Surround (RS-7) Placement

[HornEd]

Here are a couple of quotes from the official LucasFilms, Inc. THX site on their new THX Surround EX process.

"Available exclusively in THX-licensed Ultra Series products, THX Surround EX is a process that decodes a back surround signal from the left and right surround channels on specially encoded DVD movie releases."

Reading the official THX Surround EX party line makes it a THX PROCESS based on Dolby Digital Surround EX... but maybe they are pulling our legs. BTW, that PROCESS ostensibly creates a new sound format. Supposedly the new Star Wars Episode is the first movie to be fully encoded with the new THX (presumably) system... and that the 30+ Dolby Digital EX are backward compatible to the THX PROCESS. Here's another quote for those who haven't looked.

"Open options for licensees and system designers

The THX Surround EX program specification is designed to ensure compatibility with movie software and guarantee the highest level of performance whether in home theatre or music reproduction applications. At the same time, the specification allows licensees some flexibility in differentiating products and configuring systems to meet varying customer needs.

THX Surround EX receivers or A/V amplifiers may include power amplification for both surround back outputs, or simply provide line level outputs for external amplifiers. If internal power amplifiers are included, they must meet Home THX specifications for surround amplifier performance.

THX Ultra licensees are encouraged to include proprietary DSP modes for tthe (sic) two Surround back output channels to enhance the audio performance for 5.1 music recordings.

Licensees may choose from a number of different IC chips and circuit boards now offered for THX Surround EX technology. Current suppliers include Analog Devices, the Crystal Division of Cirrus Logic, Momentum Data Systems, Motorola, Sample Rate Systems and Zoran.

For optimum results, THX recommends use of two THX Ultra certified dipole speakers for the back surrounds. However, allowing for customer preference, a pair of direct radiating speakers can also be used for the back surrounds under a new THX specification."

Admittedly, it sound like there may be a little wiggle room... as I would expect there would be. THX does not have a good track record for keeping licensees in the home HT market. -HornED

PS: The THX Surround EX link is http://www.thx.com/consumer_products/surround_ex.html

This message has been edited by HornEd on 05-14-2002 at 05:08 PM

[USparc]

quote:

---

Originally posted by talktoKeith:

USparc, I've got some beachfront property in Florida for sale cheap. Do you believe that too?

Keith

---

What are you talking about???

I don't believe anything unless I can see (and hear ) it for myself!!!!

[T2K]

"My bad experiences were with the RS-3's.

I actually never owned and used them in my place."

Your words USparc,not mine. Perhaps it would be wise to refrain from commenting on something you have little, or no, experience with. Just a thought.

Keith

This message has been edited by talktoKeith on 05-14-2002 at 06:29 PM

[anarchist]

HornEd,

The THX site is ambiguous and misleading, period. The fact is they are requiring licensee's to add a variety of post-processing (AFTER DOLBY DIGITAL EX) in order to receive THX certification. Those processes are (from their site):

Re-equalization

Timbre Matching

Adaptive Decorrelation

Bass Management

Bass Peak Level Manager

Loudspeaker Position Time Synchronization

5.1 digital sound formats were originally designed for movie theaters. The best way to reproduce that sound at home is with THX Certified products. Because although many digital formats exist, including Dolby Digital, DTS and MPEG, true Home Theatre connoisseurs know that only THX Certified products, incorporating these formats, offer the most consistently accurate, trouble-free reproduction of sound from your Home Theater. - www.thx.com

By the way, THX Surround EX (BWAHAHAHA) is applied to DTS and other sound formats as well. I don't know how time you spend keeping up with pre/pro's but this is discussed regularly. That processing is NOT a new sound format but a series of attributes applied to the decoded data-stream. Go to the HTF and read some posts on Outlaw, Anthem, and others. This whole processing scheme is discussed repeatedly.

The DSP modes they refer to are applying these attributes and certain proprietary sounds. Manufacturers have been doing this for a while - your Yamaha has Dolby Digital Spectacle, Dolby Digital Adventure, yada, yada, yada. We aren't talking about anything new.

In case, my explanation is unclear or unbelieved even after the quotes, here is an excerpt from the Bryston SP1.7 manual which makes it simple and to the point:

If the EX Control Option is set to OFF,selecting this function (LED green)will automatically incorporate the THX post processing option for all surround modes. Dolby Digital 5.1, DTS 5.1 and DTS-ES 6.1 bitstreams will be decoded and presented with THX post-processing.

------------------

Home Theater

KSP 400's

KSP C6

KSP S6's

Yamaha RXV995 (Current)

Bryston 9BST (On the horizon)

Bryston SP1.7 (A little further on the horizon)

Music Room

Heresy's

KG4's

KSW200

Ella PP EL-34 (Coming soon)

This message has been edited by crash827 on 05-14-2002 at 07:33 PM

[boa12]

yea guys my b&k ref 30 IS thx ultra - whopee! & yea it's a post-processing. i just use it sometimes to get

the re-eq & get some of the harshness out of the highs in movies. no big thing though. works over any surround format -dd, dts or prologic.

i get a matrixed rear center whether i choose thx or surround w/ dd, dts or prologic. just that DD EX material actually has the rear center(s) info matrix encoded on the sl & sr channels.

yea DD EX was really a joint of lucasfilms thx & dolby.

1st time it was used was that s-wars phantom menace i believe as ed mentioned. so maybe some day thx &/or dolby will catch up w/ dts & have a actual discrete rear surround (center), but be able to push out more material w/ it.

right on av! rock on! it's all good!

------------------

My Home Systems Page

[HornEd]

So, the upshot is that LucasFilms, Ltd., THX, et al are not to be believed. And Bryston is. Does that mean that your question about putting the Null toward the Sweetspot according to THX is a real issue or more smoke.

Frankly, while I give some credit to THX as a unifying force, my belief in Santa Claus and the Easter Bunny rates higher. Of course, they are easily eclipsed by my respect for Bryston.

Generally, the preamp/amp folks are so full of smoke, mirrors and misrepresentations that it gives me pause to upgrade what I have. I realize that 5.1 has a strong hold in the industry... but I truly do prefer 6.1 for its enabling technology that assists matched monopole mains meet the challenge of better quality HT. I believe that responsible 6.1 with monopoles has an psychoacoustics advantage over 5.1 with WDST... but I am willing to have my mind changed with a good A/B demo to the contrary.

Frankly Crash the only reason I went to the THX site was because you seemed to be raising THX as some sort of worthwhile authority rather than the crass, wishy-washy, money suckers they have turned out to be. In the end, it is we consumers who pay more for our products based on the THX greased palm pronouncements.

It will be interesting to see what good, if any, comes of all this over the next few years. -HornED

[T2K]

Originally posted by HornEd:

The problem I have with Keith vitriol toward my posts is that his position is that anyone who doesn't agree with his KSP-S6 or WDST approach is full of BS or, worse, deliberately misleading people. That runs across my grain of how I have served my fellow residents of this planet... and I find that style of posting patently offensive. Frankly, as a life-long maverick, having an honestly held dissenting opinion is a healthy stimulation to better understanding for all. I respect Keith many ways... and have said so in previous posts... but "verbal arson" is not one of them.

My sarcasm is caused by your incessant deliberate misstatement of fact and the attitude that you have displayed here that any opinion other than yours is incorrect. You base you opinion on a speaker that,by your own admission,you do not possess. How could a person be legitimitely critical of a product that that person has never used or experienced.

You posts are filled with contradictions adnauseum.

Keep up your reading ED and you will find why Klipsch proudly displays WDST speakers on their home page. Klipsch just recently sent Sound&Vision magazine their Reference system,including RS-7's,to represent the latest HT equipment that Klipsch currently has to offer. Sound&Vision's Daniel Kumin responded " I'd expect a lesser system to suffer from excessive localization of the surrounds or a tonal mismatch in the front channels.The Klipsch system never exhibited any of these faults,delivering fine detail and fully integrated surround from beginning to end"..... He was referring to WDST speakers ED, no matter how to try to redefine that term.

As far as the positioning of KSP-S6's goes, I really don't care how a person sets up his possesions in his own home.I DO KNOW that the proper positioning of the KSP-S6's is along the sides of the listening position.I just so happen to have here a piece of Klipsch literature that has a drawing/picture of the recommended placement, although the text does say the S6's "sound pattern" does offer flexability in placement.

