Axiom Home Page Forums General Discussion Home Theater Music In Surround

I am a big fan of music mixed in surround. Let's talk about it.

I had high hopes for DVD-Audio as a format, and tried to support it as a consumer. I can still remember the thrill of listening to ELP's "Brain Salad Surgery" in surround, with the synthesizer in Karn Eval 9 spinning around my head. I was hooked!

As usual, though, the (mild) format war between SACD and DVD-Audio, coupled with the advent of mp3 and Itunes pretty well killed those efforts.

Still, when I compare the experience of listening to the normal CD of Porcupine Tree's "Fear of a Blank Planet" to the DVD-Audio of the same disk, it's literally a paradigm shift (at least to my ears). I refuse to believe, with all of the home theaters set up around the world, that there isn't a viable market for music in surround.

The advent of blu-ray, with high-fidelity audio in multiple channels, has once again raised my hopes. Releases like Steve Wilson's "Grace for Drowning" reinforce those hopes.

I read eagerly about the recent "Immersion" reissues of disks by Pink Floyd, Rush and others. However, I have no interest in springing for the whole Immersion package just to get my hands on the surround blu-ray version. I just want to be able to buy disks in surround.

Is it hopeless, or does surround have a chance? What's your favorite surround disk? Care to make a recommendation?

What about music in surround? single choice
	Blu-Ray Audio is the answer
	Blu-Ray Audio won't help
	SACD & DVD-A are all we need
	We should all still be listening to mono 78s
Votes accepted starting: 03/09/12 09:37 PM You must vote before you can view the results of this poll.

Since 8-track wasn't on the list, I went with B-ray.

Dang! How could I have forgotten 8-tracks? With that wide tape, it just had to be hi-fi, right?

Whip, I've had the same thoughts...even as far as the immersion discs. I'm hoping Blu-Ray makes some inroads, but I feel that the overall trend, unfortunately, is towards low-fi packaging.

I'm hoping that, ironic as it would be, studios start supporting multi-channel B-D discs to give them something physical to sell... that might not be as easy to "freely" exchange on the internet.

Whip, in one sense(which happens to be the one I most often use)all music with at least two channels was "mixed in surround". Surround ambience from directions other than the front was picked up by the recording microphones and became mixed into the front channels(there was no place else to go). Modes such as DPLII or Neo:6 extract this content and send it to the surrounds where it belongs, making the overall effect more spacious and realistic.

This can't duplicate the total effect of an actual multi-channel recording you'd like where an instrument is discretely placed in a surround channel, but nevertheless, even in pop recordings thought to have little "natural" ambience I've experimented with, the effect was nearly always clearly audible and helpful. For example, I gave a listen now on Amazon to the "Fear of a Blank Planet" sample, using both DPLII and Neo:6, and found both to be effective. Switching the surround off suddenly to stereo mode clearly collapsed the sound field toward the front.

So, if you've listened to this material only in stereo, you might try a surround mode to give you part of what you're looking for.

I also enjoy PLIIx M for many of my cds. Don't own any high end audio tracks in the poll.

By far, this is my favorite topic for music format discussions.

At the moment, option number one leads your poll by a wide margin. I'd argue that, as much as I hate to admit it, I don't believe that the format matters. The DVD-A and SACD formats want for nothing when a well mastered multi-channel disc is paired with good speakers.

I have quite a number of both DVD-A and SACD discs, and I'm of the same mind concerning the Floyd Immersion discs. Just give me the opportunity to buy the multi-channel disc, and keep the rest, thanks.

The problem is that, as the major studios/publishers discovered, the market doesn't care enough. Some years ago I read articles that cited something like Soundscan sales results which indicated that multi-channel discs accounted for an infinitesimally small portion of total unit sales.

The typical explanation is along the lines of "times have changed. Nobody wants to stop and sit in one place listen to an album from start to finish now like they did before."

I've got everything from Steely Dan to Porcupine Tree, Queen to Beck, The Beatles to Robert Cray, and wish that I'd bought every disc that I'd hummed and hawed over in the stores when those discs were much more readily available. Asking prices for many of those discs, sold as "new", are now astronomical.

I find the whole thing very disappointing, because new discs from major artists are very rare, and when they do produce them, we "fans" get gouged with needless marketing fluff like the Immersion packages. Just sell the damn disc, will you? And there's no reason to ask three times (or more!) the price of the stereo CD for it either, by the way.

