Re: Comcast HD service

"Glenn Greenstein" <glen.jackson@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote in message
news:jPbEi.74423$ax1.61858@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx

"MZ" <mark@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote in message
news:26qdnWxscKcEMX3bnZ2dnUVZ_uygnZ2d@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
"Sri Krsna" <vze3drf7@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote in message
news:46E09378.90407@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
MZ wrote:

Eh, I prefer a stereo setup over surround. I've owned, used, and set up
both dozens of times, but the artificial subwoofer + satellite combo
leaves a lot to be desired, IMO. It's typically lacking significantly
in the 200-400Hz range (lower midrange), and they're almost always
ported wrong (and too small), so you get a wild frequency response below
that. A good stereo pair will give you a far better sound, even if it
lacks the movie theater boom and sizzle (something which I find
annoying, by the way).

Having said that, a good center channel design with good processing can
add a fair amount of depth. And by processing, I don't mean the crap
that comes with most 5.1 receivers. But its benefits are very much
room-dependent.
Yeah, but Glenn doesn't exactly strike me as being a die-hard music fan
or music DVD fan so for what he wants, it's probably in his best
interest to be dazzled at the local Best Buy or Crazy Eddy's. I like you
run a stereo gig in my living room with a McIntosh set-up that's about a
decade old and I really can't complain about the sound. The only
weakness with this set-up is that when out of the sweet spot, the
dialogue when watching movies is a bit muddled, but there's an elegance
and musical truth to the stereo set-up even when spinning SACDs or DVD-A
that I don't want to sacrifice. The rig in my study is a bit more
serious though so I tend to do most of my music listening there.

I wasn't only referring to music listening either, where two channel
tends to reign supreme. And, granted, many of the movies I tend to watch
either pre-existed surround sound or just don't benefit much by it. But
even for the other types of movies, I'm just not overwhelmed by the audio
and see more problems with it than benefits. Especially with your
typical home theater setups, which belong over in the Bose section of
"innovative and neat looking, but lacking in functionality and quality."
I went to the Transformers movie recently with some friends (yeah, I
know...), and was annoyed to no end at the shrill highs and overpowering
boomy sub bass (bass isn't supposed to be boomy, folks, even down to
20Hz). And to think, people actually try to replicate that sound!

Mark, most movie theaters have crappy sounding subs. They never
recalibrate them once they are set up. So often I just hear these massive
subsd bottoming out durring heavy bass scenes. My HT is calibrated using a
sound pressure metter so I have pretty even sounding bass, but I will
admit, I do crank the sub up a bit higher than the speakers.
As far as movies with surround that really take great advantage of it,
"House of Flying Daggers" is one of my favorites. Great surround effect
and a really good movie. Another great surround movie is "Pearl Harbor".
Yeah, the movie itself is not much, but the sound track is amazing. You
hear the planes flying right by you.

Glenn, I think you might be so far removed from 2 channel audio that you may
not realize how you can hear the planes fly right by you with only 2
speakers. :) And yes, I agree with you about movie theaters and the people
who try to replicate that sound with out-of-the-box surround systems that
they tack up on the wall. Again, I'm not necessarily knocking a properly
implemented surround setup, although like I said, its usefulness is limited
for a lot of movies. Some movies or shows would be better served by
actually turning off the surround speakers and hoping your center channel
and sub are tuned properly.


Not only that, but the "sweet spot" issues you bring up are only
exaggerated as you add more channels of audio. It's hardly a trivial
matter to get two channel
s to play nicely, let alone 5 or 6 or more. Technically, additional
channels can help the image, especially when they're encoded specifically
to do so like 5.1 (hell, I installed a "dumb" center channel in my car
for that very purpose), but it's not easy to implement correctly.
Certainly not by opening a box and screwing the stuff to the wall. Yes,
multichannel audio can have its benefits (surprisingly, even for music),
but only when done correctly.

Well, that's is why you need a good home theater receiver. I think Yamaha
does an excellent job with what you just spoke about and gives you a lot
of flexibility to do fine tuning. You can change output and crossover
points on all 5 spearkers.

There's more to just changing crossover points and adding delay though.
Rooms often require some degree of EQing, especially if you're changing the
baffle step because of a wallmount (on or in) installation, or if the
speakers are off-axis and have mediocre dispersion qualities. Room +
installation location are absolutely key, and some speakers fare better than
others.

And yeah, I know that many so-called audiophiles look down on EQing, but
don't get me started on audiophiles. :)


That's not to say that people won't like what they hear when they make
the "upgrade" to a home theater setup. After all, to each his own. But
I wouldn't suggest it to someone without knowing their tastes, the movies
they watch, and most importantly, the room it'll be in.

Most people I would not classify as audiophiles. Bose set ups are normally
sufficient for about 80% of the population. I don't think Bose is
particularly bad, I just think it limits you and does not have good low
bass.

I actually think the main problem with their bass tends to be integration
with midbass and the lack of lower midrange. Let alone the output
capabilities. People want big sound out of little speakers, but there are
certain physical constraints that make that difficult.


.

Relevant Pages

  • Re: audio connections -- optical vs. composite
    ... There is a surround encoding technique called Dolby Surround. ... This is realy 4 channel multichannel sound transferred on 2 channels ...
    (alt.tv.tech.hdtv)
  • Re: Comcast HD service
    ... about a decade old and I really can't complain about the sound. ... I went to the Transformers movie recently with some friends ... I do crank the sub up a bit higher than the speakers. ... As far as movies with surround that really take great advantage of it, ...
    (alt.sports.football.pro.ne-patriots)
  • Re: Comparing SD pictures: HBO & others
    ... picture quality varies widely on the analog channels. ... >> only center channel sound so I ... >> TNT...Nascar just isn't the same without surround sound, ...
    (alt.tv.tech.hdtv)
  • Re: audio connections -- optical vs. composite
    ... the satellite receiver not in 5.1 still produce Dolby Pro-Logic from my ... There is a surround encoding technique called Dolby Surround. ... This is realy 4 channel multichannel sound transferred on 2 channels ...
    (alt.tv.tech.hdtv)
  • Re: Comcast HD service
    ... A good stereo pair will give you a far better sound, ... I wasn't only referring to music listening either, where two channel tends ... Transformers movie recently with some friends, and was ... (bass isn't supposed to be boomy, folks, even down to 20Hz). ...
    (alt.sports.football.pro.ne-patriots)