|
Audio Asylum Thread Printer Get a view of an entire thread on one page |
For Sale Ads |
99.251.236.4
In Reply to: RE: Stereo vs. multichannel: what are your thoughts on this statement (inside). posted by carcass93 on June 24, 2010 at 12:14:29
carcass93
"It's not really important who actually said that - suffice it to say that's somebody who made a career of trying to discredit "audiophile beliefs":"
That is flatly untrue. Sean Olive is a scientist who has devoted his career to studying what characteristics people prefer in speakers. It just happens that the results may overthrow some beliefs about audio, but that is normal with any good research.
Here's is the text quoted without attribution (against the rules but the mods so far show no sign of caring) from a post on Hydrogen Audio by Sean Olive, without providing a link (I have provided the link below) so that one could easily check the context:
"I still listen to 2-channel stereo music, but it's seldom listened to through 2 speakers: it's listened through 5 to 7 channels via an up-mixer like Logic 7. Sorry if I didn't make that clear. The up-mixing gives me a center channel (missing in stereo), a much wider sweet spot (also missing), and a sense of envelopment and spaciousness that is entirely devoid in 2 channel reproduction. I'd rather be in the concert hall listening to Bach that looking through a window into the concert hall."
This is clearly a statement of preference for listening to stereo recordings in multichannel, and the he notes three things he likes about it.
1) He gets a center channel. There's no center channel with only two speakers.
2) He gets a wider sweet spot that way.
3) He gets "a sense of envelopment and spaciousness" which is missing in stereo. On this last, please note there may be many senses of envelopment and spaciousness, different with each system, and in his multichannel system, Sean gets one he prefers to what happens in stereo (taken universally). I have many times on this forum noted that many sometimes confuse universal and particular. Some confuse them in this thread.
Here's some things Sean said in the next post at HA, no. 75:
"I agree that the discussion on 2 channel versus multichannel is off topic and I am happy to abandon it.
"I only brought it up because we seem to have people in this forum willing to sit in a tiny sweet spot while listening to overpriced, directional speakers with terrible off-axis response that we are told are both highly room-dependent and loudspeaker/listener position dependent -- all for the purpose of what? To listen to stereo, which Bell Lab scientists said back in the early 1930s was completely inadequate to convey the realism of a live music performance to an audience.
"For me, that is a terribly misguided use of effort and money because there too many inherent compromises in sound quality, given what is possible today with music recording and reproduction science and technology. We can do so much better, and we should.
"As an industry we have failed to learn and acknowledge the Bell Lab science that is almost 80 years old! And we are now repeating ourselves by ignoring the loudspeaker science that has been known since the mid-1980s from Floyd Tooles' work at the National Research Council."
__
"Always be sincere, whether you mean it or not."---Flanders & Swann
Follow Ups:
... about neither what Olive thinks about audio, nor what you think is appropriate.
I posted it mostly as a curiosity, as a glimpse of never-ending circus that is HA, and clueless "scientists" that heavily infest that place (and this one, only a little bit).
but they didn't believe me. Now you've confirmed it and more.
__
"Always be sincere, whether you mean it or not."---Flanders & Swann
It's that no one cares what carcass' intent was. HA is a very funny place.
If Carcass thinking HA is a joke and that to Carcass Olive has no credibility was all you cared about, why did you stray so far away from that very precise issue??
I'm starting doubt myself, after reading Pat's contributions to this thread.
Because dammit you succeeded! With Pat's help, of course.
given that he said this earlier (following the first twenty contributions):
The information is irrelevant to me and to any discussion in this thread.
The lady doth protest too much, methinks.
rw
... to be even more disoriented than he really is.
hearing the synthesized tricks employed by the Logic 7 car stereo decoder over listening to the original recording. Watch the cool Logic 7 video here .
rw
The Logic 7 system does not seem to be limited to use in car stereos. You seem to be showing some prejudice. What does it have to do with his qualifications as an audio researcher?
__
"Always be sincere, whether you mean it or not."---Flanders & Swann
Nothing more nothing less. Clearly many of us have heard stereo through multichannel with processors like the one Sean uses. Sean has problems with conventional stereo and many of us have problems with stereo synthesized into multichannel. I think the point is the divide calls into question any relationship between Sean's opinions and our likely opinions. IOW if that is what he likes I probably won't like his products.
ironically I have heard the Revel Ultima Salons and thought they were pretty good. Just not as good as what I have.
That would be a logical conclusion if HK International's products, or their research studies, were built to suit Sean Olive's opinions. Or if he were testing speakers with stereo synthesized into multi channel. But it's pretty obvious that neither of those are the case. The Revels are excellent. What do you have?
P
Soundlab A3s and a Vandersteen sub
Very nice.
P
and read the list of licensees. All I find are car companies.
rw
You have a relevant point? Or are you just showing your prejudices?
__
"Always be sincere, whether you mean it or not."---Flanders & Swann
what did you find in Lexicon's link for the product other than the four car companies? Something? Anything? Did you follow the link? Did you find mention of anything else?
rw
I didn't look. The information is irrelevant to me and to any discussion in this thread.
__
"Always be sincere, whether you mean it or not."---Flanders & Swann
The information is irrelevant to me and to any discussion in this thread.
I guess that explains your twenty posts. :)
rw
.
__
"Always be sincere, whether you mean it or not."---Flanders & Swann
rw
Logic 7 is good for more than auto sound and your own link said so, if you bothered to read it.
There is a white paper you must have neglected to read, too.
__
"Always be sincere, whether you mean it or not."---Flanders & Swann
to become relevant? Sure, the whitepaper talks about the 1989 design. It does not, however, make any mention of where it is used today. Except of course for the four car licensees.
rw
Come on, out with it.
Oh, and Lexicon makes its own products with Logic 7.