Maybe the rate of adoption of multi-channel recordings if the hardware manufacturers hadn't engaged in rampant profiteering. Seriously, most of the players that handle the formats were sold in the several hundred dollar price range. I bought mine for $150, and it works wonderfully, thank you very much Pioneer.

Now, we all have a second chance, as (now) affordable blu-ray players that easily handle hi-res multi-channel audio have been widely adopted. Now give us the software, and unlike the DVD-A/SACD disaster, let's keep this ball rolling this time.

Krunch, now you're making me miss the "like" button again. Great post.

Unfortunately I see the concept of quality music slipping further off the map in the coming years. Multi-channel music is just a blip on the radar for music execs. The real focus is on two-channel headphone listening. Many albums are being mastered to sound good on those terrible iPod earbuds! DVD-A and SACD died because they were niche formats that never had any traction in the mainstream. Who was one of the first companies to pull out of the SACD market? Sony, the people that brought us the SACD! Even more concerning to videophiles should be the fact that movies are starting to go the same way with Apple TV and other products. We are already being told that low-bitrate video is acceptable because it's 1080p. Me? I'll just keep spinning vinyl in stereo.

I have not heard any blu-ray audio, that I'm aware of, so I didn't vote. I've listened to many of my CD's in every format that my pre-pro offers, and Neo-6 sounds pretty good for some things, but noting quite takes the place of a good stereo image - close your eyes and one can pick out each instrument (voice included) and its location on stage and how it all comes together.

One exception, maybe. I do have one SACD - Pink Floyd DSOTM. Each speaker is playing something different - what a trip.

If you were impressed by such a presentation then the recordings from AIX 5.1 or 7.1 Stage mix will really thrill you.

AIX RECORDS

I voted that “Blu-Ray Audio won’t help” for the reasons Andrew gave. The only possible exception I can see are concert Blu-rays but even then just because they have more channels doesn’t mean they will be mastered well.

Even the first “audiophile” BD I got, which came with my Oppo had nothing but reverb mixed into the center channel. Sound engineers know that most people don’t have surround sound systems and of those who do most don’t have “audiophile” surround systems rather something like a HTIB.

I’ve found that the real issue for me is not simply bit rate or number of channels. I tested mp3s I ripped myself from well mastered CDs using different algorithms and up in the 192-320 bit range I had to listen for specific mp3 anomalies to tell the difference between them and the original on my Axioms. Even on my Sennheiser HD 600 headphones I couldn’t reliably tell the difference at 320 bits.

I found something similar between CDs and SACDs in that a SACD didn’t sound any different to me than a well mastered CD version if available. In fact except were reviews said the SACD was an improvement I switched back to only buying well mastered CDs using reviews and a local audiophile store for info.

Also in line with what John said about algorithms to extract the surround channels, I have several DVD-A concerts with both multi-channel and two-channel and it’s hard to tell the difference between the mult-channel and the extracted two-channel.

So as Andrew said for the mass market there just isn’t a reason for quality BD audio and we (peeps like us) are not a big market.

On a side note I had an uncle from Illinois, who’s played in bands all his life, out visiting and demoed a lot of music I listen to for him. He was pleasantly surprised by how well mixed all the bands I from Asia I played for him were. I hadn’t thought about it but besides just getting bored with U.S. bands I think the recordings, at least for pop and rock bands, are better mastered than the crap here which may also be why I’ve gravitated toward them since getting a good sound system.

I have several DVD Audio and SACD discs and overall love the sound when mixed properly. I have even read reviews over the years where the staunch vinyl crowd "reluctantly" admitted that they were that good and, in performance, at least equal to their precious vinyl recordings. The problem, like any niche product(remember laserdisc?), is that, even with all its great potential, if the companies are not going to support it and bring the price down to where the masses are going to be interested in buying it, it is never going to catch on. We certainly have had several examples of that over the years, especially in the recording aspect of audio.

The even larger problem lies with the engineers and record producers of the various artists and labels who, even though the capability has been there for decades to do so, most have been reluctant to go back in to the studio to remix recordings for an alternate "multi-channel" sound vehicle for some unknown fear of tampering with what they describe as their "original concept".

The ironic thing about this is that if one is old enough, I, myself personally, can remember back in the late fifties, hearing many of the same excuses from recording engineers and producers who weren't keen on remixing their mono recordings in to the newly invented breakthrough format, "Stereo"!

Thanks for the link to AIX -- I wasn't familiar with you folks!

Um, JC works with Axiom, not AIX. He's just a big AIX fan, and rightfully so.