I have nothing against you personally ED,its just that your STYLE, that is the deliberate misstatement of fact and lame innuendo, really piss me off. Good day to you ED. :^)

Keith

[anarchist]

HornEd,

The bottom-line is read between the lines and get to the bottom of the story. THX is definitely trying to establish a brand with the public and is marketing heavily. You have referenced THX and the future as the basis for having all monopoles in a system.

I wanted to point out two things:

1) THX Surround EX is not a sound format.

2) The 5.1 authorities (Dolby and THX) specify monopoles are not the proper speaker for 5.1 and not what they are basing their recording practices on. I will also point out that both Dolby and THX suggest in a 6.1 and certainly a 7.1 system, monopoles may be used and provide satisfactory results - but the recording is still based on having dipoles.

Also, please note, both state the surrounds are used for ambient sound and special effects. The difference between ProLogic and DD, according to them, is under DD, a discrete signal is sent to left and right surrounds versus the same signal sent to both under ProLogic. A full-range is largely wasted in this environment - particularly if you are going to conform to THX specifications.

Many of us don't and with good reason. In your theater with KLF30's I can see and agree with your choices - particularly with front effects. My matched system achieves the same results (the listeners enjoyment) using different speakers. In the end, there is no ONE best way. As I said before, there are no absolutes and that is all I wanted to get across.

The advice you give is certain to help many people and that is a wonderful thing. Just be aware identical speakers is not a global solution and tailor your advice to the speaker selection and environment. I know you try and I appreciate your opinions - even if they come across as authoritarian from time to time. I am often accused of the same thing and I try real hard to be flexible in my appproach.

I will leave you and Keith alone for a bit.

PS: Knowing your system, if you wanted to spend the money and you really like music as well, get the Bryston setup in my sig. You want something less expensive in separates - get an Anthem AVM20 processor and Parasound 2205 amp. I can't imagine the volume out of your system with a Parasound - you would possibly blow out any windows in the room. The best receiver today - likely the Pioneer 49TX. In every case, your front effects become two back surrounds.

------------------

Home Theater

KSP 400's

KSP C6

KSP S6's

Yamaha RXV995 (Current)

Bryston 9BST (On the horizon)

Bryston SP1.7 (A little further on the horizon)

Music Room

Heresy's

KG4's

KSW200

Ella PP EL-34 (Coming soon)

This message has been edited by crash827 on 05-14-2002 at 11:41 PM

[boa12]

i've found w/ the rear cornwalls crossed down to 50hz, a LOT of low bass is getting put in the surround/rear surround channels, even by mixers that apparently digress from the standards set by DD/thx.

but this is why if available the dts mix is preferable for me. more low bass in the rear. again to really appreciate it you need a lower high pass than the too high fixed standards, or maybe ed you could just set the rears/rear surround to large.

most recent example, just watched moulan rouge (girlfriend choice) & noticed this w/ the dts format. had some real lfe but it also worked w/ low bass in the rear to give a front-back rolling effect of bass. kinda like a tidal wave of bass from one end of the room to the other. cool effect.

------------------

My Home Systems Page

[SteveB]

FWIW, I prefer DTS-ES discrete much more than THX any day of the week. I got to hear some THX stuff at a Tweeter down my way, and DTS blows it out of the water. IMHO, this coming from an amateur audio junkie, they are both virtually the same damn thing. Just another version of surround sound, the whole reason we are each here on this forum. Everyone has their own preference, mine happens to be with the DTS. THX is marketed so heavily in the sci-fi genre it seems. Not all HTS and audiophiles are in this fan club though. If DTS were smart, they'd start doing some of the higher money makers in DTS format (ala Spiderman, etc). They did well with Titanic, T2, etc, and I see no reason for them to stray from the THX hype. Should be a good fight. Ding Ding....

Steve

[boa12]

right on steve. i still think despite some dolby affecionados to the contrary, that dts w/ it's higher bit rates just plain sounds more dynamic. they say the info dolby dumps w/ it's higher compression doesn't affect sound quality, but my ears don't think so.

anyway, did you ever get a better matching rear center?

especially w/ dts 6.1 discrete a good timbre match to the others is important. i think av hit it earlier. even for a wide rear wall 2 rc-7 would work better w/ the rs surrounds. or 2 ref towers, but again really not necessary if you have a high pass cross on them at 80hz or above (but u could maybe set them as large & still have a good overall effect.)