__
"Always be sincere, whether you mean it or not."---Flanders & Swann
You do read, don't you? This is from the link you provided.
"It plays normal stereo recordings in full and satisfying surround, with a wide sound stage and increased envelopment, while standing ready to play encoded material in full surround. Multi-channel recordings encoded with LOGIC 7 technology, play in every system capable of handling two-channel material, and can be broadcast with standard equipment. LOGIC 7 encoders and decoders are available now from Lexicon, and integrated receivers that include LOGIC 7 technology are on the market today. An integrated decoder chip is also available."
http://www.lexicon.com/logic7/index.asp
What point are you trying to make? What is the relevance of your meanderings?
As for the facts, see link below--there is the logo on the front panel, or you could download the user guide . . .
__
"Always be sincere, whether you mean it or not."---Flanders & Swann
What point are you trying to make?
I'll be happy to repeat for your benefit: "Clearly he prefers hearing the synthesized tricks employed by the Logic 7 car stereo decoder over listening to the original recording"
As for the facts, see link below--there is the logo on the front panel...
Ok, it is also found on their cinema processor. A home theatre application is where my matrix decoders are found as well. I agree with Kal Rubinson's assessment:
"Sometimes it works well and, more often, it is simply phase-y, diffuse and annoying. "
To each his own.
rw
You forgot a couple of things. You should hone up your research skills.
I expect Sean Olive knows how to use Logic 7 and other upmixers better than most. His text also indicates he uses other umpmixers.
__
"Always be sincere, whether you mean it or not."---Flanders & Swann
He prefers using matrixed upmixers.
rw
You originally said he prefers car stereo upmixers! Now you've chagned it to preferring to listen to stereo recordings using upmixers, which is a different thing.
__
"Always be sincere, whether you mean it or not."---Flanders & Swann
is different from other Logic 7 decoders?
rw
Certainly the hardware products are different.
Is Windows 7 always the same for every computer?
__
"Always be sincere, whether you mean it or not."---Flanders & Swann
Is Windows 7 always the same for every computer?
is always the same for a given flavor (32 bit vs 64 bit). Only the drivers differ. That's why you don't have to buy a computer, motherboard, or processor-specific flavor.
Did I make a pronouncement either way on that?
I'll disregard these comments of yours since nothing at all changed:
"Now you're changing your story to be more correct! You originally said he prefers car stereo upmixers!"
rw
*
Music making the painting, recording it the photograph
from an application software's standpoint regardless of which brand of computer, chipset or processor you choose to run it.
rw
works identically from an application software's standpoint and even that is still not strictly correct. It's the user interface rather than the kernel that works identically regardless of which brand of computer, chipset or processor you choose to run it.
Music making the painting, recording it the photograph
Edits: 07/06/10
You put the same software on any Win7 machine and it works exactly the same.
rw
"You put the same software on any Win7 machine and it works exactly the same."
This is not true. The processor must support the instructions that are used in the software. The software must not call on drivers that are missing on a particular machine, etc. Even if all the operating system calls work as intended then with different hardware the actual execution of instructions will vary, including the speed of operation (which will affect the sequence of computation and I/O) and the pattern of memory references (a function of page faults and cache misses, etc.).
Not to mention the myriad (hyper-astronomical) ways a system can be configured, many of which will affect the performance and ability of a computer system in real-time applications, such as audio. At least in the past, some computer vendors bundled their own extensions to Windows with their products. These have had deleterious affect on system performance on occasion.
Tony Lauck
"Diversity is the law of nature; no two entities in this universe are uniform." - P.R. Sarkar
Do you think or have evidence that the car stereo version of Logic 7 works inherently different from that of other Logic 7 decoders? I'm speaking from the user's perspective, not in minutiae about their power supplies, mounting brackets or connectors.
rw
The system seems to have evolved over the years, at least to a certain extent. It also comes in different configurations. I would assume that the installations in the various luxury cars are all customized. From all that I've read the various techniques of "steering", etc. were developed to address the problem of movie sound. Its applicability to two channel unencoded music is dubious, no matter how many PhD degrees an employee touting the product might happen to have. (Sean Olive is an employee of Harmon and they own Lexicon.)
When I am listening to music seriously I sit on the midline between my two speakers and may roll my chair forward and back a bit according to the recording. I am definitely unconcerned with the size of any "sweet spot", but then I'm not peddling any gadget, either.
When I am in my car I sit off to the left side and watch the road. It is not possible to listen to classical music in my car properly due to the noise level. I could play loud rock music if I wanted to destroy my hearing. The last thing in the world I am concerned about is whether the imagining in my car is good, so I am not about to trade in my old BMW 5 series for a new model with these gimmicks.
Tony Lauck
"Diversity is the law of nature; no two entities in this universe are uniform." - P.R. Sarkar
The last thing in the world I am concerned about is whether the imagining in my car is good, so I am not about to trade in my old BMW 5 series for a new model with these gimmicks.
My TL came with a six channel Panasonic ELS surround system capable of playing multi-channel DVD-A discs. A demo disk came with the unit, but honestly in the seven years I've had the car, I never listened to it. The only steering I do with the car controls the front wheels. :)
rw
I observed that the Logic 7 page and the *white paper* found there make ZERO mention of where it is used other than in cars. That is an observation of fact. As for the DC-2 you referenced, do you understand the term "legacy product"? Does that ring any bells? Yet another observation of fact is that unit is no longer sold. That implies to me the current availability of true multi-channel music content has rendered the twenty year old technology obsolete. I have a similar matrix capability on my HT receiver and never use it.
rw
Post a Followup:
FAQ |
Post a Message! |
Forgot Password? |
|
||||||||||||||
|
This post is made possible by the generous support of people like you and our sponsors: