• The move to the new server is done. There are some software and database maintenance updates in process. This has us passing the hat around to help out. We appreciate any donations. Seriously, even a dollar helps. The payment page may be found here - https://www.audiokarma.org/support.html

Why did HT (multichannel audio) never click with me?

Apreggiator

Apreggiator

Trapped in the Bassment
Subscriber
Why did HT (multichannel audio) never click with me?

It's an honest question.
I've tried 5.1 at home several times and listened to 7.1/Atmos in demo setups.
But I've always been preferential to stereo + subwoofer(s) for music as well as film.

And I cannot explain it.
Why could this be?

P.s. I can ask AI myself. I'd like your thoughts about- and experiences with this matter.
 
Last edited:
Register to hide this ad
I was super excited to have my first surround receiver (3 channel IIRC, left, right and two rear on the same channel).
I even carefully chose the first presentation- "Firebirds" a combat helicopter feature, and it ROCKER hearing all that sound whirring and zipping all around.

...and then basically never used the rear speakers again.
The were a pain to set up, and required space behind where typical living room furniture sets.

Even in my current home, with an 18x22 living area, connected dining area and two hallways, there's just barely places to put rear speakers (one in the entry hall, and one in the short hall to the guest room/bathroom) that would be acceptable to get sound "behind the main seating" on the couch and 90 degree opposed loveseat.
Then there's running the wires.
 
I have a 9 channel Atmos set up, with my 3-way horns as mains. to be fair, it sounds pretty good, even though I regard my surround speakers as an afterthought. It's just that 2 channels sound much better than 9. is it poor integration or just that after 56 years, I'm more accustomed to 2-channels and naturally gravitate that way? I do prefer movies with the surround engaged, but music, even music optimized for atmos, just doesn't sound as good. perhps it's too much uncanny valley?
 
Could be HOW your listening to it. I preface to say that mostly I like two channel listening. However, there are times I prefer 5.1 Center channel is tuned to just below front left and rights to fill in a seamless transitions from left to center or right to center which often it helps to center a left or right older recordings where voices may be on the left or right side and that helps move the voice closer to the middle. I hope that make sense, I'm really tired tonight, been a very long day. Now, back speakers are also tuned down until I just start to hear it blend with corresponding left and right front speakers. Essentially it expands the sound stage, if imaging is difficult to achieve in your listening space.

It takes some trial and error, but it can work wonders when implemented correctly to expand the sound stage without being distracting. There are times I insist on listening in 5.1 like when I'm listening to classical music. It makes me feel as if I'm in the venue rather then in a room.

Garry~
 
2 channel is hard to get right. But through iteration and reiteration we land on a set of gear and gear placements that work in our rooms.

Multichannel is much harder. You need surround speakers that have very wide dispersion, horizontally and vertically. This knocks out 80% of popular brands and almost everything vintage. You need speaker placement that is exacting and symmetrical. You need a very good surround processor. You need to be competent with REW or MLSSA to make the power response of all your speakers match. Four subwoofers are needed for smooth in room response.

Then you have an amazing multichannel system capable of truly immersive listening. Very few installations check all the boxes.

Then there’s the multichannel software. Some of it is really well done. A lot of it is bombastic bum fodder with instruments whizzing around you, etc.

But when it’s good, it’s sublime.

Full disclosure- I just finished a dedicated 9.4.6 multichannel theater system and with the right source material it’s amazing. But rheb2 chalked system that shares the space and main speakers sounds better with a lot of source material I own.
 
I DO still use stereo for movies and I also use the TV speakers to simulate a center channel which helps bring the dialog out.
That works well, as described above, by having the TV volume slightly below that of the 2 channel stereo.
I rarely miss the rear channel.
 
A lot of my tv viewing is watching programs originally produced in stereo, sometimes mono. If your speakers are positioned just right, dialog might be perceived as coming from the center of the tv screen, which is what the center channel speaker is for. My Energy Reference Connoisseur 6.0 speaker system with RC30 towers for stereo place video dialog and music vocals so perfectly everybody who hears it swears the center speaker is operating. And for programs recorded in stereo, it might be best.

Some of the programs recorded in stereo have been re-mastered to send much of the dialog to the center channel speaker. Even without the
re-mastering, Dolby surround sound will still extract dialog and send it to the center channel speaker. This can be a big advantage for movie scenes where the dialog is very hard to hear, Especially for us older folks. Add to that the 3 step Dialog control and center channel level controls my Yamaha AVR has (like many other AVR's) and it makes movies much less frustrating to watch when you can't make out the dialog. The other surround sound effects are an added bonus.

Music video's properly recorded in DD 5.1 or better are really quite a treat. Those converted to 5.1 from stereo however, not so much. Sometimes one of the matrix surround sound modes is a nice diversion for stereo music, But I always revert back to stereo. It seams the best way to listen to either music or video is to play it back in its original format.
 
Last edited:
Definitely true. Setup is everything!

