Fish Posted January 25, 2005 Share Posted January 25, 2005 I'm a 2 channel guy at heart,most of what I listen to is 2 ch.I cannot stand phony 5.1 like hall,stadium and the rest of that echo racket.But 5.1 when done properly can really be good,no better than 2ch or no worse,just a different experience.I can also tell you DSOTM on sacd,on a good and properly set up system is really something to hear,theres more than I ever heard before on the lp. Some older stuff also sounds great on 5.1,Steely Dan,Yes and some others,some really suck in 5.1,like Grateful Dead and Neil Young and some sound good both ways..The bottom line is 5.1 is great on some music and bad on others but you still have the option of hi-rez 2ch which is always great. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dodger Posted January 25, 2005 Share Posted January 25, 2005 ---------------- On 1/25/2005 1:37:13 PM garymd wrote: I think some of you missed my point. I was trying to say that I could understand why many of you go to the trouble of matching all your speakers and getting good gear to drive your multichannel recordings because, even though it didn't sound very good the way I had mine set up, I could hear the potential and wanted to give you guys credit for setting yours up properly. I KNOW MY SYSTEM IS SET UP POORLY FOR MULTICHANNEL RECORDINGS! Unless I move, I will never have the space in my family room to do this properly. Not just speakers, but the gear required. My downstairs system is for 2-channel only and will stay that way. Thank you for all your helpful responses. BTW - I have these DSOTM recordings: Original LP MFSL LP 200 gram LP reissue Original CD 25th Anniversary CD SACD Overkill? I think I'm missing the MFSL CD if one was ever made. ---------------- Gary, If it's of any help, I knew where you were coming from and what you meant. Careful reading showed that, your willingness to try again is another. He was giving a compliment. As was I. I'm the one that has the problem withit, but I do give each and everyone credit for your system and what you have put into it. dodger Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
garymd Posted January 25, 2005 Author Share Posted January 25, 2005 One of the reasons I tested this was to hear how they divided the sound into 5.1 on some familiar recordings. I was curious. I really didn't have time to calibrate my system as I was waiting for the cable guy to show up. I was scrambling just to find cables to set it up. I've collected all those DSOTM recordings over the years more as test subjects then anything else. Most of us are probably sick of this LP as it's been played to death on the radio and on our systems over the years. It's always been a good "show off the system" album and IS, IMO, one of the great rock albums (is it really rock?) of our generation. Allan - You'll probably hate it. Even LarryC bought a copy after reading reviews on the forum and I don't think its been played more than once in his home. It's an album almost everyone is familiar with so when you play it for a guest they usually have a point of reference from their own system. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
maxg Posted January 26, 2005 Share Posted January 26, 2005 "I think I'm missing the MFSL CD if one was ever made" There was. I have it. My DSOTM collection is: Vinyl Original - Greek Pressing Vinyl Original - French pressing Vinyl Original - Quadraphonic Vinyl Orignial - UK edition MFSL CD The Greek pressing is the best. Far better than even the MFSL vinyl 200 gramme recording that Tony has and even better than the US original that he also has. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
edwinr Posted January 26, 2005 Share Posted January 26, 2005 Multi channel certainly has some merit. I've got 5.1 in my upstairs system. But somehow I find listening to the same music in 2 channel SACD on my Klipschorns removes a haze from the music. It's easier to focus on what's going on. To do full justice to multi channel in my downstairs system is going to be horribly expensive. In my view, it's either done properly, or not at all. 2 Channel rules for me at the moment. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
minn_male42 Posted January 26, 2005 Share Posted January 26, 2005 ---------------- On 1/25/2005 1:53:55 PM Fish wrote: I'm a 2 channel guy at heart,most of what I listen to is 2 ch.I cannot stand phony 5.1 like hall,stadium and the rest of that echo racket.But 5.1 when done properly can really be good,no better than 2ch or no worse,just a different experience.I can also tell you DSOTM on sacd,on a good and properly set up system is really something to hear,theres more than I ever heard before on the lp. Some older stuff also sounds great on 5.1,Steely Dan,Yes and some others,some really suck in 5.1,like Grateful Dead and Neil Young and some sound good both ways..The bottom line is 5.1 is great on some music and bad on others but you still have the option of hi-rez 2ch which is always great. ---------------- it really does come down to the recordings.... great SACD recordings sound simply amazing in multichannel!!! buy almost anything from the telarc SACD catalog and you will hear some very wonderful sounds in multichannel http://www.telarc.com/sacd/all.asp?mscssid=QRXPU20JEF7M8HTFN4TGGGUGJUKQ4MH7&q=cbsa and it doesn't take a ton of money to set up a great multichannel system - but it does take some care in selecting components... IMHO - the auto eq / room correction feature on the better receivers can improve your multichannel sound immensely - it also improves movie soundtracks as well but the sound improvements are much more noticible on music sources The pioneer elite MCACC feature is in it's third generation and the Yamaha system is in it's second generation. The H/K "easy-set" feature has had it's share of problems and doesn't seem to be up to par in comparison..... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
fini Posted January 26, 2005 Share Posted January 26, 2005 ---------------- On 1/25/2005 1:53:12 PM Allan Songer wrote: You must like this LP a little bit, eh Gary? I guess I'll have to give it a go some time. I remember when the record came out and everyone seemed to be smoking A LOT of pot and listening very carefully! I didn't "get it" then but with 30 years under my belt I might have half a chance. ---------------- Of pot smoking?? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Q-Man Posted January 26, 2005 Share Posted January 26, 2005 I've been saying this for a long tome now. SACD and DVD-Audio on a system with the same full range speakers all around is great. This is one of the reasons that I went to the trouble of putting in a Klipschorn for my center channel. After getting this right, I felt like throwing away all my CD's. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
maxg Posted January 26, 2005 Share Posted January 26, 2005 ---------------- On 1/26/2005 11:27:33 AM Q-Man wrote: I've been saying this for a long tome now. SACD and DVD-Audio on a system with the same full range speakers all around is great. This is one of the reasons that I went to the trouble of putting a in Klipschorn for my center channel. After getting this right, I felt like throwing away all my CD's. ---------------- Ditto - but replace SACD/DVDa with vinyl. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Parrot Posted January 26, 2005 Share Posted January 26, 2005 You listen to vinyl in multi-channel? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
maxg Posted January 26, 2005 Share Posted January 26, 2005 ---------------- On 1/26/2005 11:43:39 AM paulieparrot wrote: You listen to vinyl in multi-channel? ---------------- Yes - 2 of them to be precise. Only Allan listens in mono. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
garymd Posted January 26, 2005 Author Share Posted January 26, 2005 ---------------- On 1/26/2005 11:45:53 AM maxg wrote: Only Allan listens in mono. ---------------- Wrong! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
maxg Posted January 26, 2005 Share Posted January 26, 2005 Gary, When you say "wrong" do you mean you actually listen to mono recordings on a single speaker setup or do you listen to mono recordings over a stereo setup like I do? Lots of people listen to mono recordings on stereo - I have dozens, maybe hundreds of mono recordings but I havent listened to these on a single speaker setup since about 1969. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
maxg Posted January 26, 2005 Share Posted January 26, 2005 2501 posts! well 2502 with this one - I think I just made answering machine status - or I have been an answering machine for ages and just noticed - never mind - carry on. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ben. Posted January 26, 2005 Share Posted January 26, 2005 I guess it technically would dual mono, then. I think he does what I do. Flip the switch on the pre to mono for some records, but listen through both speakers. I s'pose I could turn one speaker all the way down... I've toywed with the idea of getting a mono rig set up. I have a homemade University corner horn, c. 1956. It works fine, but I have nowhere in the house to put it. Plus, wifey would strangle me dead if I even brought it up. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
garymd Posted January 26, 2005 Author Share Posted January 26, 2005 Correct Ben. I switch the pre to mono and listen through both speakers. Same way Allan does it as well as just about everyone I know who owns mono LPs (and CDs). Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Allan Songer Posted January 26, 2005 Share Posted January 26, 2005 If your channels are balanced correctly you end up with one central image (why do we refer to audio in visual terms?). Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
boomac Posted January 26, 2005 Share Posted January 26, 2005 ---------------- On 1/26/2005 1:08:15 PM Allan Songer wrote: If your channels are balanced correctly you end up with one central image (why do we refer to audio in visual terms?). ---------------- You tellin' me you can't visually see the instruments Allan? Thats about the only way, for most of us, to experience these sessions. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
sfogg Posted January 26, 2005 Share Posted January 26, 2005 "If your channels are balanced correctly you end up with one central image" With comb filtering you wouldn't have if it was actually played back on a true mono rig with one speaker. When you are listening to your mono records like this compared how it sounds through two speakers vs if you turn off on of them or crank your balance knob all the way to one side. Pay particular attention to the vocals. Shawn Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Allan Songer Posted January 26, 2005 Share Posted January 26, 2005 I've done that. Too distracting for me from where I sit and listen most of the time. A pure mono rig would be best but life is full of compromises. 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.