------------------

My Home Systems Page

[SteveB]

Hey boa,

Haven't gotten the surround (rear) center yet. Still using my old Kenwood tower (JL-840). It performs well for now, but I am looking into another RC-7 as many have suggested. My problem with the RC-7 would be mounting the sucker. That's one heavy and awkward speaker to mount. Any suggestions if I go that route?

Steve

PS. Now I have issues with my new Boston Acoustics PV-800 sub as it is emitting a humming upon purchase. Their techies wont reply. I'll give them another day or two before going with a RSW from Klipsch

[boa12]

steve, sorry i'm no mounting expert, have a nice rear mantle that my rear C7 rests on.

does the sub have a 3-prong ac plug (w/ safety ground)?

if so try a 3:2 cheater plug (make sure it's orange j/k ) like from the hardware store/section for around 50 cents. takes the 3 prong ac plug to a 2 prong (floats the ground).

------------------

My Home Systems Page

[HornEd]

Boa and SteveB, it's refreshing to see two people with different approaches to side/surround speakers being amiable... that's the way it ought to be on this Forum. I, too, prefer DTS with its seemingly more precise audio detail... especially when coming from a full-range speaker array front and back.

Hoever, it is truly amazing to hear seemingly rational people resort to all kinds of diatribes, illusive or biased "authorities", or knee-jerk invectives reminiscent of the playground when presented with a dissenting opinion. They take it upon themselves to attack someone who bases his opinion upon his own ears (hmmm, is that now a sin?) and no less an authority than the web published comments of Dr. Floyd E. Toole, Ph.D.

Dr. Toole is perhaps the most respected authority on acoustics and psychoacoustics by his peers that the world has ever known. Sure, Dr. Toole is now VP of Speaker Engineering for Hardon Industries, but his decades of published work for the Canadian government is well established... and his views remain constant.

Despite my high regard for Dr. Toole, my systems are vigorously tested using his published guidance as confirmed by my personal experience. The posts that I make reflect the observations of this process. If my comments sound authoritarian, it is because my pursuits of audio truth for my room and gear are serious pursuits... and my conclusions, rightly or wrongly, reflect my experiences with the quality of life that good audio should bring. Perhaps some mistake my enthusiasm for some stern pronouncement of perfection. That, of course, could not be further from the truth.

Personally, I believe that bipole (or worse, dipole - which are out of phase) speakers that fire toward the front and back wall with a null facing the sweetspot are concepts that have had their day and are a bad idea that is better laid to rest. So, what if they are a standard for "THX" and its money-grubbing license fee oriented advertising... I still have a right as a consumer to prefer something better in my opinion. In hundreds of posts, emails and phone calls, I have recommended WDST and KSP-S6 solutions for folks with acoustics environments that warrant them. Generally, that means listening environments that are too small or have some acoustics impediment that tend to preclude the use of monopoles. These recommendations are, in my opinion, consistent with my overall impression of Dr. Toole's life work and my own personal research.

However, that does not change my opinion that in a room with enough size and reasonable acoustics properties, identical monopole speakers are much preferred. Certainly, I will grant you that the demands on the front center speaker will be greater than the demands upon the speakers used in the rear array in most HT mixes... a notion which leads some folks to save money on rear speakers... and that is their value judgment right! But, to me, identical speakers make a huge difference in multi-channel music and better quality movie sound tracks.

Here is an excerpt from one of Dr. Toole's "whitepapers" found at http://www.infinitysystems.com/home_audio/whitepapers/acoustical_design.pdf

"The surround side/rear loudspeakers have been matters for experimentation, especially for the reproduction of movie sound tracks, but the appearance of multichannel music changes the focus somewhat. In the days of Dolby Surround/ProLogic, film sound was well served by multidirectional (including dipole) surround loudspeakers. However, listeners are finding that the digital discrete 5.1-channel systems seem to work well with five identical loudspeakers, and this certainly is the early trend in multichannel music. The key factor here is that the perceptions of direction, space, depth and so on, are really very much in the hands of the artists and recording engineers."

