue, in the AV7702’s 2-channel performance. It mostly did what good audio electronics do: get out of the recording’s way.

YMMV

I do have a dedicated two channel Parasound pre-amp I used in my desktop system but it wasn't any better than my other gear.

Two channel sounds flat and uninvolving compared to 3D immersive audio, not to be confused with 2D "surround sound". Immersive audio adds the vertical soundfield, stereo is limited to left and right, front and back. When you take away the vertical soundstage and revert to two channel it sucks on most recordings. You don't need to be an "audiophile" to hear the difference, it is obvious.

[witchdoctor]

Has anyone other than me noticed that the people who are bothered by my statement that 2 channel sucks have never compared two channel to truly immersive audio? 

Look at the progress that has been made in other types of tech since the fifties and what has changed in stereo? Yes, the actual equipment it is played back on has changed, but as for the 2 channel algorithm it is stuck in the past. Two channel does not exist in the real world, it is fake. When I hit a drum in my living room it isn't broadcast in 2 channel. So I am not saying that 10 channel Auro3D is the same as live music, I am saying it sounds closer to live music than 2 channel via the auromatic upmixer.

[Bob in St. Louis]

Be nice folks.

Bob (moderator)

[AJinFLA]

????

They can't put for any sort of cogent response to any of the very basic science put forth, so it's ad hominem, red herrings, etc from here on out.
Your thread title is a bit hyperbolic, but then again, the responses of the 2ch stalwarts....

Perhaps your title should have been "Realistic immersion from 2ch vs mch, no contest". but then again...
I guess the folks who heard this (posted earlier) http://www.onhifi.com/features/20010615.htm would never have heard a "good" 2ch system either.

cheers,

AJ

[AJinFLA]

bothered by my statement that 2 channel sucks

That could also be because it doesn't, for certain types of music (electronic/studio constructs) where there are no immersive spatial rendering benefits (it could actually be a detraction).
I would guesstimate based on my exposure over 30+ yrs to audiophiles, at over a dozen shows, etc., that less than 10% listen to any kind of acoustic based music where a live performance would indeed be immersive. That is a preference, just like yours, so there is no right/wrong. IOW, no "suck" dichotomy.

[goskers]

Has anyone other than me noticed that the people who are bothered by my statement that 2 channel sucks have never compared two channel to truly immersive audio? 

Yes.  I thought it was pretty well known that two channel has always been limiting when it comes to an immersive field.  I have not heard Auro but would like to some day.  I do like two channel but am open to the new processing options.  I don't think it's correct to judge this on the merit of old surround processing either.

Perhaps I haven't heard a good two channel setup either.