Thunderous overhead surround!

http://img.tesco.com/pi/entertainment/DVD/LB/754381_DV_L_B.jpg http://img.tesco.com/pi/entertainment/DVD/LF/754381_DV_L_F.jpg

With tonight’s showing of the Oliver Stones dramatization of the events of September 11th 2001 with thousands of soils still trapped within the two towers one after another each of them came thundering down to a heap of twisted steel and concrete. :(

You can hear the building buckling under tons of pressure until it rains thunderously overhead down the sides, “McLonghlin” gives the order two his men to run towards the elevator shaft fast!

Distant sounds of screaming of employees running around, it’s a disturbing and distorting sound to hear! Hard to imagine but (Soundelux) have created one memorable sound mix, right down to the rushing air of implosion!

http://gallery.avsforum.com/data/506/3677JBL_Control_1_height_surround_overhead_array.jpg

Overhead surround is an easy thing to set-up as well as adding dimension to the surround field, of looking to the sides and above you, creates enormous suspense. So just as me what home cinema sound system you have and I’ll give a few guidelines to getting it set-up.

http://gallery.avsforum.com/data/506/3677IMAG0023-med.jpg

http://gallery.avsforum.com/data/506/3677IMAG0024-med.jpg

...what?

good God! how many surround speakers do you have?

I think with good speakers, calibrated and set up correctly you would get the same effect from either 2 or 4 surround speakers.

you are obviously single or have the most understanding wife ever

Before retiring from ATT Labs "JJ" was working on a similar project. Very few people heard it and none said much. Seems it was at least 11 channels & speakers in a very dead room.
Don't know if this link still works.
xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
The link is dead.
But he is James D. (JJ) Johnston, now with Microsoft.

Word.

After listening very closely and looking at the reactions of Nicolas Cage’s character the eyes looking upwards towards the ceiling and realizing all I need to do here is simply re-plugging of the four-channel surround array.

So I re-plugged the outputs for (surround matrix) and assigned it to the x4 JBL control 1.

The 2x JBL control 1 that are placed above I re-plugged the outputs using the centre back mode and assigned them for (height surrounds) and it really worked knocked my socks off it did. I was looking above to the sides the fronts the heights it was a confusing sequence and worked very effectively.

Most you with Dolby-EX would have to add matching surrounds the same as used for sidewalls centre back for timber matching reasons.

Also you will have no sound from the centre back that, so this is why I used a Dolby Pro-Logic decoder (separate) for the past 9 years now. It’s just got one additional output which still adds mood and tension.

So looks like some of you will have a lot of re-plugging to do here, get separate Dolby Pro-Logic decoder from a second-hand shop of if you still happen to have one laying around then, well re-plug those surrounds using the RCA phone and send the inputs to the Dolby Pro-Logic decoder.

Use the internal amplifications centre back output for dts-ES and assign that to a new array of surrounds placed at the back, and turn of the Dolby Pro-Logic decoder when playing dts-ES.

I know sounds really confusing, but ain’t it great. :cool:

1-2-3 confusion

Seriously, any sound could have been routed to any channel, but you wouldn't know with that daisy-chain fire hazard you call a speaker array.

. . . I think he's trying to create his own "World Trade Center" catastrophe.

very nice!

I don't know how you can bring yourself to post those pictures, I would be embarrassed just knowing I had a room that looked like that...

I don't know how you can bring yourself to post those pictures, I would be embarrassed just knowing I had a room that looked like that...


Wow, way to show your colors man. I say if the guy wants to experiment with his audio gear then let him. It shouldn't matter the condition of the room he's using to do so, not all of us have big houses and well paying jobs. You never know, that may just be an unfinished room or something.

I see no need to slam the guy like that. *retracted* Have a good one.

Wow, way to show your colors man. I say if the guy wants to experiment with his audio gear then let him. It shouldn't matter the condition of the room he's using to do so, not all of us have big houses and well paying jobs. You never know, that may just be an unfinished room or something.

I see no need to slam the guy like that. You sir, get my @$$hole of the day award (usually reserved for office co-workers). Have a good one.


You should do some re search on the guy & than you would understand my comment. He has been on a couple other forums with his babbling & horrid pictures. I have no problems with someone experimenting & enjoying what they have, but this guy is a freaking nut case.

And I don't have a big house or some really good paying job. In fact it has taken me about six years to get my set up to where it is now.

Wow, way to show your colors man. I say if the guy wants to experiment with his audio gear then let him. It shouldn't matter the condition of the room he's using to do so, not all of us have big houses and well paying jobs. You never know, that may just be an unfinished room or something.

I see no need to slam the guy like that. You sir, get my @$$hole of the day award (usually reserved for office co-workers). Have a good one.

So its OK for you to call a poster a @$$hole but its not OK for him to render an opinion about come kid's abortion of a room? Sure the kid can do what he wants, and if he wants to hang dozens of tiny speakers from hooks, more power to him but when he posts pics then he is asking for comments. My comment concurs with the guy you swore at. That room is an abortion.

So its OK for you to call a poster a @$$hole but its not OK for him to render an opinion about come kid's abortion of a room? Sure the kid can do what he wants, and if he wants to hang dozens of tiny speakers from hooks, more power to him but when he posts pics then he is asking for comments. My comment concurs with the guy you swore at. That room is an abortion.

You would be correct. I had no right to do so. maybe a little more research into the poster as mentioned above would've been wise before i posted that response. My apologies Sonytheater.

JBLsound4645,

There's really no way that setp can sound really good. Consider giving up on multiple tiny speakers and getting used movie-theater JBL speakers. Start with a single pair and work your way up. That way your nickname will make sense!

See http://www.avsforum.com/avs-vb/showthread.php?t=694822&page=1&pp=30

You would be correct. I had no right to do so. maybe a little more research into the poster as mentioned above would've been wise before i posted that response. My apologies Sonytheater.

