U.S. CitiesCity-Data Forum Index
Go Back   City-Data Forum > General Forums > Science and Technology > Consumer Electronics
 [Register]
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
View detailed profile (Advanced) or search
site with Google Custom Search

Search Forums  (Advanced)
Reply Start New Thread
 
Old 05-04-2019, 12:29 AM
 
1,284 posts, read 449,798 times
Reputation: 2522

Advertisements

I'm still using quad and a crossover subwoofer!
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message

 
Old 05-04-2019, 05:33 AM
 
7,121 posts, read 3,891,444 times
Reputation: 6660
Quote:
Originally Posted by Peregrine View Post
The opening sequence of Lethal Weapon II on a decent home surround system blew my mind the first time I heard it. And the 2nd time, too. No one can tell me home surround sucks.
Gladiator

Any of the current generation of James Bond films

The Avengers series

A few movies that I’ve seen on my system recently that benefit immensely from surround during action scenes.

I’m still fairly old school in that I have a 5.2 system, and my Infinity RS5 fronts and RS3 rears are nearly 20 years old now. Nice big center channel Infinity C360 and 2 powered Infinity PS-10 subs. My 80” TV is 4 years old now and still rocking it too.

Last edited by markjames68; 05-04-2019 at 05:42 AM..
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 05-04-2019, 12:45 PM
 
Location: Maryland
2,159 posts, read 728,232 times
Reputation: 4812
My 2 cents, if you already have most of the speakers you need, then why not? A good subwoofer and a very good center channel speaker (don’t skimp there) would complete whatever configuration for home theater use you choose.

I have an older model 7 channel HD receiver driving a 7.1 set up. Like you, I assembled it from 5 speakers I already had by adding two more and upgrading my center channel. Even though my receiver is an older model, it came with a microphone for balancing the speakers. You just sit the mic in your favorite listening position and tell it to do its thing. It takes several minutes playing test sounds through each speaker in turn, adjusting volumes, frequency response, even time delay based on the speaker distance.

I love our system, sometimes I listen in stereo, other times in 5.1 other times in 7.1. The receiver itself has many listening configurations depending on source material and your preferences.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 05-04-2019, 09:13 PM
 
Location: Not far from Fairbanks, AK
16,723 posts, read 29,305,311 times
Reputation: 12539
For listening to music I prefer stereo sound. For TV or movies, surround sound is what you want (better explained below). However most decent receivers have settings for listening to music usually coming out the front speakers, for a non-directional sound, and surround for when watching movies on directional sound. For music alone a stereo receiver is the best if you are picky about your music.

The 2 channel stereo receivers are still being sold at numerous stores around the US. I have al old Sony receiver that I use to listen to music through two very large front speakers, and the sound reproductions is outstanding. This old receiver has settings for surround sound though 5 speakers, so I could very well buy satellite speakers as used it for surround sound too. But nowadays I use a Visio surround sound system only when watching movies.

Differences between surround and stereo sound:
https://www.differencebetween.com/di...urround-sound/

Now, if you look at the webpage (Crutchfield), you will notice that there are surround or theatre receivers, and stereo receivers:
https://www.crutchfield.com/m_10400/...mplifiers.html

One of the best 2-channel receivers is the McIntosh MAC7200, but it costs around $7,000 for listening to music at 200-Watt x 2 channels.

Last edited by RayinAK; 05-04-2019 at 09:35 PM..
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 05-05-2019, 02:42 AM
 
1,284 posts, read 449,798 times
Reputation: 2522
Quote:
For music alone a stereo receiver is the best if you are picky about your music.
...Unless of course you're wanting to listen to discrete surround mixes (cough cough DVD-A cough cough) then you'll want at least a 6-track (well, "5-pip-1") system.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 05-13-2019, 08:32 PM
 
Location: Toronto, ON
2,167 posts, read 1,520,043 times
Reputation: 1474
Plug your tv's audio channels into your stereo (tv audio out to stereo aux in), take your speakers and add a sub for a 2.1 system . That'll sound great for movies and listening to music.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 07-19-2019, 09:42 AM
 
Location: Removing a snake out of the neighbor's washing machine
2,364 posts, read 957,197 times
Reputation: 1757
Quote:
Originally Posted by harry chickpea View Post
"Wh-at? Harry harry harry... tsk tsk.

You have obviously not heard even a semi decent one."


Could be. Then again, I have biases. Surround sound was almost always a "gimmick" in movie theatres, starting around the time of "Earthquake." The channels were dead most of the time, until an off-screen elephant had to enter stage left, go through rampaging across left, derived center, right, and finally exit stage right. It stuck around because it was cheaper than 3D and then THX sound (which included it for Lucas's tie fighters) became a marketing draw for audiences tired of cheap theatres with a single speaker.

