Finally have Multi-channel Audio

John Casler · « **on:** 27 Oct 2003, 01:31 am »

Well since I have had the HK AVR7200 for some time and recently got the Denon DVD2200 I jury rigged 6 analog cables and threw in a multi-channel SACD.

Picked up Gloria Estephan's Greatest Hits. and this is good stuff.

Much, much fuller than 2 channel alone (and LOUDER!!!!)

If they ever get the engineering down, I can see some really incredible sonics.

I have the RM40s and LRC for the frontal array and the 626Rs for sides and the LARGER sub for Bass duties.

Have to say, this rig really sounds top shelf. Great dynamics and clairity.

Have to pick up more software for more reports.

Was looking for DSOM but as luck would have it they were out.

Rob Babcock · « **Reply #1 on:** 27 Oct 2003, 04:32 am »

Cool!

Are you digging the DVD-2200? I battled against the urge to return mine and trade up to the 2900, and to my relief I recently passed the date I could do so!

No complaint about my player, just curious about the diff between the two. The 2200 is much better than my Pioneer Elite DV45-A, so it should keep me happy for awhile.

IMO experience, MC discs are a mixed bag, with some being incredible and some being awful. It sure seems to me that the mixes are advancing rapidly, and now I rarely get one that's unbearably done.

Hope you enjoy it.

Rick Craig · « **Reply #2 on:** 27 Oct 2003, 06:04 am »

Al DiMeola "Flesh on Flesh" (Telarc)

David Sanborn "Timeagain"

Berlioz "Symphony Fantastique" (Telarc)

Anything on Telarc is very well-recorded and their surround mixes are excellent. They also have a good primer on their site for setting up your speakers.

Rob Babcock · « **Reply #3 on:** 27 Oct 2003, 06:01 pm »

I've been close to buying the Al DeMeolo disc several times, but I haven't heard his recent stuff. Maybe your recommendation will induce me to finally pull the trigger.

Incidentally, Sanborn will be playing in my town next month. While I wouldn't exactly call myself a fan, he is very talented, and I just might check it out.

sfpepper · « **Reply #4 on:** 27 Oct 2003, 08:38 pm »

some SACD recommendations in Rock:

The Byrds: Greatest Hits
Chicago: The Best Of: Only the Beginning
Sam Cooke:Live at the Copa
Bob Dylan: Blonde on Blonde
The Stones: Get Yer Ya Ya's Out, Beggars Banquet

now for some jimi...

gary · « **Reply #5 on:** 27 Oct 2003, 09:12 pm »

as far as the recording quality and sonics go, the Al DeMeolo sacd is great. if you're looking for good music... maybe look somewhere else. there are two songs on it that i actually like, the rest is boring as all get out (IMO of course).

-gary

flintstone · « **Reply #6 on:** 28 Oct 2003, 06:43 pm »

Try the Alison Krauss live multichannel out on those ribbons, she has a voice made for your system.

Dave

John Casler · « **Reply #7 on:** 28 Oct 2003, 07:51 pm »

Quote from: Rob Babcock

Cool! Are you digging the DVD-2200? I battled against the urge to return mine and trade up to the 2900, and to my relief I recently passed the date I could do so! Hope you enjoy it.

SO far so good.

Yesterday, I found my "vintage" Bryston Preamp has recently developed a bit of a "short" in one channel, which was causing a bit of grain/glare at high volume due to a loose connection vibrating in one channel.

So now that I have changed out the preamp to a "smoother" sounding Integra P303, it has lost a bit of the "edge", but is still nicely aggressive compared to a "softer, high dispersion system. And I can now play the sytem louder.

I'm awaiting a new BPT L-9 Power Cord to run my amp straight in to the Hubbel wall outlet, I'm also installing, so I can bypass the Bybees in my Power Conditioner.

I found something in the BP1 was tinkering with my "tinkling"

and I suspect it is the Bybees "rounding/smoothing" the high end response of the power amp more than I like

Will report results.

John Casler · « **Reply #8 on:** 28 Oct 2003, 07:54 pm »

Thanks for all the responses and it looks like I'll be checking out Allison Krause, Pink Floyd DSOTM and some of the others ASAP.

Thanks. More suggestions welcome.

Dan Banquer · « **Reply #9 on:** 29 Oct 2003, 01:23 pm »

Did you do a level calibration on the system?
d.b.

John Casler · « **Reply #10 on:** 29 Oct 2003, 02:51 pm »

Quote from: Dan Banquer

Did you do a level calibration on the system?
d.b.

Hi Dan,

Yes, I did with a SP meter.

Interestingly, all the levels are set at 0db and you cannot increase beyond that, so you have to cycle through and see lowest level and set the other speakers to match.

Dan Banquer · « **Reply #11 on:** 29 Oct 2003, 05:34 pm »

How close were you able to get the level on each speaker?
d.b.

John Casler · « **Reply #12 on:** 29 Oct 2003, 10:38 pm »

Quote from: Dan Banquer

How close were you able to get the level on each speaker?
d.b.

Seemed to be within 1-2db, but I couldn't get manual control of the cycle, so just as I got a reading, it switched to the next channel, so it was a little time consuming.

Dan Banquer · « **Reply #13 on:** 29 Oct 2003, 11:22 pm »

For the best possible performance you need to be 0.2 db or less. What procedure are you using?

John Casler · « **Reply #14 on:** 30 Oct 2003, 12:04 am »

Quote from: Dan Banquer

For the best possible performance you need to be 0.2 db or less. What procedure are you using?