No need to apologize, I have thick skin. I try to keep my mouth most of the time but I have seen this guy post a couple places & most of the time he just seems as if he is trolling. I wish I could remember the first forum I seen him on it was unbelievable. He ended up getting a couple of his threads locked up because all his ignorant babbling. Some of the things he comes up with is just amazing & beyond anything I have ever seen or heard anyone in their right mind do.
At the very least if your going to have such a mess of stuff try to organize it so it looks half way decent.

You'd have to research the The Empire Leicester Square cinema. That is his inspiration and what he is trying to recreate, but he is missing the point. There is a HUGE difference between a cinema that seats over 800 people and his small room.

Research proved that in most cases in the home, single speakers per channel for the surrounds worked better than arrays. If he wants it to sound more like a cinema, then he needs to visit the THX (http://www.thx.com/) web site, get some fresh ideas and employ dipoles for his surrounds.

Mark

I understand why some want to make fun of this room. But I remember when I was a kid in the late 1970s and was just starting my obsessive hobby of stereo equipment and Home Theater. I wish I had pictures of my 19" black and white TV that I had when I was 13. I pulled out the speaker wires and hooked it up to my JC Penney HTIB (this was before that acronym was coined). My next step was to take apart my parents console stereo that had 12" woofers and make new boxes. I thought the added bass kicked ass. Now that was ghetto. LOL, we have all been there before.

This room rocks - yea it could use some paint. You could even color coordinate your wall treatments. When I was 15, I would have loved to have 100 surround speakers - but they hadn't been invented yet - at least not for consumers. Look at the way he incorporates the surrounds into the door. That is ingenuity. Keep it up JBL and blow the socks off your mum, dad and neighbors!!!

Nice for a teenager.... but not in this case. Methinks he's a tad over his teen years! :)
http://www.avsforum.com/avs-vb/showthread.php?t=799369

Nice for a teenager.... but not in this case. Methinks he's a tad over his teen years! :)
http://www.avsforum.com/avs-vb/showthread.php?t=799369


It would appear so. Interesting that he hasn't responded. He posted those pics for a reason. Reason being that he wanted to get a response and he has. He has to know what his room looks like and he has to realize that its not the norm. He has the right to do what he wants. He has the right to decorate like he wants. He may be a good natured guy and the salt of the earth, but none of that stops the fact that he is also a nutcase! And I mean that in a good way.

Interesting that he hasn't responded.
A speaker fell and hit him on the head. :D

The interesting point is that the "height" channel has been discussed many times using matrix decoders to extract the information called a "difference" from the surrounds.

The point remains that no cinema (or dubbing stage) has "height" channel speakers, so any "difference" encoded into the surrounds is really coincidence. It is meant to be heard from the LS/RS speakers as diffuse sound and it may appear to come from above...

If I was going to "change" (he might call it enhance) the way the soundtrack was decoded, I would opt for dual matrix decoders to recreate a system similar to the TMH 10.2 system. By processing the FL/LS and the FR/RS, the system could add 4 (2 sets of stereo) channels to the existing 7.1 system we already have...

Mark

This is outstanding...

Please stop bashing this guy, I want to see more pictures. I haven't had this much entertainment with my morning coffee for weeks!

Completely misguided, but hilarious!

I was trying to find a subtle way to put this, but I could not. You guys are showing all the awarness, concern and care of frat boys after a keg or so, or teens or junior high kids or other inadequately socialized groups. :rolleyes:

This thread is overdue for lockdown.

This is great. I wonder how often he gets out of his mothers house

I was trying to find a subtle way to put this, but I could not. You guys are showing all the awarness, concern and care of frat boys after a keg or so, or teens or junior high kids or other inadequately socialized groups. :rolleyes:

This thread is overdue for lockdown.
It's Friday!

it’s a disturbing and distorting sound to hear!

I'll can imagine :eek:

of looking to the sides and above you, creates enormous suspense.

Nothing like speakers dangling above you to create enormous suspense :)

Nice for a teenager.... but not in this case. Methinks he's a tad over his teen years! :)
http://www.avsforum.com/avs-vb/showthread.php?t=799369

See where I get the nut case from. How many others have started a post about moving their sub, with pictures of them doing it & than cleaning it. I've seen some proud guys with pics of their DIY stuff for scale or just to show off, but none yet of them moving & cleaning them.

Isn't she a Beauty... :rolleyes:

It's Friday!
Then let's go and knock back a couple of cold ones. :D

See where I get the nut case from. How many others have started a post about moving their sub, with pictures of them doing it & than cleaning it. I've seen some proud guys with pics of their DIY stuff for scale or just to show off, but none yet of them moving & cleaning them.

Isn't she a Beauty... :rolleyes:
Oh, $h!t. I didn't even look at that thread until just now.

May be over his teen years; still lives at home with Mom. :D

Yeah... kind of ironic that some posters have been quick to criticize the sarcasm without really looking into the history of the OP. ;)

trust me... I'm well beyond a frat boy on a kegger. Or... an inadequately socialized group? <scratching head>

Yeah... kind of ironic that some posters have been quick to criticize the sarcasm without really looking into the history of the OP. ;)

trust me... I'm well beyond a frat boy on a kegger. Or... an inadequately socialized group? <scratching head>

I wasn't going to do this, but an irresistible impulse overcame me.

Would be all be laughing at him if this was not pictures on the internet, but I guy we knew and who was in the room with us?

As for his JBL woofer being a beauty, well I've heard sane people say that about a Corvette, a sailboat, a railroad engine and a new deck in the back yard.

Sarcasm--remarks that mean the opposite of what they seem to say and are intended to mock or deride. Mid-16th century. Directly or via French < late Latin sarcasmus < Greek sarkazein "tear flesh" < sarx "flesh"

Anyway, time to get back to waxing the woof..., er, car.

