|
|
|
raffells said:
Well I could offer an explanation.(until last week I listed in both)
The clues to this I have already given in an earlier response.
I will not elaborate further.
My whole point as a former surround enthusiast is that far too many people on this site make outrageous opinions out to be facts.I dont think this helps the cause..Ive said this before....Some,(in the trade)seem to make the most ridiculous of remarks.I wont expand further but it seems to me that from comments posted on this site ,the quality and detail of music or equipment doest seems to be important.
eg.In surround the centre channel doesnt seem to matter if its missing.?????
One day they are expanding on sound direction and then talking about a single subwoofer to capture all very low level bass which is then just one direction.Ok it doesnt matter?..
It doesnt seem to matter if the surround was generated from a stereo mastereither .So where does this greater depth come from ,Magic? or does that magic only apply to when the rear wall accoustics are mystically piped into the recording.Another laughable hysterical posting.
If you want to observe some interesting facts.Go to the thread where people are discussing whether they can hear the difference between stereo CD and stereo Hirez.Amazingly most of those who could tell much difference are multi channel listeners? No wonder they cannot tell the difference between genuine surround and fake surround.(Just look at the reviews of those majority of faked surround sacd releases) A serious surround listener (Bissie) has already passed some comments on this.
Yes I enjoy the different sonic location that surround gives me ,a bit like listening on cans.
However I recognize that listening to the stereo layer more accurately gives me the same perspective as a real classical concert with the sound reflecting from behind the orchestra in a proper time dimension.Even when it is studio recorded.
Moving closer to the orchestra or even within it DOES NOT and cannot give that same perspective but a different sonic perspective which you may like (I used to) but it is hardly more accurate.
Pop music can be a different kettle of fish.(covers too many areas)
Edwin pointed out in a thread something I find quite common with musicians/when they come around and listen they notice accuracy of tone rhythms etc and very very rarely if ever noticed it was surround.
So for those who think average quality surround is better than stereo with better speakers you are living in your own fantasy world..Please do not present that opinion as fact.
Otherwise I may start a New Thread..Titled Dustbin for surround sound Hype presented as facts.
I am not representing any opinions as facts. As I mentioned above, whether listening to surround or stereo is all about preference and nothing else. No more, no less.
I also respect that many prefer stereo to surround. My only complaint is the lack of high end equipment which provides multichannel playback.
|
|
|
|
|
|
raffells said:
in no way can stereo recreate reflections (or sources in certain music) coming from the side or behind the listener.??????
Oh cant it ? Do the microphones somehow filter out the (Not wanted) side wall and rear wall reflections.No.They have often been the cause of complaint on stereo recordings.
And the reason they are the cause of complaint in stereo recordings is that they interfere with normal listening because they come from in front of the listener, rather than from the side or behind which is what you would experience in the concert hall or from a MCH system.
|
|
|
Post by soundboy October 24, 2008 (273 of 314)
|
|
|
|
|
|
Post by Perigo October 25, 2008 (274 of 314)
|
|
|
|
|
|
Post by nickc October 25, 2008 (275 of 314)
|
|
|
|
|
|
Post by raffells October 25, 2008 (276 of 314)
|
|
Polly Nomial said:
And the reason they are the cause of complaint in stereo recordings is that they interfere with normal listening because they come from in front of the listener, rather than from the side or behind which is what you would experience in the concert hall or from a MCH system.
Ok I give up on this one.
As one of my listeners once said When playing the applause at the end of a piece.
..
..
You are missing the load of clap from the back.?
..
..
I remember an anecdote about rehearsing the Leonora 3 overture.
The offstage trumpeter had just started playing from the rear of upper circle doorway and was suddenly dragged by the back of the neck, out through that read doorway.Still trying to play whilst he was going down the stairs backwards , you could clearly hear the "newly" employed usher saying.Whats wrong with you,? cant you see theres some guy in the big hall down there trying to teach this band how to play properly.Now that would be worth having in surround.
|
|
|
|
|
|
raffells said:
.. You are missing the load of clap from the back.? ..
That reminds me of those multichannel SACD demos where at the end of a performance, people on the front row started clapping because they thought the people behind them were clapping. Demos can't get much more convincing than that :-)
|
|
|
|
|
|
raffells said:
Well I could offer an explanation.(until last week I listed in both)
The clues to this I have already given in an earlier response.
I will not elaborate further.
My whole point as a former surround enthusiast is that far too many people on this site make outrageous opinions out to be facts.I dont think this helps the cause..Ive said this before....Some,(in the trade)seem to make the most ridiculous of remarks.I wont expand further but it seems to me that from comments posted on this site ,the quality and detail of music or equipment doest seems to be important.
eg.In surround the centre channel doesnt seem to matter if its missing.?????
One day they are expanding on sound direction and then talking about a single subwoofer to capture all very low level bass which is then just one direction.Ok it doesnt matter?..
It doesnt seem to matter if the surround was generated from a stereo mastereither .So where does this greater depth come from ,Magic? or does that magic only apply to when the rear wall accoustics are mystically piped into the recording.Another laughable hysterical posting.
If you want to observe some interesting facts.Go to the thread where people are discussing whether they can hear the difference between stereo CD and stereo Hirez.Amazingly most of those who could tell much difference are multi channel listeners? No wonder they cannot tell the difference between genuine surround and fake surround.(Just look at the reviews of those majority of faked surround sacd releases) A serious surround listener (Bissie) has already passed some comments on this.
Yes I enjoy the different sonic location that surround gives me ,a bit like listening on cans.
However I recognize that listening to the stereo layer more accurately gives me the same perspective as a real classical concert with the sound reflecting from behind the orchestra in a proper time dimension.Even when it is studio recorded.
Moving closer to the orchestra or even within it DOES NOT and cannot give that same perspective but a different sonic perspective which you may like (I used to) but it is hardly more accurate.
Pop music can be a different kettle of fish.(covers too many areas)
Edwin pointed out in a thread something I find quite common with musicians/when they come around and listen they notice accuracy of tone rhythms etc and very very rarely if ever noticed it was surround.
So for those who think average quality surround is better than stereo with better speakers you are living in your own fantasy world..Please do not present that opinion as fact.
Otherwise I may start a New Thread..Titled Dustbin for surround sound Hype presented as facts.
Here a lot of statements are (also) presented as facts, that are nothing more than opinions. Raffles obviously prefers stereo listening to surround listening, but I for certainly do not agree with his reasoning behind that. Still he can prefer what he wants, like anybody else.
His point about the musicians is totally contrary to my own experience with musicians; when we started to bring surround monitoring to the recordings (which the majority of recordings still not do even when they do record for surround) the reaction of the musicians showed a sudden interest in the playback we did not have before. Comments like: wow I now hear the right tonal balance, and what I contribute in the total. Even Alfred Brendel who is very particular if anything changes in the recording process, was so positive during the Mozart piano concertos that we stayed listening in surround for the complete sessions and the playbacks. His tuner, the very much in demand, Michel Brandjes who spends hours to perfect the piano to sound best for concerts and recordings for the great pianists, was so enthusiastic by what he heard that to this day he is bringing many of the famous artists he is working with to Polyhymnia to hear a demo. With the Dutch pianist Rian de Waal the demo resulted in a cooperation where Polyhymnia has installed a surround recording set (with surround) monitoring in his studio/concert hall in Valthermond. There are really many musicians and audio/music enthusiasts that can appreciate the major improvement in sound quality surround can offer over stereo.
Coming back from yesterday's 120 anniversary concert of the Royal Concertgebouw Orchestra, with a fantastically played Beethoven pico 3 with Mitsuko Uchida, which sounded so beautiful sitting in row 18, half on the left, that made me aware again that reproduced sound has a very hard time getting close to that, but surround is definitely able to bring out certain characteristics in the sound that make it so beautiful in real life, that stereo cannot do.
For me, dealing with surround and stereo recordings for more than 25 years, there is no issue. Surround gives major sound quality improvements over stereo. For me a fact, for you an opinion.
|
|
|
Post by raffells October 25, 2008 (279 of 314)
|
|
GROOT GELUID said:
Dear Grot,
If you think that playing the same item through two speakers and changing it to play thru 5 speakers suddenly chages the tone well great.Ive said before show everyone the proof.
Its sounds a bit like that magic piping from the rear walls again.
Perhaps I will start that posting about " surround sound fantasies after all"
PS Raffells has spent longer on surround than you.He does like some surround better than stereo but judges each item on its merit.Not sure about raffles, he just owns hotels in Singapore.
Are things really that bad in surround world..
|
|
|
Post by Stanbury October 25, 2008 (280 of 314)
|
|
raffells said:
Dear Grot,
If you think...
Guys: Please move this stereo vs mch debate to another thread and leave this one to new player postings.
|
|