Further, the discussion of the past, present and future of surround sound on the official Dolby web site makes no mention of using bipole, dipole, or tripole approaches for side/surround speakers... but the illustrations show monopole speakers in the surround positions! Check it out for yourself at http://www.dolby.com/ht/430.l.br.9904.surhist.pdf

The Q & A section of the Dolby Digital website poses the question, "Whats the best type of speakers for a home theater?"

The answer, "Dolby Laboratories does not recommend specific speaker types or brands for home theater systems. For best results, we generally recommend that the five main-channel speakers (left, center, and right front speakers, plus the two surrounds) be the same. At the least, all speakers should come from the same manufacturer and be designed to provide similar tonal characteristics, or timbre."

Still further on the official Dolby site, I poured through pages of technical information about mixing movies and music for home 5.1 and I found references to the fact that 5.1 has five full-range channels (plus LFE) available to the sound engineer... but nowhere was there a specification that anything other than five identical full-range speakers should be used.

Now, I can understand how one sound engineer or another may have his/her favorite way to mix and/or reproduce sound... but the basic audio tools now available to the sound engineer do not currently presume that side/surrounds MUST be bipoles, dipoles, tripoles, or WDST... as far as I can tell.

Audio is an evolving technology... and my learning about the myths and half-truths rampant in this industry is on a steep learning curve. While it pains me that some people are put off by my writing style... my course is set by what I discover to be plausible... with changes when I find it is not. On balance, my email from people inside and outside of Klipsch is far more supportive not. I call them like I see them... and own up to my errors as they occur. If reading my posts offends... than by all means... pass them by. -HornED

PS: Dr. Toole, too, is a horn enthusiast with a pragmatic bent. In the main, you will find that my posts more closely parallel his published observations on acoustics, psychoacoustics and speaker suggestions than any other authority.

This message has been edited by HornEd on 05-15-2002 at 08:30 AM

[T2K]

Steve,wondering if you actually tried a RS-7 rear center with your Reference system? Just wondering how the WDST speaker would sound there. The May issue of S&V tested the Ref setup with 2-pr RS-7's and the results were positive. Inquiring minds ya know.......:^)

Keith

This message has been edited by talktoKeith on 05-15-2002 at 08:36 AM

[HornEd]

Thanks, Keith, the eloquence of your Smiley haiku is well taken. Peace. -HornED

Oops!, it seems that the Smiley haiku has been edited to become a speculation to Steve B. Always nice to have a divergent approach to balance out the Forum. -H.E.

This message has been edited by HornEd on 05-15-2002 at 08:50 AM

[anarchist]

Ed,

From the official Dolby site since you had diffulty locating references; these are excerpts but I am sure they are clear enough when you think about it. They cover both speaker type and THX:

The other alternative is to install and switch between two pairs of surround speakers, one optimized for film playback (bipoles/dipoles/tripoles), and the other, identical to the front speakers, placed at ear level for optimum DVD-Audio playback. This purist (and potentially costly) approach is facilitated on some A/V receiver models by the inclusion of connections and switching for two pairs of surround speakers. However, while this approach may optimize the effect for a listener in the center "sweet spot," those seated off-center may hear too much of one surround speaker or the other.

Bipolar, dipolar, and tripolar surround speakers use speaker drivers aimed towards the front and back of the room to achieve a diffuse soundfield like that created by the multiple surround speakers used in movie theaters. Your rooms acoustics will effect these designs more than conventional direct-radiating speakers, which, when placed properly, can also make effective surround speakers.

In addition to Dolby Digital and Dolby Surround Pro Logic decoding, some systems offer the option of switching on additional processing enhancements. Some, such as THX-licensed processes (www.thx.com), are intended to make your home theater sound more like a movie theater or the dubbing theaters in which movie soundtracks are mixed.

------------End Paste--------------------

I think that covers everything. I will add building a system around multi-channel audio is out there on the edge since there is no certainty it will be anything more than a novelty - frankly, it is asinine to me as I have never hear a band that played with the instruments surrounding me (or anyone else for that matter.) You like music, you listen to two-channel or three-channel if your processor is good enough to not collapse the sound stage. The stage should be in front of you not surrounding you - my preference.

