|
Propeller Head Plaza Technical and scientific discussion of amps, cables and other topics. |
|
|
|
Propeller Head Plaza Technical and scientific discussion of amps, cables and other topics. |
|
In Reply to: Rethinking Quad posted by lipmanl@hotmail.com on February 12, 2007 at 11:16:37:
...personally I prefer 2 channel sound with its holographic image which, although an artificial construct of stereo which is just in front of you, takes the place of the visual images at a live concert.My experience with quadraphonic sound in the 1970s would lead me to believe the recordings and effects were not a very good approximation of the live event.
People whose ears I trust have told me that 3 channel stereo (with a center channel) is superior to 2 channel stereo, filling in information that is missing with just 2 (the equivalent of the 3rd microphone used in the early Mercury recordings).
They also say the most realistic at recreating the live musical event is a good 5.1 channel system in a good room playing a good recording.
This post is made possible by the generous support of people like you and our sponsors:
Follow Ups
- Quadraphonic sound... - mkuller 20:27:48 02/12/07 (6)
- Where to get really good 5.1 classical recordings?? - cheap-Jack 09:06:32 02/14/07 (5)
- Have you checked SACDs? - Ted Smith 11:56:20 02/14/07 (4)
- No, I go for DVD-audio. - cheap-Jack 07:38:22 02/15/07 (3)
- Re: No, I go for DVD-audio. - Ted Smith 09:08:52 02/15/07 (2)
- So yu find digital multi-channels sound better than analog stereo? - cheap-Jack 08:08:01 02/16/07 (1)
- Yup - Ted Smith 08:59:47 02/16/07 (0)
Top of Page ]
[ Contact Us ]
[ Support/Wish List ]
[ Copyright © 2024, Audio Asylum, all rights reserved ]
