Axiom Home Page Forums General Discussion Stereo Stereo or Surround for Music Only Room

All,

Any comments on using matched speakers for 5.1 channel music vs. a typical HT setup (e.g. M60s/VP150/QS8s)? I have been underwhelmed listening to 2-channel music through my HT. Admittedly, my receiver doesn't have PLII and I haven't tried any DVD-A's (even in bitstream mode). My experimentation is purely 2-channel music in "normal surround" mode on my receiver.

I just haven't found the front soundstage produced by the VP150 and M60s to be as convincing as the 2-channel. Thoughts?

Whenever I am listening to a CD and switch from stereo to surround, I find that the surround modes wash the sound out and it doesn't sound as full as when in stereo. This is a function of the sound processing as a opposed to the speaker combo.

Using matched speakers is the easiest way to get a good sound from your HT system but using a combination of different brands will work as long as they are matched in sound level, power and frequency response. Personally I like the matched set.

Choosing a Subs would be the exception to this since their frequency range is outside of the rest of the system.

If you truly listen primarily to 5.1 channel music (not HT), and can afford the space and cost, in theory identical speakers are better. BTW that means your material would mainly be multichannel SACD, DVD-A, Digital Dolby & DTS 5.1 music.

However most people want a mix of HT and music, plus don't have a huge collection of discrete multichannel material. Also space, aesthetics and cost make QS8s better than matched M60s for surrounds.

Re soundstage of M60s/VP150 to be less convincing than 2-channel (I assume you also have QS8s in a 5.1 config), if you don't have discrete multichannel material or Dolby PLII or HK Logic 7 to reconstruct surround, you haven't yet had a valid stereo vs surround comparison.

The "surround" modes (not PLII or L7) of many receivers can sound fake and strange, and I see how stereo would sound better. In my experience using PLII to reconstruct surround from stereo is usually natural sounding and generally (but not always) contributes to the experience.

If you have a regular DVD player the best way to evaluate surround vs stereo is get a quality DVD-A music disc with a Digital Dolby 5.1 soundtrack (assuming your receiver does Digital Dolby 5.1 decoding). That way you don't have to buy a special player.

Note there are lots of poorly-mixed surround releases. There are also quality surround relases that just don't use much surround -- that's the decision of the recording engineer and artist. Popular DVD-A albums that makes good use of surround are The Eagles Hotel California, and Fleetwood Mac Rumours.

joema,

Thanks for the suggestion. I don't have PLII or Logic 7, so I have no doubt you're right that I haven't given 5.1 channel music a fair shake on my system. I think I will give a couple DVD-A's a try using the 5.1 soundtrack. I've heard that the pcm 5.1 soundtracks are often almost indistinguishable from the "real" DVD-A soundtracks. Have you found this to be the case? I don't think I'll be jumping on the SACD/DVD-A bandwagon until discrete digital connections are the norm.

Hotel California and Rumours are two of my all-time favorite albums, so I think I'll start there. Thanks!

I don't have a true DVD-A player, so haven't compared DVD-A vs the DD 5.1 compatibility track included on DVD-As.

However I do have SACD, and in general the DD 5.1 track on quality re-mixed DVD-As sound just as good (to my ears) as a true multichannel SACD. I'd assume it'd be similar with a DVD-A.

With a quality Axiom surround system, the difference in engineering and mixing quality between various albums becomes huge.

The Rumours and Hotel California DVD-As are two of the best, in terms of engineering and mixing (and I've only heard the DD 5.1 version). I strongly recommend them. They are real masterpieces -- the surround isn't artificial or contrived, yet greatly contributes to the experience. Even if you don't like the music itself, it's impressive.

By contrast I have DVD-As of Neil Young - Harvest and REM - Greatest Hits, and the DD 5.1 multichannel mix isn't that good -- it's flat and lifeless.

Although the lack of player/receiver digital connections is a little hassle, it's not that bad. Newer players have some form of bass management. I wouldn't let that put me off. The real issue is whether there's enough quality multichannel material to make it worthwhile. In my case the answer is yes.

If you have good 5.1 speaker system, a big stereo collection, and no PLII or Logic 7, getting a receiver with PLII or L7 would be a good step.

my 2 cents.
If you already have a 5.1 system, spend your windfall on the best 2 channel system you can afford. Don't water down your money on 5 channels. Personally, I'm always more entertained by a great 2 channel recording on a great 2 channel system than 5.1 on an average system.

EAR,

I just came across this article and thought I'd share it with everyone. It gives a bit of history as to why 2-channel is predominant now and also talks about why it can be inadequate.

A good read.

Thanks, good article, and a nice compliment to Alan's earlier in this thread. That site looks interesting too.

I was stuck on the assumption that real stereo was pure only when played on two channels. I bought my center and surrounds for home theater use. But Alan's advice has opened my ears, and I now use the H/K Logic 7 as my default setting for stereo music.

I don't think I will go back to "pure," two-channel stereo. The sophisticated soundstage produced by Logic 7 -- as well as Dolby PLII, but I prefer Harman Kardon's method -- is actually a more "pure" reproduction of orchestral performances.