Again, although it seems difficult to gain concurrence, there are no absolutes. Posting as if KSP's/WSDT are ok if there is no other choice but you should always opt for monopoles if possible, does not recognize both can be equally effective given certain parameters; Dolby does mention in a 6.1 or 7.1 setup, monopoles can be very effective. If your speakers weren't designed as a HT system, obviously timbre matching will lead you to identical speakers even if it is not optimal in a 5.1 system.

------------------

Home Theater

KSP 400's

KSP C6

KSP S6's

Yamaha RXV995 (Current)

Bryston 9BST (On the horizon)

Bryston SP1.7 (A little further on the horizon)

Music Room

Heresy's

KG4's

KSW200

Ella PP EL-34 (Coming soon)

This message has been edited by crash827 on 05-15-2002 at 12:15 PM

[boa12]

steve, the more i think w/ your mounting needs & current use of a tower, u should really get 1 or 2 rf-7

or rf-3 for the rear surround. don't know which receiver u use but u could probably set them as large for that rear low bass effect & probably not have bass quality issues w/ your sub there. & would be good for music in 6 or 7 channel/speaker stereo.

ed, have u ever tried setting the surround & rear to large for that rear low bass i described above? just curious. when i had my fixed 80hz marantz going I ran the rear cornwalls on large w/ nice effect & no conflict w/ sub - it made for a pretty even bass response in the room.

keith, i can't remember for sure again but do you use the ksp for rear surround? that would be nice w/ those powered subs also in the rear for bringin up the bass from behind.

i like my set-up. the cornwalls' 15" drivers run down to 50hz w/ 200 watts & up to 75amps are like rear subs.

------------------

My Home Systems Page

[HornEd]

Thanks for your reply, Crash827 and the pasted references. Actually, I don't have that much problem navigating the Dolby site,. My expressed concern was that bipole, dipole and tripole commentary were not mentioned and not illustrated in Dolby's past, present and future review... and equally missing from their technical guidelines for mixing under their 5.1 format. I am not opposed to someone using those speakers if it works for them... I just don't think that they are the only effective alternative. At least on that much we seem to agree.

As a frequent live concert goer of many years, I like the live sound of Klipsch... particularly from my Khorns. I agree with you again in that I do not want to be in the center of the band... but I do like having the "acoustic feel" of sitting up front and in the middle of the audience. I actually auditioned a Denon 5800 with the notion of having both kinds of surrounds. After a week or so of A/B testing, I sent the Denon and the WDST's back... they were very good, but I liked what I had better for my acoustics set. So, in effect, I have come by my bias honestly.

Having an HT system that makes me feel like I am sitting in a commercial theater is not my idea of a good time! From the SF Metreon to my neighborhood state-of-the-art multi-screen, I have not found a commercial theater to match the best my little home theater has to offer in audio... and my 65" HDTV fed by a full-fledged progressive scan DVD player isn't bad either. I am far more concerned with "feeling" that I am in the movie rather than being in a theater.

I expect to move later this year, providing my health holds, and will go through another round of testing to see what works best in the new digs. I made some notes from your posts to help me approach the new acoustics set with an open mind. Of course, I will also apply what I understand about Dr. Toole's prolific writings on the subject... so far they have really worked for me... particularly on the center channel and monopoles where there is room to use them effectively.

Boa, as mentioned in other threads, I have tried various combos of large and small here and there. I get the effect that you talk about... including the audio illusion of localization of bass to the KLF-30's... even though I KNOW the low bass is coming from the 7' SVS tower! It is uncanny and very compelling to enjoy it until my tinkering notions take hold. -HornED

This message has been edited by HornEd on 05-15-2002 at 01:01 PM

[anarchist]

HornEd,

One very big agreement between us: I find my home HT to be much more enjoyable sonically than any theater I have been in. My kids comment on why does ours sound better every time we go to a movie - which isn't very often anymore as I prefer just to buy the DVD and watch it at home. I believe we will go even less once I build the dedicated HT and we put in a widescreen and HDTV projector.

------------------

Home Theater

KSP 400's

KSP C6

KSP S6's

Yamaha RXV995 (Current)

Bryston 9BST (On the horizon)

Bryston SP1.7 (A little further on the horizon)

Music Room

Heresy's

KG4's

KSW200

Ella PP EL-34 (Coming soon)