And thanks Mark!

Thoughtful comments from all.

I agree that with many disks it can be difficult to notice a meaningful difference between surround and stereo. I think this is especially true with classical music, where the surround channels are primarily used for ambience. You can, indeed, get much the same effect with PLII or Neo:6.

But look at an album like the Doobie Brothers' "The Captain and Me". I always thought this was one of the best mixed and recorded albums of the early 70s. The stereo mix is quite spectacular, but the surround mix leaves me gasping. The sound stage is no longer in front of you -- instead you're in the middle of it. A track like "South City Midnight Lady" is demonstrative. Acoustic guitars, horns, vocal harmonies, gentle percussion arrange tastefully all around you. And, if your heart is set on stereo, you can listen to the other side, recorded at 192 bit resolution. Makes my mouth water just thinking about it.

At any rate, I'm glad I have my Axioms now to get a really balanced and nuanced presentation.

Just to keep the conversation lively, here are two pieces for which I'd gladly pay a premium to obtain a good multi-channel recording:

The first is Respighi's "The Pines of Rome." The first time I heard this piece performed, the orchestra included 5 or 6 small brass choirs spread around the various corners of the theater. Talk about surround sound! The effect was, um, really effective! Capturing that kind of a performance in full surround would be a great way to show off the capabilities of multi-channel audio.

The second is one of Zappa's final concerts where a live ensemble performed "The Yellow Shark." It was presented in 6-channel surround, with speakers at the front L&R, center L&R and rear L&R of the audience. In addition to the main mix, Zappa used little costumed guys with fishing poles to lower hula hoops over the heads of soloists. The hula hoops had 6 mics positioned around the hoop which sent the solo out to the various corners of the PA system. I've always wanted to hear that one in surround...

I'll keep supporting good audio, but even I don't go crazy with it, since there are still too few bands that I enjoy who have multi-channel releases.

Concert Blu-rays are awesome, but to provide more value to the consumer, they really need to do album+live concert combos. I really think they could increase sales if they could offer this at under $20 street price. I'll also say that I'm not tempted to buy any more classical CDs at this point. When I want some more classical, I'm going to get concert Blu-rays. Actually seeing the musicians perform in a nice hall is a pretty cool part of the experience.

Also, I don't know how we're going to get high school and college kids to move to high-bitrate, multi-channel music recordings when decent gear costs more than they have to spend. Or maybe they really are spoiled enough to be able to afford it. I'm out of touch.

Yeah, but that's always been the case hasn't it? I mean, in college one of us would buy an album and the rest would make cassette copies. These never lasted very long, but everything I ever enjoyed on cassette I later purchased on CD. Isn't that roughly equivalent to the whole mp3 thing?

And there are always companies like Axiom making quality gear at prices that folks can afford if they're interested.

Fear not Axiomos! You can always enjoy surround sound the old fashioned way. Live music... and the best part? The artists get to keep most of the proceeds.

Whip, as I commented in my previous reply, DPLII, etc., processing of 2-channel material can't "duplicate the total effect" of a multi-channel recording which places instruments discretely beside or behind the listener, and only gives you "part" of what you want. In my case, however, my listening is almost entirely classical(I've made numerous recommendations here in the "Stunning" thread and others)and the ambient surround effects pretty much fully satisfy me.

Very little classical music(the Berlioz Requiem is an exception)was composed with the intent to have some of the performers to the side or back of the listeners. I have no doubt that the Respighi performance that you attended made a spectacular effect, but that ain't the way Respighi wrote it. If you want a reasonably good performance of Pines, Fountains and Festivals(my favorite versions are Batiz and Muti)in SACD(ambience in the surround channels, not discrete performer placement)it's available here .

JohnK -
As Carson used to say, "I did not know that." I assumed it was always performed with ensembles in different parts of the theater. Interesting.

Oh, and thanks for the recommendation!

I am hopefull BR Audio/concert discs will keep showing up, I recently purchased Rush - Moving Pictures in BR and it is great but it was also a great recoding on CD to begin with, I think there might be a connection here........

After hemming and hawing fore awhile, I just ordered the multi-channel SACD of Wish You Were Here.

It's always been one of my favorites and though I'm at least as guilty as others in not sitting in one spot and listening to an album through, I'm going to make myself do it with this one!

'S'bout time.

"Mom! Mark's threatening to hog the couch!!!"

Well, that's better than the other way around.

We'll be interested in your review of the multichannel version. Seems to be tailor-made for it.