[DVV]

jerry & dejan, i have an ambient surround-sound processor - the jvc xpa-1010.  it was discontinued several years back; s'phile even reviewed it & gave it a "class a" rating, for whatever that's worth.  designed to be used w/conventional 2-channel recordings, it has four channels: two ambient speakers to be placed on the walls behind the main speakers, above & to the outsides of them; the other two placed on the wall behind you, in the same layout.  jvc used dsp and four microphones, placed to mimic the plac ...

I know the sort of device you are talking about, Doug. I tested a Technics version of it some years back, and since JVC is owned by the same crew which owns Technics, I wouldn't be surprised if they were more or less the same under the hood. That text may well still be up on http://www.tnt-audio.com , somewhere in the log, the designation was something truly memorable and unique like GXL-190 GTTurbo....

It wasn't bad at all, if memory serves. Not your high end total purity gear, to be sure, but if used judiciously, it could pay for its way.

Since I don't own it, obviously I thought it a little too much, because after all, it could only doctor the sound based on its inbuilt algorithms. It wasn't true sound, it was an artificial approximation of what it might sound like in a room, hall, theater, stadium, etc.

I remember it also had a parametric equalizer built in.

Cheers,
DVV

[WerTicus]

my HT and my stereo is in the same room... in fact the stereo is the FL and FR channels of the HT... the other 2 amplifiers go off when music is on because the surround speakers and center speakers just arnt good enough to keep up with my mains.  But naturally they provide the effects nicely for movies.

I would LOVE to have all the same top of the line speakers surrounding me and when money permits i intend to do so.

I am curious as to why people even want to have distinctive HT and music setups... because a movie is a hell of a lot better with audiophyle quality gear, just like music is.  Cept of course your limited to dolby most of the time, but its still going to sound worse on your bose ht than on your (whatevers)

[doug s.]

dejan,

i am not familiar w/the technics device.  whether or not the xpa-1010 is hi-end or not, i really don't know.  i *do* know that ya don't wanna run the main l-r channels thru it!   it retailed for $1200, which was a tidy sum fifteen years ago, & s'phile considered it a definite step up from the similar yamaha & lexicon processors awailable at the time.  afaik, the jvc was the only one specifically designed to enhance 2-channel audio.  

yure correct about it using algorithms, but since it is basing the sound-program on what is reflected from the sides & back of the venues, w/mapping microphones placed facing the front & back corners of the warious venues, it really does not have to provide more than an approximation, to give a pretty good representation of the acoustic space in a home environment...

doing a search for more info on the xpa-1010 came up w/a link for a used one f/s from a california dealer, for $220, as of mid-october.  a worthwhile gadget at a good price, imo, for anyone inclined to check it out...
http://www.definition.com/demolist.htm

regards,

doug s.

[audiojerry]

Thanks for the heads-up doug. It's something I will consider. Like DVV mentioned is that it is processing an ambient soundfield instead of something directly in the recording. The disadvantage for me is that it couldn't playback multichannel SACD or DVD-A in true multi-channel. The advantage is it could closely recreate ambient effects and turn a good 2 channel stereo recording into a virtual surround sound system.

Is it possible to use this processor with just 2 rear channels instead of 2 in front and 2 in back? It seems like the front channels could smear the imaging and soundstaging for the 2 main speakers.

[BeeBop]

As far as audio goes, multichannel is still an illusion.

and stereo isn't? Don't getcha.steve

I meant it's an illusion because there is not a lot of multichannel audio software available yet. I agree that it sounds great when you get a well-mixed disc.

[doug s.]

jerry,

since i don't own any sacd's or dvd-a's, or any way to play them back, multi-channel hi-res formats aren't a concern for me!    and, when i consider how much software i presently own, & how much i may purchase in the future, that could be a hi-rez multi-channel format, vs a standard 2-channel format, well.. the issue is a non-starter...  especially since i can now get decent ambisonics w/two channel, w/my present set-up!  

re: using only two rear channels, i know it can be done, but i'd have to re-check the manual to see if the front mains then need processing.  i do *not* recommend running yer mains thru the processor...  in any event, yer fears about the front surrounds mucking up the main speakers are completely unfounded, ime.  imaginig/soundstaging only improves w/the surrounds - no degradation whatsoever.  wolume levels can be adjusted between the front surrounds & the rear surrounds, as well as between the surrounds & the mains - tailor it any way ya see fit...  

note the location of the left-front surround above the window in my room - done correctly, the surrounds shouldn't be near the mains.  and, when the surround system is on, ya can't localize the sound coming from the surrounds at all...


btw, i *have* been known to occasionally yust sit & listen to music...  

also, i did find links to websites of ralph glasgal, an ambisonics (ambiophonics?) freak.  he's the guy who bought two 1010's from me, when i bought three from the jvc warehouse, a coupla years after they had been discontinued...  
http://www.ambiophonics.org/index.htm
http://www.ambiophonics.org/realism.htm

doug s.

[DVV]

dejan,

i am not familiar w/the technics device.  whether or not the xpa-1010 is hi-end or not, i really don't know.  i *do* know that ya don't wanna run the main l-r channels thru it!   it retailed for $1200, which was a tidy sum fifteen years ago, & s'phile considered it a definite step up from the similar yamaha & lexicon processors awailable at the time.  afaik, the jvc was the only one specifically designed to enhance 2-channel audio.  

yure correct about it using algorithms, but since it is basing the sound-program on what is reflected from the sides & back of the venues, w/mapping microphones placed facing the front & back corners of the warious venues, it really does not have to provide more than an approximation, to give a pretty good representation of the acoustic space in a home environment...

Oh I agree, Doug. As a matter of fact, I must admit I rather liked the Technics unit. At its core was a Dolby Surround processor, which explains why it was fairly cheap. Despite the fact that I knew I was being pampered by algorithms, it still sounded quite decent - as long as one didn't run wild with the volume and parametric eq.

I have had moments of doubt, when I think I might just have bought it for the living room DVD gig. Perhaps i should have. Ah well, you can't win 'em all ...

Cheers,
DVV