Using the DVD players menu

Activate test tones

Adjust channels till they all read the same (say 75 db) from all speakers

My SPM only has 1db increments so accuracy to that level wouldn't be possible with my equipment.

If I could get the test tone to "not" cycle except manually it would be very helpful, since (as I mentioned before) by the time I feel the reading is accurate, it switches to the next channel

Dan Banquer · « **Reply #15 on:** 30 Oct 2003, 10:55 am »

Years ago Dr. Lipschitz did a study on level matching in stereo. He found that differences of above 0.2 db level difference between two speakers was rather audible. This also holds true for multichannel. The demonstrations I have gotten from mix down engineers show the same thing. If you can; get a better meter.
You also want to place the speakers equidistant from the listening position.
d.b.

John Casler · « **Reply #16 on:** 30 Oct 2003, 03:33 pm »

Quote from: Dan Banquer

You also want to place the speakers equidistant from the listening position.
d.b.

Thanks Dan,

For the info. I do use a "modified" ITU configuration with all speakers eqidistant from the listening positiion, and more than 3 feet from any wall.

I always find it interesting that people get "matching speakers" and then place the sides up on or against the wall, completley changing their tonal character.

My modification is that I have the side surrounds "directly" to the sides, on axis and not at a specific angle behind me.

All my speakers are precisely converged "on axis", with the result being very interesting.

In listening to the Gloria Estephan SACD, there are some gongas the have the "sonic positioining" of being directly behind me in a very clear and distinct way, when there are no active speakers there.

I think with a bit more engineering and production this Multi-channel Audio could really be good.

Hope they do "Diana Krall - Live in Paris". I want to see if they show restraint and keep everything where it was during the show. The regular CD does not.

Krall sings from the center and her piano is stage right.

Why spend all the dough to "recreate" when the sonic image is engineered incorrectly.

If anyone can suggest any Multi-Channel that is realistically holographed, rather than "demonstrating" that we now have rear channels and can sit "IN" the orchestra,

let me know.

Dan Banquer · « **Reply #17 on:** 30 Oct 2003, 04:08 pm »

I guess if you wish not pursue adequate level control, I will not pursue it further either. However; if you do not acheive the level accuracy that I stated in an earlier post then your imaging/staging etc.etc. will be skewed. Believe it. The mix down engineers will tell you the same thing.
d.b.

azryan · « **Reply #18 on:** 30 Oct 2003, 11:55 pm »

"-However; if you do not acheive the level accuracy that I stated in an earlier post then your imaging/staging etc.etc. will be skewed. Believe it. The mix down engineers will tell you the same thing."

That's right John! In fact all those mix down engineers have been trying to call you to tell you this, but you're always online and they can't get through! heh

Hey, if you want to get .2db accuracy, you've got plenty of space in your room to physically do it by moving your speakers the few inches it'd take.

Anyone who demands you balance your system to tenths of a db should have told you how to do it if they really cared and didn't want to just act better than you.

The 1foot distance setting in your player is VERY VERY typical. I don't know how someone can just tell you to set it to .2db or you're totally wrong. Yeesh!

Not sure if you can change it to meters, but I heard some players can then be adjusted finer that way. Annoying math though.

I'm sure you'll find after moving your speakers to get to ~.2db that it'll be a whole 'nother world of incredibly seamless audio that just totally blows away what it sounds like now. Seriously! Just ask all the mix down engineers, they'll tell you!

BTW... when you get DSotM...(and you will get it I'm sure)... remember that all three versions on the disc are diff.

Everyone always raves about how awesome DSD is because of this disc, and you WILL find the SACD 5.1 version clearly the best, but... the 2-chan PCM and DSD layers are from diff. lesser quality tapes and even the levels of all three are different.

I think only the 2-chan SACD layer has 'Money' slowly build to the ending like it originally did.
The CD and 5.1 version is the same level throughout (impressing more people), but they're just diff. mixes, not more accurate or anything.

Plus for no reason S'Phile found there to be like about 300+ clipped samples in the CD layer, and zero in the SACD layers. Ok... uh, that's a fair disc to compare CD to SACD.

Probably the highest profile SACD out today... I wonder if they didn't crap up the CD layer and change the levels on the 2-chan SACD layer on purpose? Naw... Sony would never do that. Not like this disc was originally supose to be DVD-A and Sony swooped in and poured money all over it.

There was a good article (in the usually stupid Sound&Vison) where they interviewed Alan Parsons (who originally recorded Dark Side) and he critiqued the new 5.1 mix and noted differences in the quad mix he did 'way back when'. Some he liked his better, some the new mix. Clearly all just 'choices'.

One track on the 5.1 mix bumped up Water's voice. Waters' liked that, Gilmour didn't. heh
And the background-type sound effects are all louder on the 5.1 mix. Most people have mistaken that for 'clearer because it's SACD'. Nope, just louder. hehe

Surround sound is filled w/ so many variables it's crazy.

Dan Banquer · « **Reply #19 on:** 31 Oct 2003, 01:58 am »

If you start moving the speakers so they are not equidistant from the listening position you are going to need to adjust the delay accordingly. Most mix down engineers I know don't do that. I am going to assume they have good reason.
The level calibration procedure that I am discussing with John is a standard practice. No more and no less.
However if you have a chip on your shoulder we can take care of that in another forum should you so desire. I am not in the mood these days to take undeserved crap.
d.b.