Surround sound has no real place outside of the full immersion systems like Omnimax and the 360 cameras. To bring it home, I experienced a production recently that had wild sound that included the sound of one of those ubiquitous beeping noises emitted by half the appliances in the U.S. It sounded at times as though it was coming off screen, and I found it super-annoying that I couldn't track it just using my ears, to locate where it was or if it was something of mine that was beeping. Our ears are amazing natural technology, capable of discerning the location of sounds within a couple of degrees.

On screen action is generally covering less than 40 degrees in our visual field and even fewer degrees in the 360 of reality. It gets three sound emitting sources and is relatively accurate. In a 5.1 system, about 160 degrees has to make do with a single audio source. Theatres would hang about four speakers along each side wall to spread that out and avoid a lot of the obvious misalignment. Home systems use a single speaker pr channel, so the elephant jumps from behind the wife's easy chair to the screen and then hides behind the floor lamp. Yep, realistic. NOT.

Further, some of the sound mixers for movies do strange drugs and are influenced by clueless studio execs who determine if they get to work on the next big project. I can't count the number of movies where I've walked in an auditorium in a properly calibrated theatre and experienced surround sound mix that was cartoonish and unprofessional because some jerk at a studio wanted to toss his weight around "to enhance the audience experience." I have 5.1 at home, but have balanced the surrounds to be barely audible. Makes me happy. Audiophiles can do what makes them happy, which sometimes seems more like jerking off to the technology specs and money spent than understanding total experience.

This is a common symptom of the movie-going public and of home-theater consumers: They expect something to be coming from the rear/surround speakers all the time.

The truth: Surround elements should be periodic, embracing the element of surprise.

They also don't need to be loud all the time. The surrounds can spread out the sound of traffic ambience in a city scene, or the sound of crickets or a running brook in a rural or nature scene.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 07-19-2019, 10:17 AM
 
Location: McAllen, TX
3,957 posts, read 2,608,667 times
Reputation: 4727
Quote:
Originally Posted by TheGrandK-Man View Post
This is a common symptom of the movie-going public and of home-theater consumers: They expect something to be coming from the rear/surround speakers all the time.

The truth: Surround elements should be periodic, embracing the element of surprise.

They also don't need to be loud all the time. The surrounds can spread out the sound of traffic ambience in a city scene, or the sound of crickets or a running brook in a rural or nature scene.
Depending on your system you could also use what they call 5-channel or 7-channel stereo where all of the speakers are running at the same time mirroring what would only be on the two front speakers. This many times is the way I prefer to do it.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 07-19-2019, 10:21 AM
 
Location: Removing a snake out of the neighbor's washing machine
2,364 posts, read 957,197 times
Reputation: 1757
Quote:
Originally Posted by gguerra View Post
Depending on your system you could also use what they call 5-channel or 7-channel stereo where all of the speakers are running at the same time mirroring what would only be on the two front speakers. This many times is the way I prefer to do it.
I've heard such setting before, and it sounded to me like a hot mess!

Certainly, there's no rule limiting 'stereo' to two channels/speakers, but it just sounds cleaner and clearer to me via two speakers.

But if you want something coming out of the surrounds at all time, yeah, I guess that's one way to do it!
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 07-19-2019, 10:48 AM
 
Location: McAllen, TX
3,957 posts, read 2,608,667 times
Reputation: 4727
Quote:
Originally Posted by TheGrandK-Man View Post
I've heard such setting before, and it sounded to me like a hot mess!

Certainly, there's no rule limiting 'stereo' to two channels/speakers, but it just sounds cleaner and clearer to me via two speakers.

But if you want something coming out of the surrounds at all time, yeah, I guess that's one way to do it!
Maybe to you, I have no idea what you heard. I do have a pretty high-quality system and it does not sound like a mess, on the contrary, it sounds great. It fills the room entirely when I use it like this. This is especially true for music. My $3K system sounds better than a $200 system. My front speakers alone cost around $1500. I think it goes without saying that YMMV.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.

Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.


Reply
Please update this thread with any new information or opinions. This open thread is still read by thousands of people, so we encourage all additional points of view.

Quick Reply
Message:

Over $104,000 in prizes was already given out to active posters on our forum and additional giveaways are planned!

Go Back   City-Data Forum > General Forums > Science and Technology > Consumer Electronics
Follow City-Data.com founder on our Forum or

All times are GMT -6. The time now is 04:15 PM.

© 2005-2019, Advameg, Inc. · Please obey Forum Rules · Terms of Use and Privacy Policy · Bug Bounty

City-Data.com - Archive 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21, 22, 23, 24, 25, 26, 27, 28, 29, 30, 31, 32, 33, 34, 35 - Top