fletcherkane Posted January 11, 2005 Share Posted January 11, 2005 5.1, 7.1, 9.1, what's next, 13..3? I am pondering my home theater tonight, and I am wondering, what if any increase in pleasure I would receive if I keep adding more channels... It seems that the Law of diminshing returns starts kicking in after 5.1. In other words.. LCR to Prologic...Huge difference Prologic to 5.1...Pretty cool for movies--pretty big difference. 5.1 to 6.1...Rear Center... Interesting concept, rarely notice the addition 6.1 to 7.1...Two Rear Centers...Nobody encodes anything in 7.1 anyway. Really don't notice 7.1 to 9.1...OVERKILL I love to watch my movies in a theater-like environment, but, IMHO, the more speakers/channels of sound get added, the less enjoyment you get out of each successive addition, thus diminishing the perceived value of each additional purchase. What are everyone else's thoughts as to this phenomenon. Am I all wet, or not alone in this feeling. Post away.... Fletch Lives Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Griffinator Posted January 11, 2005 Share Posted January 11, 2005 ---------------- On 1/11/2005 8:36:56 PM fletcherkane wrote: 5.1, 7.1, 9.1, what's next, 13..3? I am pondering my home theater tonight, and I am wondering, what if any increase in pleasure I would receive if I keep adding more channels... It seems that the Law of diminshing returns starts kicking in after 5.1. In other words.. LCR to Prologic...Huge difference Prologic to 5.1...Pretty cool for movies--pretty big difference. 5.1 to 6.1...Rear Center... Interesting concept, rarely notice the addition 6.1 to 7.1...Two Rear Centers...Nobody encodes anything in 7.1 anyway. Really don't notice 7.1 to 9.1...OVERKILL I love to watch my movies in a theater-like environment, but, IMHO, the more speakers/channels of sound get added, the less enjoyment you get out of each successive addition, thus diminishing the perceived value of each additional purchase. What are everyone else's thoughts as to this phenomenon. Am I all wet, or not alone in this feeling. Post away.... Fletch Lives http://forums.klipsch.com/idealbb/images/smilies/10.gif"> ---------------- The operative is, as long as there is information encoded for the given channels, it's a worthwhile addition. Covering the gap between the two rears with a surround back speaker has been an immense improvement. As soon as HD-DVD starts happening, you'll start seeing 7.1 encoding, and you'll be able to move your surrounds to the side, where they're supposed to be, and use the stereo pair in the rear, and believe you me, you'll hear the difference, and you'll appreciate it. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
skonopa Posted January 11, 2005 Share Posted January 11, 2005 I currently have a 6.1 setup, and I am happy with that for now. However, I do have the capability to expand to 7.1 My Denon reciever that I am using as a pre/pro can do 7.1, plus I have a 7-channel amp, with one channel currently unused. I can easily get and add that 7th speaker if the need arises. By the time that 7.1 does become worth-while, I'll probably have upgraded the pre/pro anyway. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Colin Posted January 11, 2005 Share Posted January 11, 2005 There was a study by Lucas Films showing that 10.1 was the best for surround channel sound (includes monitors up high at the front to add height)- personally I think the law of diminishing returns takes place a lot sooner, like with two Khorns... or a portable CD player and a GMX system... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
edwinr Posted January 12, 2005 Share Posted January 12, 2005 In my opinion, having 2.0 channel home theatre solves all the hassles and problems associated with the 5.1, 6.1, 7.1, 9.1 debate. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
nicholtl Posted January 12, 2005 Share Posted January 12, 2005 Griff's right. Extra speakers surrounding you, if implemented correctly, is most definitely not a diminishing return. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Frzninvt Posted January 12, 2005 Share Posted January 12, 2005 What do you mean no 7.1, what in the heck do you think that DTS-ES Discrete and DD EX are? If you think that the extra two rear channels do not make a difference and improve on the movie watching experience you are sorely mistaken. I am running at 8.2 (two centers and an additional subwoofer) yeah baby! My NAD T163 has two dedicated subwoofer outputs, the center is "Y'd" out. My preamp also has the ability to upsample 5.1 soundtracks to 7.1 so I can use my additional rears all the time if need be. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jdm56 Posted January 12, 2005 Share Posted January 12, 2005 Mark the calendar boys, I actually agree with da Griffinator on something! 7.1 discreet channels is a definite step-up from 5.1. But at some point there just won't be enough folks willing to keep adding speakers and amps, and the channel proliferation will stop. As for the point of diminishing returns, I think that starts kicking in after 2.0, the exact point being determined by the size of your room and the depth of your pockets. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Olorin Posted January 12, 2005 Share Posted January 12, 2005 I'm not so sure about diminishing from 2.0, but just like the direct-vs-wide, this could easily be a religious argument. In my case, 2.1 was a big step up from 2.0, and 5.1 was a gigantic leap from there. I haven't gone farther yet. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
gcoker Posted January 12, 2005 Share Posted January 12, 2005 If you have a 6.1 or 7.1 setup and play a DTS-ES DVD. Play a sceen and then tuen off the rear surround and play it again. You will hear a difference. To me (depending upon room size) 7.2 is the way to go. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ygmn Posted January 12, 2005 Share Posted January 12, 2005 6.1 equates to 7.1 except 2 mono rear speakers....from the source material....and teither is an improvement over 5.1... choice between 7.1 or 6.1 is hard...and room dimensions and things play a big roll here IMO... Skinny room like moons theater (no bad feelings just example moon).....and 1 rear center is enough... Wide room then 2 might be better then 1.... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
lipinski Posted January 12, 2005 Share Posted January 12, 2005 jump from 2.0 (or 2.1) to 5.1 is "muy gigante" IMO. I've got one room with each. I much prefer movie and music in the 5.1 room. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Shade Posted January 12, 2005 Share Posted January 12, 2005 6.1 equates to 7.1 except 2 mono rear speakers ---------------------------------------------------- Only in some processors. Lexicon for example uses stereo rears. It is a pretty big improvement. For example, if sound is steering down the left side of the room, it stays on the left when it reaches the back. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
cmdridq Posted January 13, 2005 Share Posted January 13, 2005 Some people are convinced bi-wiring and speaker cable an inch thick make a "huge" difference. Personally, anything past 5.1 is almost, but not quite, in that realm for me. At least at this point in time. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
doudou Posted January 13, 2005 Share Posted January 13, 2005 ---------------- On 1/12/2005 12:35:58 PM gcoker wrote: If you have a 6.1 or 7.1 setup and play a DTS-ES DVD. Play a sceen and then tuen off the rear surround and play it again. You will hear a difference. To me (depending upon room size) 7.2 is the way to go. ---------------- i really think gcocker spoted an important point: it depends on the size of the room. i think there is no need to fill a deep between the two rear with a rear center if the rears are distant from only 1 meter. but if you have a large room and if your the rears are far from eachothers then you have to fill the gap. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JewishAMerPrince Posted January 13, 2005 Share Posted January 13, 2005 Dolby PLIIx, music, cinema and game, which does for 7.1 that which PLII did for 5.1 (and then some) is truely a beautiful thing. Jerry Rappaport Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ygmn Posted January 13, 2005 Share Posted January 13, 2005 ---------------- On 1/12/2005 8:26:20 PM Shade wrote: 6.1 equates to 7.1 except 2 mono rear speakers ---------------------------------------------------- Only in some processors. Lexicon for example uses stereo rears. It is a pretty big improvement. For example, if sound is steering down the left side of the room, it stays on the left when it reaches the back. ---------------- yes but my statement was the source material is encoded with a mono rear channel...so....what receivers do is another thing all together...and not how it was mixed by studios nor as a movie theater is... In movie theaters the rears all play the same stuff...as do each side surround.... Yammy has 9.1...they introduce another set of front effects behind and wider then LR mains....probably sounds better...but is based on receiver computer chip...and then is not as intended...so kinda double edged....and also on what the HT owner desires out of system.... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Anonymous Posted January 13, 2005 Share Posted January 13, 2005 ---------------- On 1/13/2005 7:32:51 AM cmdridq wrote: Some people are convinced bi-wiring and speaker cable an inch thick make a "huge" difference. Personally, anything past 5.1 is almost, but not quite, in that realm for me. At least at this point in time. ---------------- you are right and you are wrong... about your wiring... good quality wiring ie transparent audio, mit cable, or kimber can make a huge difference if you have a system that can equate such a difference. meaning that if you spent 15 grand on a 2 ch system those cables will make a big difference over your 16 awg vampire wire. Furthermore most speakers that msrp for more than 5 grand a pair do not even have bi-wired capabilities. On top of that your cross over in the speaker makes a huge difference too, if you spend a lot more than 5 grand on a pair of speakers you will find your self having to buy cross overs in addition to your new speakers (active or passive) when this is all brought together great wiring can make a huge difference. But for most of us here having over kill cables, that you are probably thinking of, may not be a "huge" upgrade in sound because our speakers simply will not take advantage of that speaker wire..... Personally I listen to more music than I do movies and therefore I really enjoy 2 ch a lot more than i do movies in surround sound. Another thing wth the diminishing channels is you say anything past 2.0 ch's is diminishing, but what about all the people, even in this same forum, that absolutley swear by 3 ch stereo, personally i have not heard a 3 ch stereo in a good listening enviroment so i cannot make that judgemennt, but all of them who swear by it ie 2 k-horns and a belle or ls, say that there is just no other way.... Griff, how do you know that when hd-dvd comes out it will be encoded in 7.1? there is hd tv and that is only 5.1? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
myriadcorp Posted January 13, 2005 Share Posted January 13, 2005 Let Room size and your budget determine 5.1 6.1 or 7.1. In my case 5.1 worked fine for my room size. If I had put additional rear speakers they would be damn near sitting next to each other. Not really a large sound field when all speakers sit together. I could have went 6.1 or 7.1 with budget. However, the room was just not large enough to support 4 rear speakers. Layout your room with your budget, then decide if you want to invest in the extra speakers. Its not a huge difference over 5.1 but it does sound alittle better if the room is setup right. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Colin Posted January 13, 2005 Share Posted January 13, 2005 Wrong, wrong, wrong! First Gramsa man, before I go arguing with you, I hafta know: are you quoting the Bible or Pulp Fiction? Cause if it is the Bible, thats OK, thats your thing, but if it is Pulp Fiction, maybe I had better temper my words! But where do you get these fallacies? It aint necessarily so. if you spent 15 grand on a 2 ch system those cables will make a big difference Not only not 100% true all the time, but it can also be just the opposite: the more expensive system can benefit LESS from expensive cables. A superb system hardly needs the minor tweaks of expensive cable. Personally, while my budget was tight, I thought minor tweaks made a big difference with my super-sensitive walnut-oiled Cornwall 1s, with their B2 crossovers. Little tweaks seemed to make big differences with some of their inherent flaws (including the crossover). When I upgraded to my classic Klipsch corner Khorns (AK2 crossovers), nothing irked me. The smoother, deeper frequency response has no major flaws. That doesnt mean that I dont want to improve the search for audio nirvana: the illusion of the 3D sonic holographic image in my living room. I am still investigating better CD player, pre-amplifiers, amplifiers, EQ, subwoofers and acoustic treatments. if you spend a lot more than 5 grand on a pair of speakers you will find your self having to buy cross overs Again, not true. Loudspeakers over 5K are very expensive in the audio world and rarely need major modifications like new crossovers. Investors in big ole horns here at the Klipsch forum are simply getting their maximum value out of older loudspeakers that need updating and have more capability than other more expensive models like Avant-garde Audios large bright horns. You can buy RF7s for a grand, spend a few hundred and get new custom crossovers that make the loudspeaker sound twice as good. You can buy really cheap loudspeakers, like my $10 Altec Lansing Model Ones from Goodwill, where the drivers and the crossovers need upgrading and still have cleaner, more accurate loudspeakers, with deeper bass, than the thin wall crap they sell at Best Buy. If you spend 5K on loudspeakers, you may find yourself spending more to improve your home movie and music reproduction system. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.