When I first got my Pioneer Elite SC-09TX AVR it took me several months before I finally figured out how to get the most out of it as far as multi-channel home theater. It's a very complicated and sophisticated piece of equipment. But once I got it set up right, there was no turning back. I still listen to music in stereo (with 4 speakers up front), but when watching TV and movies I am in full 10.2 surround and it raises the viewing experience to an entire new level. Movies are equal to professional theater environments with audio intricacies you can only achieve through modern multi-channel Dolby audio. Like being at the theater in my living room.

Pop in a modern war flick with the Polk SRTs and you'll be ready to jump into the closest foxhole you can find. It's that realistic.

TV is awesome too. Even watching sports is an experience.
 
Last edited:
W9TR said:
2 channel is hard to get right. But through iteration and reiteration we land on a set of gear and gear placements that work in our rooms.

Multichannel is much harder. You need surround speakers that have very wide dispersion, horizontally and vertically. This knocks out 80% of popular brands and almost everything vintage. You need speaker placement that is exacting and symmetrical. You need a very good surround processor. You need to be competent with REW or MLSSA to make the power response of all your speakers match. Four subwoofers are needed for smooth in room response.

Then you have an amazing multichannel system capable of truly immersive listening. Very few installations check all the boxes.

Then there’s the multichannel software. Some of it is really well done. A lot of it is bombastic bum fodder with instruments whizzing around you, etc.

But when it’s good, it’s sublime.

Full disclosure- I just finished a dedicated 9.4.6 multichannel theater system and with the right source material it’s amazing. But rheb2 chalked system that shares the space and main speakers sounds better with a lot of source material I own.
Click to expand...

Thanks for responding all, and keep 'em coming.
What's been said by most resonates well with me, but probably the key is in what W9TR says here, my stereo system is pretty well set up or perhaps I'm used to its strengths (and flaws!) and my multichannel definitely did not meet the dispersion characteristics and proper processing as described.

I'm curious if we can dig a bit deeper into the perceived effect of stereo versus surround. Does either approach 'feel' more or less natural (when set up equally well)?
 
Source material availability seemed to be the limiting factor for a long time when it came to music. I wasn't into it at the time it came out, but I think you were basically limited to dvd audio for 5.1. Once Dolby Atmos took off, it seems that there has been a lot of effort put into remastering old albums into the format as well as many new releases coming out mastered in Atmos. As long as you have the right streaming service and hardware for it. I use Apple Music on Apple TV boxes. I have a 7.1.4 system in the living room. It's really cool. Some of the songs are duds but others are great. I do think its difficult to tune the overall system/room though, and I'm still not totally happy with my setup. Room setup being a big one. I live alone so I put two movie theater chairs in the middle of my living room. Well, that's getting old and I want to move back to regular couches/chairs along the walls which is going to kill the whole setup.

When it comes to movies - which I don't really have the attention span to sit through these days, it was a must.
 
Apreggiator said:
I'm curious if we can dig a bit deeper into the perceived effect of stereo versus surround. Does either approach 'feel' more or less natural (when set up equally well)?
Click to expand...
When set up equally well, stereo doesn't hold a candle to surround when watching a modern movie. Night and day difference.

A good analogy would be mono vs stereo for listening to music. Some die hards may prefer mono but most would choose stereo.
 
pac1085 said:
When it comes to movies - which I don't really have the attention span to sit through these days, it was a must.
Click to expand...
It's funny, first I have always appreciated Surround, so I built my system for that purpose, but in addition I'm 72 years old now, I'm still very active. I also work nights last 22 years by choice. So It was my thought to build a nice system hoping it would help me slow down a bit and spend more time to enjoy it. Pfft .... that just didn't happen. It's not hard for me to plug in a movie and fall completely asleep before the movie finishes the credits. I'll close and rest my eyes for just a few seconds, and I'm out like a light. Shaking my head.

Garry~
 
Multi-channel never really clicked for me either. I enjoy a good 5.1 HT experience now and then.

However, most of my system use is focused on 2-channel music and most of my time is spent listening as such.

I guess for some, including me, we have our favorite use and we stick with 'em because we enjoy 'em.
 
Apreggiator said:
Thanks for responding all, and keep 'em coming.
What's been said by most resonates well with me, but probably the key is in what W9TR says here, my stereo system is pretty well set up or perhaps I'm used to its strengths (and flaws!) and my multichannel definitely did not meet the dispersion characteristics and proper processing as described.

I'm curious if we can dig a bit deeper into the perceived effect of stereo versus surround. Does either approach 'feel' more or less natural (when set up equally well)?
Click to expand...
Some 5.1 surround audio is spectacular and immersive. Super wide soundstage and pinpoint imaging, wonderful hall sound. Mostly classical stuff.
Some of the rock stuff is also incredible, like DSOTM in 5.1 SACD. A lot of multichannel stuff is bombastic and over-the-top, and the 2 ch versions are better.

If you are interested in what it takes to do multichannel audio here is the guideline I used to design my system. CEDIA/CTA RP-22 is the gold standard for immersive audio system design. It’s HT focused but applies to music only systems.

 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom