KVR Audio

BONES · Post by **BONES** » Fri Dec 03, 2004 10:57 pm

Maybe in an mp3 kind of way but I am yet to hear a home theatre system I would want to listen to music on - my cheap-arse computer speakers [$60] sound better than a $500 home theatre.

tetraplan · Post by **tetraplan** » Sat Dec 04, 2004 12:27 am

BONES wrote:Maybe in an mp3 kind of way [...]

You mean this?

Groet, Erik

P.T. · Post by **P.T.** » Sat Dec 04, 2004 5:45 am

Hopefullt it will be as successful as Quadraphonic was in the 70's.

greekgoddj · Post by **greekgoddj** » Thu Apr 28, 2005 8:54 pm

jtxx000 wrote:I don't and I don't see the point for music. We don't have 5 ears, do we?

Perhaps you should read a bit about how we perceive ears. According your statment...the two speakers for stereo should not be position in front of the listener with a 60 degree spread, but on the exact left of your heard and exact right of ur head, each speaker facing an ear.

Daniel78 · Post by **Daniel78** » Thu Apr 28, 2005 9:14 pm

Did audiophiles say the same things about Stereo when it was first introduced? (just asking, i'm not old enought to remember

). I can imagine that probably seemed really gimicky at the time.

I do agree that the listening experience could be very inconvenient in practice - a surround sound room vs a nice pair of haedphones... hmmmmm...

I suspect however, that 3d positioning in stereo will become more advanced, and more believable (i haven't heard anything up till now thats been very convincing), and eventually we'll have realistic sounding 3d audio from headphones ( i'd imagine accurately simulating 3d on non-specially placed stereo speakers would be more tricky)

But what do i know? just guessing really

greekgoddj · Post by **greekgoddj** » Thu Apr 28, 2005 9:20 pm

you can already get some great spatial results from using 2 speakers...check out stereo dipole..the problem is how large and stable the sweet spot is. that is where more speakers make a difference, even though I am not refering to 5.1

proletkult · Post by **proletkult** » Thu Apr 28, 2005 9:26 pm

If I waqs writing to picture and the producer had the budget..definately. Any other situation..no chance.

Hunter · Post by **Hunter** » Fri Apr 29, 2005 10:23 am

Yes, will think about a cheap surround system this year, as long as I can integrate it with monitors + decent hifi speakers at the back, somehow.

kilroy · Post by **kilroy** » Sat Apr 30, 2005 4:27 am

BONES wrote:The majority of DVD players do a shithouse job of playing audio and the majority of home theatre systems are in no way designed for accurate, or even entertaining, reproduction of music. To get the same sound quality from a 5.1 system that I have in my Au$900 stereo system I would need to spend around 10 times that amount. I'm sorry but I will always take quality over glossy gimmicks, that's why I use ORION.

Well, here you go then...me and BONES...sharing the same head space.

*Totally* agree. The DACs in most commercial multi channel players are pretty horrid. I find the system to system transposition of surround mixes to be waaay more erratic than for typical stereo mixes. Most folk's homes are barely adequate for stereo listening without adding the complex multi channel environment issues into the fray. In order to get the same smash out of a surround mix you really have to hammer the front channels, to the degree that whatever is left going on behind you eventually just gets annoying.

And puh-leeez...what's up with all the (wrong sounding) bass??!! It is all over the map from system to system...just an absolute nightmare to take into account when you are mixing for this medium.

I suppose surround can be jolly good fun for movies...but for music, I can't help feeling that is just a great way to market more music to the home theater lot that already have the systems in place.

TVD · Post by **TVD** » Sat Apr 30, 2005 4:40 am

BONES wrote:Maybe in an mp3 kind of way but I am yet to hear a home theatre system I would want to listen to music on - my cheap-arse computer speakers [$60] sound better than a $500 home theatre.

My very affordable Roland MA-8 Monitor Speakers are just dandy!

TVD · Post by **TVD** » Sat Apr 30, 2005 4:42 am

Kriminal wrote:Would you or do you use Surround Sound in your trax.

I'd be interested to hear yout opininons, what kind of music, etc etc.

Im not talking about film scores, just general music.

Thanks

I'm old-school. I use stereo (2 speakers).

TVD · Post by **TVD** » Sat Apr 30, 2005 4:47 am

nuffink wrote:Fantasound
Quadraphonic
QS
SQ
CD-4
QUAD-8
Ambisonics
Dolby Surround
Dolby Pro Logic
Dolby Digital
DTS

BUY MORE SPEAKERS. BUY MORE AMPS. BUY MORE EARS.

CONSUME.

They've been throwing it at Joe public since the 1940's.
This time he's listening with all his 5.1 ears.

Most of the dance/hip-hop clubs don't even have anything digital but CD turntables (with only Dolby Digital Stereo....not 5.1).

kritikon · Post by **kritikon** » Sat Apr 30, 2005 5:33 am

Surround sound for music is the equivalent of fluffy dice in your car. Made out of velvet and ermine. Very expensive fluffy dice....

I suppose if I had cash falling out of my pockets, I might use it for fun, but otherwise see no point in it.

I would, however, have a large 3rd ear grafted to my back if I could....although I think I'd also have one put on my chest just to even the front/rear balance out a bit. I'd also have a few extra eyeballs sewn in somewhere a bit more mobile than my head...fingertips sounds good, but I'd keep poking myself in the eyes when I'm typing or playing. So I'm not sure where I'd have the eyes...I quite like the idea of antennae on top of my head...like what snails have....

Hmmmmmm......I need to go and do something productive methinks

cyanogen · Post by **cyanogen** » Sat Apr 30, 2005 6:40 am

Forget surround sound. Whatever happened to Smell-o-vision?

Surround Sound. Yes or No?