Anyway, time to get back to waxing the woof..., er, car.

Ya, Um your not going to post pictures of that like him are you ?

On a side note if the guy was in the same room with me I would still have the same things to say. Hes a freaking nut & hopefully no one takes his advice seriously. I had to work with a similar guy recently that was "supposedly" running for Mayor in our town. First thing on his agenda if he got it was to shut down a local donut shop because he thought it was dirty. Funny thing he would also tell you he was a former Cop, than a FBI agent ,been in the military for over 20 years, was a spy when he was in the military, & that the government has implanted several super hi-tech chips within his body. All the wile the guy pushes carts for a living looks like his mother still dresses him, & demands that people take him seriously :rolleyes:

Would be all be laughing at him if this was not pictures on the internet, ...

yes... whether he's 15 or 50. :rolleyes:
Why do you take a personal interest in defense of this individual?

yes... whether he's 15 or 50. :rolleyes:
Why do you take a personal interest in defense of this individual?
I don't know. No windmills nearby I suppose. ;)

I think the guy knows his setup is a bit peculiar and that his pictures are probably a great source of amusement for all of us, himself included.

I don't know. No windmills nearby I suppose. ;)

Ah!
So are you Sancho Panza or Dulcinea? :D

Ah!
So are you Sancho Panza or Dulcinea? :D
Well there is a third choice, the omission of which, some might construe as insulting. But of course you and I are above that sort of thing. There is though, something to be said for Dulcinea
http://port.hu/picture/instance_1/62407_1.jpg

[B]All of you people, who are criticizing this individual, don't realize that you are part of this so called tin-can space continuum. Why are you complaining about an individual, who is using his imagination to create a reality of his own making? Don't you think there are other realities besides your own? Or do you all think that anyone who is willing to share their thoughts; along with pictures, not elitist enough for you? I feel that those complaining about this individual are nothing but automatons trained to be just that. I'm of the opinion that the forums on this Url was created for individuals who wanted to share, and help other people of kindred spirit.

[B]All of you people, who are criticizing this individual, don't realize that you are part of this so called tin-can space continuum. Why are you complaining about an individual, who is using his imagination to create a reality of his own making? Don't you think there are other realities besides your own? Or do you all think that anyone who is willing to share their thoughts; along with pictures, not elitist enough for you? I feel that those complaining about this individual are nothing but automatons trained to be just that. I'm of the opinion that the forums on this Url was created for individuals who wanted to share, and help other people of kindred spirit.


We are not complaining about him. We are making fun of him. Two very different things. So, in this politically correct world we live in, where nobody is supposed to object to anything for fear of giving offense, it could actually be argued that we are, in fact, doing the opposite of what you accuse us of doing. We are not conforming, we are not automatons doing what we were trained to do (be polically correct) we are anarchists who throw caution to the wind, go out on the limb and state what we really feel. He is a nutcase. He has the right but he is still a nutcase. But I mean that in a good way. Some say I am off the wall as well. I take it for what its worth, laugh at myself and continue on in my own nutty way. So should you. It seems that YOU are the conforming one. You who cast stones are really conforming to what is perceived to be the opposite of norm. But you in your confirmation of being different you really don't know what normal is so you are just lost in the universe blabbing nonsense, pretending that you are different when in reality you are the norm. See ya... :eek:

All of you people, who are criticizing this individual, don't realize that you are part of this so called tin-can space continuum. Why are you complaining about an individual, who is using his imagination to create a reality of his own making? .

LOL... first post and being prematurely critical of others without any background research IMO. What do YOU know about the individual or his previous posts/threads? I have a can opener if you need one. :D

We are not complaining about him. We are making fun of him. Two very different things. So, in this politically correct world we live in, where nobody is supposed to object to anything for fear of giving offense, it could actually be argued that we are, in fact, doing the opposite of what you accuse us of doing. We are not conforming, we are not automatons doing what we were trained to do (be polically correct) we are anarchists who throw caution to the wind, go out on the limb and state what we really feel. He is a nutcase. He has the right but he is still a nutcase. But I mean that in a good way. Some say I am off the wall as well. I take it for what its worth, laugh at myself and continue on in my own nutty way. So should you. It seems that YOU are the conforming one. You who cast stones are really conforming to what is perceived to be the opposite of norm. But you in your confirmation of being different you really don't know what normal is so you are just lost in the universe blabbing nonsense, pretending that you are different when in reality you are the norm. See ya... :eek:


Well Said...

All of you people, who are criticizing this individual, don't realize that you are part of this so called tin-can space continuum. Why are you complaining about an individual, who is using his imagination to create a reality of his own making? Don't you think there are other realities besides your own? Or do you all think that anyone who is willing to share their thoughts; along with pictures, not elitist enough for you? I feel that those complaining about this individual are nothing but automatons trained to be just that. I'm of the opinion that the forums on this Url was created for individuals who wanted to share, and help other people of kindred spirit.
STFU :D

Well...I see that I stirred up a hornets nest by posting. That's as it should be. First of all, I'm not part of the PC crowd, I'm not part of the normal crowd, I don't need a can opener, I won't STFU, and I've been a revisionist since the age of 11; which more than qualifies me as a radical; because I said no to a so-called higher authority. So, no matter how, or what you think,and practice your philosophy, I just hope that you recognize everybody as individuals who are into doing, and creating their own reality. I would call that creating the life that you really want.

I came to this forum because of the vast knowledge base that's available to everyone, and to expand my knowledge of integrating the convergence of stereo, and HT components.

I came to this forum because of the vast knowledge base that's available to everyone, and to expand my knowledge of integrating the convergence of stereo, and HT components.

I have been into HT since 1990, so I'm now in my 17th year and still learning. What I have discovered over that time is that there are many ways to this, some are more correct than others and therefore yield better end results.

What he is trying to achieve is spaciousness and envelopment in a small room. However, what he has done is not one of the best ways to accomplish this...

Mark

Well...I see that I stirred up a hornets nest by posting. That's as it should be. First of all, I'm not part of the PC crowd, I'm not part of the normal crowd, I don't need a can opener, I won't STFU, and I've been a revisionist since the age of 11; which more than qualifies me as a radical; because I said no to a so-called higher authority. So, no matter how, or what you think,and practice your philosophy, I just hope that you recognize everybody as individuals who are into doing, and creating their own reality. I would call that creating the life that you really want.

I came to this forum because of the vast knowledge base that's available to everyone, and to expand my knowledge of integrating the convergence of stereo, and HT components.


I disagree with you, as I posted earlier. I think that in your perceived radicalism you are in reality just joining a different group think and that you are even worse off than those you ridicule as you pretend that you are different while you really are a conformist. You are just conforming to a smaller set of group values, but don't mislead yourself. Its still a group just the same. So if you don't have one, go buy yourself a can opener because you need one just as much as the rest of us. Unless your completly delusional. And we assumed that the OP was an individual. Just a little nutty. See that's the problem with the particular herd you joined, they see everybody outside their herd as another single herd and react accordingly. It never dawns on them that there are a lot of herds. All different. And that most everybody is part of one. Even you. Hell, I was marching in the street, acting high and mightly about how different I was and how conformist everybody else was years before you were probably even born. But when I grew up, I realized that I had just conformed to a different set of rule. Those that my particular group thought were different but we weren't. From our communes, to our acid, to our hair, to our philosophy, we were really only pretending and never realized that we were just as brainwashed as everybody else. Just following different rules. Wake up and think about it. Stop pretending to be different and really be different. Stop preaching about how noncomforist you are and really be nonconformist. If you really go off away from the herd, shi*, you wouldn't be at this site or on the internet, embracing technology anyhow. What a phony. And this is not a hornet's nest, I'm not angry, or stirred up, just trying to enlighten a sheep that thinks he's not.

Given that Jusbegood has only made 2 posts, I wonder if he is our OP incognito?

Mark

everybody as individuals who are into doing, and creating their own reality. ... But, you're not God. :confused:


Tim

Given that Jusbegood has only made 2 posts, I wonder if he is our OP incognito?

Mark

I think his punctuation and thoughts are a little better realized...

I think his punctuation and thoughts are a little better realized...

Yeah good point. Also he might not have been able to help himself and attach yet another series of images. I can't link to the other site, but now he is in the process of upgrading his power amps. He is going to need another room soon just for the gear - he was on about using 8 of these new amps :eek:

Whilst I'd hate to pay his power bill, at least with all that gear turned on, his heating bill will be low :D

Mark

Well, if he gets the right amp, he'll be able to get to number 11 on his volume control... :D

I wish he'd just listen and lose some of the surrounds. Anyway in his latest post he also reveals his intention to create a quasi SDDS system (5 screen channels) using two more matrix decoders, and he has already added two more matching LCRs to his front stage...

I applaud his persistence, but wish he would take on some advice from the forums he posts on. It has been already documented on this site why this will not work correctly.

Life is too short to learn from all of the mistakes yourself - and taking free advice a damn site cheaper too :)

Mark

This looks like a dorm room. I can't believe how old this guy is.....looks like a concoction created by my 14 year old brother...except for the pink walls

I wonder if Adam was as crazy as you before he got Eve....You definitely need a woman---

... But, you're not God. :confused:
Tim


This looks like a dorm room. I can't believe how old this guy is.....looks like a concoction created by my 14 year old brother...except for the pink walls

I wonder if Adam was as crazy as you before he got Eve....You definitely need a woman---

What happened. Is this the AVS forum or did it change to a religious forum while I was sleeping? What in the world does god or adam or eve or any other tale have to do with anything? (rhetorical question, no need to answer) :confused:

It concerns me that you get your panties in a wad over an analogy to Adam and Eve or the mention of God in a post. Makes you look like some kind of anti-Christ liberal wacko.

Do you get pissed every day you pull money out of your wallet and it says "In God we Trust"?

By the way...God has everything to do with anything --

:eek:

I'm mad, I just got the Onkyo Sr605 receiver and it won't do a 14.1 surround, it only will a 5.1 or a 7.1 :)

WoW Those pics of that room..
Remind me of a setup @ age 15
I seen, But not my room.
:) :) :)

It concerns me that you get your panties in a wad over an analogy to Adam and Eve or the mention of God in a post. Makes you look like some kind of anti-Christ liberal wacko.

Do you get pissed every day you pull money out of your wallet and it says "In God we Trust"?

By the way...God has everything to do with anything --

My panties aren't in a wad. I'm not upset. I'm not pissed and I didn't call you or anybody else names or personally insult you. Interesting to me that "so called" people of God are some of the most viscious, and unforging, people I have met. Its easy to post references to God, its quite another to actually live by those scriptures, and your post proves that,while you can testify all you want, you are NOT a man of God and make no attempt to live by scripture.

You were the one getting upset that God was being mentioned...FYI

...WOW!!! :eek:

This is outstanding...

Please stop bashing this guy, I want to see more pictures. I haven't had this much entertainment with my morning coffee for weeks!
Same here

I don't think he's been around for months.

I don't think he's been around for months.
I already told you, he was critically injured when a speaker fell and hit him on the head. :rolleyes:

"Thunderous overhead surround!" must have been too thunderous?

See where I get the nut case from. How many others have started a post about moving their sub, with pictures of them doing it & than cleaning it. I've seen some proud guys with pics of their DIY stuff for scale or just to show off, but none yet of them moving & cleaning them.

Isn't she a Beauty... :rolleyes:

His gear creates his reality man, back off. :D When he's waxing and buffing his woofer, I wonder what he really thinks he's waxing. :eek:

I wonder if he set the camera on auto and then got into position. :rolleyes:

I have been using use a CS-3X Jr in my bedroom test system for quite some time and it derives overhead sound quite nicely. I have a 7.1 + 4 ceiling mounted in a 2 ft square pattern directly over the listening area.


I like it so much I am going to implement it in my main HT as soon as I get another amp for it.

I was also thinking that something like this Spherical Speaker Array might make for the optimum overhead channel speaker. What to you think?

Spherical Speaker Array (http://www.engadget.com/2007/05/06/spherical-speaker-array-provides-blaring-ball-of-sound/)

http://www.blogsmithmedia.com/www.engadget.com/media/2007/05/5-5-07-sphere_speaker.jpg

I wonder if he set the camera on auto and then got into position.No! Of course, his Mom took the pictures! :D

The Robb Report Home Entertainment and Design magazine had an article on the Parasound Halo C2 and overhead effects channels, complete with settings, a couple of years back. They thought it was cool for movies but found it awesome for music. Pretty much opposite of what they expected.

BTW, BIG subs in small rooms is pretty cool.

I have been using use a CS-3X Jr in my bedroom test system for quite some time and it derives overhead sound quite nicely. I have a 7.1 + 4 ceiling mounted in a 2 ft square pattern directly over the listening area.


I like it so much I am going to implement it in my main HT as soon as I get another amp for it.

I was also thinking that something like this Spherical Speaker Array might make for the optimum overhead channel speaker. What to you think?

Spherical Speaker Array (http://www.engadget.com/2007/05/06/spherical-speaker-array-provides-blaring-ball-of-sound/)

http://www.blogsmithmedia.com/www.engadget.com/media/2007/05/5-5-07-sphere_speaker.jpg

Interesting to say the least. It looks like the very first BOSE speaker where Amar was trying to prove his theory of the "spaciousness effect" of reflected sound energy.

The main problem I see with using a CX3jr for extraction of height surround from the LS and RS is that the new height surround channel will essentially be mono, even though the CX3jr does offer separate left and right EXTRA channels.

I would like to hear from someone that has tried a pair of these connected to Front Left and Surround Left (unit 1), and Front Right and Surround Right (unit 2).

Each pair of channels then can create 4 new channels on each side of the room - Front Left, Surround Left, Left Wide and Left Height. The same would be created on the right. The result is stereo separation of these extra channels including the wider in phases channel to handle the phantom that are mixed, but we don't hear as intended between the screen channels and the surround channels. We don't hear them as intended because of the shape of our ears. Replace the phantom with a real speaker, and the rules change...

Mark

Interesting to say the least. It looks like the very first BOSE speaker where Amar was trying to prove his theory of the "spaciousness effect" of reflected sound energy.

The main problem I see with using a CX3jr for extraction of height surround from the LS and RS is that the new height surround channel will essentially be mono, even though the CX3jr does offer separate left and right EXTRA channels.

I would like to hear from someone that has tried a pair of these connected to Front Left and Surround Left (unit 1), and Front Right and Surround Right (unit 2).


Edit:
Each pair of channels then can create 4 new channels on each side of the room - Front Left, Surround Left, Left Wide and Left Height. The same would be created on the right. The result is stereo separation of these extra channels including the wider in phases channel to handle the phantom that are mixed, but we don't hear as intended between the screen channels and the surround channels. We don't hear them as intended because of the shape of our ears. Replace the phantom with a real speaker, and the rules change...

Mark

That is a very interesting idea, you would not only create left and right overhead channels, you could create front wide left and right channels similar to the Sunfire's "Side-Axis" channels in their Theatre Grand.

I might just have to get another CX3jr and experiment with it and see. I was planning all along to upgrade my receiver to a Theatre Grand with full intent on using the side axis channels but a second CX3jr would be considerably cheaper for the time being.

The overhead channels on the CX3jr are called SP1 and SP2.

So if I understand what your saying, I run two boxes with front left and left surround in on one box and front right and surround right in on box two, then the SP1 out on box one would be the wide left and the SP2 out on box one would be the overhead left. Likewise with box two, the SP1 out would be right wide and SP2 out would be the overhead correct?

The only problem I see with this is it might make calibration a bit tricky otherwise sounds a like a real good idea.

Edit: I ordered a second CX3jr to test this out, only cost $69.00 plus shipping, so plenty inexpensive to test out anyway.

That is a very interesting idea, you would not only create left and right overhead channels, you could create front wide left and right channels similar to the Sunfire's "Side-Axis" channels in their Theatre Grand.
Exactly, it keeps the extra channels in stereo pairs

I might just have to get another CX3jr and experiment with it and see. I was planning all along to upgrade my receiver to a Theatre Grand with full intent on using the side axis channels but a second CX3jr would be considerably cheaper for the time being.

The overhead channels on the CX3jr are called SP1 and SP2.

And does it offer 2 outputs decorrelated for stereo or mono?

So if I understand what your saying, I run two boxes with front left and left surround in on one box and front right and surround right in on box two, then the SP1 out on box one would be the wide left and the SP2 out on box one would be the overhead left. Likewise with box two, the SP1 out would be right wide and SP2 out would be the overhead correct?

The only problem I see with this is it might make calibration a bit tricky otherwise sounds a like a real good idea.

Yes your right on the mark. I believe that is what Tom Holman also did with his 10.2 system - take a 6.1 (7.1 is essentially the same, based on program) feed and create 4 additional channels in stereo pairs - and his layout makes perfect sense.

These units are supposed to have their own built in test gens, so I would calibrate your system in pass mode first, then activate the two boxes to level match their extra channel out puts. It might take a bit of time, but I think it will well worth it in the end...

Edit: I ordered a second CX3jr to test this out, only cost $69.00 plus shipping, so plenty inexpensive to test out anyway.

WOW, I'm tempted to try this my self :) I'm going to google that product now.
Do you happen to have a link? My google skills suck at best...

EDIT - It appears it was much easier to find after all :)

CS-3X Jr (http://www.smartdev.com/cs3xjr.html)

Mark

The main problem I see with using a CX3jr for extraction of height surround from the LS and RS is that the new height surround channel will essentially be mono, even though the CX3jr does offer separate left and right EXTRA channels.I think the main problem with using the CX3jr for extraction of height channels is that there is no height information encoded in the soundtracks.

The CX3jr uses the early Circle Surround matrix, which extracted centre and stereo surrounds from 2-channel sources. When fed the surround channels of a 5.1-channel source, correlated mono info would be routed to the "centre" output, making the CX3jr a faux EX decoder (unlike real EX decoding, the surround-back information wasn't cancelled form the L/R surround channels).

Using the CX3jr to extract surround-back information meant that the "surround" outputs were left idle. Some folks, with the encouragement (read: misinformation) from Widescreen Review magazine and SRS Labs, used those outputs to feed overhead speakers.

Of course, since there is no height information in soundtracks, the overhead speakers were simply getting any random decorrelated info that existed in the surround channels of the original soundtrack. Nothing more than that, though many were convinced otherwise.

A matrix decoder can be placed between any two channels in order to extract a third channel that goes inbetween. This seems fine in concept, since replacing phantom imaging with a hard source has multiple benefits. However, raising those speakers high up can be problematic.

Imagine a car exits screen right; the sound goes from the centre speaker to the right front speaker and disappears in the right surround speaker. If you place a speaker between the right front and right surround, it will add imaging stability to the pan. If you raise that extra speaker overhead, then the car will take a momentary flight above you before landing in the right surround speaker. Do you really want that?

Sanjay

And does it offer 2 outputs decorrelated for stereo or mono?


You can have either Stereo or set it to mono for a single speaker.


These units are supposed to have their own built in test gens, so I would calibrate your system in pass mode first, then activate the two boxes to level match their extra channel out puts. It might take a bit of time, but I think it will well worth it in the end...


Yes is does have a test gen built in, it is what I used to calibriate my current overhead setup with. So yes it is doable just will take a little time to get it just right.


WOW, I'm tempted to try this my self :) I'm going to google that product now.
Do you happen to have a link? My google skills suck at best...

EDIT - It appears it was much easier to find after all :)

CS-3X Jr (http://www.smartdev.com/cs3xjr.html)

Mark

I found them on Ebay Express, one dealer has them for $75 the other $69, both were about $12 to ship so super cheap if you have some extra speakers and a amp or two to test with.

Side note: Should you try this;

In my current setup I am using direct radiators for the overhead but was thinking when I migrate this setup in to my main HT that di, or tripoles would be much better overhead. They would diffuse and disperse the signal over a broader area reducing the focus to a particular location overhead. So you might want to try that if you got any laying arround.

If you raise that extra speaker overhead, then the car will take a momentary flight above you before landing in the right surround speaker. Do you really want that?If I'm watchin' Chitty Chitty Bang Bang.

ha ha

I think the main problem with using the CX3jr for extraction of height channels is that there is no height information encoded in the soundtracks.

The CX3jr uses the early Circle Surround matrix, which extracted centre and stereo surrounds from 2-channel sources. When fed the surround channels of a 5.1-channel source, correlated mono info would be routed to the "centre" output, making the CX3jr a faux EX decoder (unlike real EX decoding, the surround-back information wasn't cancelled form the L/R surround channels).

Using the CX3jr to extract surround-back information meant that the "surround" outputs were left idle. Some folks, with the encouragement (read: misinformation) from Widescreen Review magazine and SRS Labs, used those outputs to feed overhead speakers.

Of course, since there is no height information in soundtracks, the overhead speakers were simply getting any random decorrelated info that existed in the surround channels of the original soundtrack. Nothing more than that, though many were convinced otherwise.

A matrix decoder can be placed between any two channels in order to extract a third channel that goes inbetween. This seems fine in concept, since replacing phantom imaging with a hard source has multiple benefits. However, raising those speakers high up can be problematic.

Imagine a car exits screen right; the sound goes from the centre speaker to the right front speaker and disappears in the right surround speaker. If you place a speaker between the right front and right surround, it will add imaging stability to the pan. If you raise that extra speaker overhead, then the car will take a momentary flight above you before landing in the right surround speaker. Do you really want that?

Sanjay

True there is no there is no height information in soundtracks but from my experimenting a single unit, it does a pretty good job of deriving it from the left and right surrounds. The movie Underworld evolution for example was phenomenal with the derived overhead sounds, the thunder sounded like real thunder etc... The under water scenes in the movie Cave sounded like you were under water, the echos from noises in the above ground Cave scenes sounded like you were in a cave. In the movie Shooter the bullets that flew past your head sounded like it. I could go on an on, but to me the benefit far out ways any random noise that perhaps does not belong up there gets up there but even then calibrated right you probably not even notice it.

I think most people who tried this just did not calibrate them correctly, my rule of thumb is you should not hear them when they are on but should notice them gone when they are turned off.

I think a lot people think they need to sit there and actually be able to discern that they are on during a movie. Adjusted like that really troughs the soundtrack off, and hampers your experience by you losing focus in the movie when something loud happens overhead like a car taking a momentary flight.

If I'm watchin' Chitty Chitty Bang Bang.In that case, I would mount all my speakers on the ceiling (there's a lot of flying car action in that movie).

Sanjay

there is no there is no height information in soundtracks but from my experimenting a single unit, it does a pretty good job of deriving it from the left and right surroundsDeriving what? As you say, there is no height information. So what is "it" that is being derived?

Sanjay

So what is "it" that is being derived?
I think we need Bill Clinton for this one. :D

Deriving what? As you say, there is no height information. So what is "it" that is being derived?

Sanjay

From what I can tell it detects the directional cues, and perhaps particular volume level triggers that occur in the left and right surrounds such as ambient effects and sound effects sends them to the overhead channels which creates the illusion of their being intentionally placed sound above you and it seems to work well.

I think the main problem with using the CX3jr for extraction of height channels is that there is no height information encoded in the soundtracks.

I agree that you need to have specifically encoded soundtracks, but the same could be said about playing 5.1 soundtracks over a 7.1 system. We've all found that the EX decoders (or PLIIx) can create a very convincing back surround extension from standard 5.1 source material.

The CX3jr uses the early Circle Surround matrix, which extracted centre and stereo surrounds from 2-channel sources. When fed the surround channels of a 5.1-channel source, correlated mono info would be routed to the "centre" output, making the CX3jr a faux EX decoder (unlike real EX decoding, the surround-back information wasn't cancelled form the L/R surround channels).

Real EX (SA-10) decoders don't cancel the information in the LS RS either because they are fed two analogue channels - LS and RS - from decoded outputs of the DD decoder. Only ES discrete (home theatre only) has the cancellation process. The SA-10 (used in cinemas) is a modified CP45 Dolby Pro Logic processor, so simply does for the surrounds what it used to do for the front staging - IE look for signal with the same phase and amplitude and steer them to the centre channel. That centre channel just now happens to be at the back of the room, not the front...

Using the CX3jr to extract surround-back information meant that the "surround" outputs were left idle. Some folks, with the encouragement (read: misinformation) from Widescreen Review magazine and SRS Labs, used those outputs to feed overhead speakers.

Yes, the addition of EX was to make three full range channels out of two, so the band limited surround (know called extra) is not used and is why it is not an option on home gear...

Of course, since there is no height information in soundtracks, the overhead speakers were simply getting any random decorrelated info that existed in the surround channels of the original soundtrack. Nothing more than that, though many were convinced otherwise.

Agreed that the results will be unpredictable at beast...

A matrix decoder can be placed between any two channels in order to extract a third channel that goes in between. This seems fine in concept, since replacing phantom imaging with a hard source has multiple benefits. However, raising those speakers high up can be problematic.

Well that is the idea we've discussing, but not just using one matrix decoder fed the surround inputs.

What we intend on exploring the possibilities of extra channels between the front left and surround left and front right and surround right. Therefore the inputs will be front left and left surround to unit 1, and front right and right surround to unit 2, giving us a stereo pair of "wide" channels as well as a stereo pair of "height" channels. Nothing is for certain, but I believe this is the basis of 10.2...

Imagine a car exits screen right; the sound goes from the centre speaker to the right front speaker and disappears in the right surround speaker. If you place a speaker between the right front and right surround, it will add imaging stability to the pan. If you raise that extra speaker overhead, then the car will take a momentary flight above you before landing in the right surround speaker. Do you really want that?

And that just it. Our ears do not allow us to hear that "phantom" image correctly. The sound is spectrally torn between the front right and surround right. So by placing a real speaker in that location should give us the desired effect. This speaker is not to be confused with "height" channel.

So by using two matrix decoders, we have the possibility of generating four extra channels, not just 2, so there should be a real speaker to go where the "phantom" should be heard, and then the height speaker. The "wide" left will be at the same height as the front left. The left height will be elevated. The same will happen on the right. This should prevent the lift you've described.

Again nothings for certain, but for the cost, it could prove to be a fun enhancement...

Mark

Deriving what? As you say, there is no height information. So what is "it" that is being derived?

Sanjay

Becuase EX is based on pro logic, you might remember the early decoders from the 1990's that gave a mode called 3 ch logic. Essentially, that is what EX is. In 3 channel mode, the "difference" that should be steered to the surrounds simply played from left and right becuase there is no surround to steer to.

I think where this works in the home with extending 5.1 is that if there is any "difference" in the left and right surrounds, those speakers still play those signals as the EX system is like 3 channel logic.

So yes, there is a chance that the sound you hear is coincidental, but sound engineers still mix ambient noise into their surrounds, not just hard directional effects, so there is reason to believe that those that tried this with a single unit heard that ambient noise now playing from a different location which may or may not have enhanced their experience.

Again, we are looking at a dual system and the main goal is actually to replace the phantom between the front left and left surround, front right and right surround. If there is any extra "height" channels, then that is a bonus...

Mark

I agree that you need to have specifically encoded soundtracks, but the same could be said about playing 5.1 soundtracks over a 7.1 system. We've all found that the EX decoders (or PLIIx) can create a very convincing back surround extension from standard 5.1 source material.That's very different, because we know what sounds are supposed to go in between the left & right surround speakers. For example: it's easy to figure out that correlated mono info will end up imaging directly behind the listener, which is where EX and PLIIx will steer those sounds. But how do you know which sounds are supposed to image higher above the rest of the sounds in the listener plane? Real EX (SA-10) decoders don't cancel the information in the LS RS either because they are fed two analogue channels - LS and RS - from decoded outputs of the DD decoder. Only ES discrete (home theatre only) has the cancellation process. The SA-10 (used in cinemas) is a modified CP45 Dolby Pro Logic processor, so simply does for the surrounds what it used to do for the front staging - IE look for signal with the same phase and amplitude and steer them to the centre channel. That centre channel just now happens to be at the back of the room, not the front...Old Pro Logic always cancelled the extracted centre info from the L/R channels, otherwise dialogue would have been heard in triple-mono. Nothing changed when it was adapted to Surround EX, otherwise the surround-back channel would be heard from your sides as well. What we intend on exploring the possibilities of extra channels between the front left and surround left and front right and surround right. Therefore the inputs will be front left and left surround to unit 1, and front right and right surround to unit 2, giving us a stereo pair of "wide" channels as well as a stereo pair of "height" channels. Nothing is for certain, but I believe this is the basis of 10.2...Any pair of channels will have content that will phantom image exactly in between. You can use a matrix decoder to extract correlated mono info and send it to a speaker placed inbetween the original pair. You haven't changed directionality, just made the imaging more stable by replacing a phantom image with a hard source. You could add even more speakers inbetween for greater stability, all without changing directionality. But when you route some of the sound to overhead speakers, you're changing directionality without any height directional cues in the recording.

BTW, Holman's 10.2 system uses discrete channels with independently recorded content. That is, the height information is really stuff that was miked for that purpose, not whatever decorrelated information that just happens to be in the left front and left surround channels. So by using two matrix decoders, we have the possibility of generating four extra channels, not just 2, so there should be a real speaker to go where the "phantom" should be heard, and then the height speaker. The "wide" left will be at the same height as the front left. The left height will be elevated. The same will happen on the right. This should prevent the lift you've described.The "wide" speakers sound like a good concept. My only concern with the "height" speakers is that it is random decorrelated sound, having nothing to do with actual height information. Again nothings for certain, but for the cost, it could prove to be a fun enhancement...I'm sure it will be fun. And I'm not trying to discourage you from experimenting. Simply wanted make sure that you and others understood that the information you will be sending to the overhead speakers has absolutely nothing to do with height. That doesn't mean the results won't be pleasing; it just won't be height channels. I hope the distinction is clear.

Sanjay

From what I can tell it detects the directional cuesBut there are no height directional cues in the recording. For example: there are directional cues in 2-channel music that will tell you where the vocalist and each instrument should image in the soundstage. But there aren't any directional cues for what should image above the soundstage. Understand the difference?

Sanjay

That's very different, because we know what sounds are supposed to go in between the left & right surround speakers. For example: it's easy to figure out that correlated mono info will end up imaging directly behind the listener, which is where EX and PLIIx will steer those sounds. But how do you know which sounds are supposed to image higher above the rest of the sounds in the listener plane? Old Pro Logic always cancelled the extracted centre info from the L/R channels, otherwise dialogue would have been heard in triple-mono. Nothing changed when it was adapted to Surround EX, otherwise the surround-back channel would be heard from your sides as well. Any pair of channels will have content that will phantom image exactly in between. You can use a matrix decoder to extract correlated mono info and send it to a speaker placed inbetween the original pair. You haven't changed directionality, just made the imaging more stable by replacing a phantom image with a hard source. You could add even more speakers inbetween for greater stability, all without changing directionality. But when you route some of the sound to overhead speakers, you're changing directionality without any height directional cues in the recording.

I would say pro logic reduces the level from the original channels, but it not cancelled. Play any program through PL and pull the negative from the centre speaker. You still hear (now greatly reduced) the original sound elements from the left and right speakers.

Based on what we are trying to achieve, and not that far from you observations to EX, sound that pans from left stage to left surround can benefit here. If it is in-phase (and phantoms have to be in-phase to work), it will be steered to the "wide" speaker - an example might be a car driving off the screen. The sound doesn't just stop because we lost the visual.

If there is a "difference" like might be used to make thunder sound less directional, then "height channel" and elevation become very appropriate. Again, there is no guarantee...

Phantoms at the sides - It is well documented that our ears (their shape and location on our heads) do not really allow us to hear a phantom image at the sides. As a result, the sound tends to snap from one location to the other in a pan, or tear itself apart - part of the sound is heard from front left, some from the surround, but it not the same as a phantom between the front left and right when intended to heard from between the two points in space...

BTW, Holman's 10.2 system uses discrete channels with independently recorded content. That is, the height information is really stuff that was miked for that purpose, not whatever decorrelated information that just happens to be in the left front and left surround channels. The "wide" speakers sound like a good concept. My only concern with the "height" speakers is that it is random decorrelated sound, having nothing to do with actual height information. I'm sure it will be fun. And I'm not trying to discourage you from experimenting. Simply wanted make sure that you and others understood that the information you will be sending to the overhead speakers has absolutely nothing to do with height. That doesn't mean the results won't be pleasing; it just won't be height channels. I hope the distinction is clear.

He promoted the "10.2 swictheroo" as both a 7.1 to 10.2 adapter as well as fully discrete system. Again, I am more interested in the "wide" channels than "height" but it still has possibilities, and this approach is a far cry from those attempting to recover them from the surrounds alone...

Mark

But there are no height directional cues in the recording. For example: there are directional cues in 2-channel music that will tell you where the vocalist and each instrument should image in the soundstage. But there aren't any directional cues for what should image above the soundstage. Understand the difference?

Sanjay

Yes I understand there are no height directional cues because there is nothing designated for height and what I actually really get above are bits and pieces of the side surround sounds being thrown up there.

What I am saying is the CX3jr does seem to do a pretty good job on picking what bits and pieces get thrown up there thus creating the illusion that it was meant to be up there.

This something that may not be for everyone and would be different for each user because every setup is different. I like it myself, it took a while for me to not be conscious of their existence thus be constantly trying to discern above sound while watching movies. Once you can get past that stage it really adds more than it subtracts of the immersion, at least for me anyway.

What I am saying is the CX3jr does seem to do a pretty good job on picking what bits and pieces get thrown up there thus creating the illusion that it was meant to be up there.

What your hearing being sent to the height channel speakers is a "difference" signal contained in both channels where one channel is out of phase.

A really good test to see how the CS3xJr is working is to play the THX optimiser audio phase test tones.

On 5.1, the in-phase test in the surrounds should phantom behind the listener. With the out of phase test, the sound sound be diffuse difficult to localize.

If you play these tests through an EX system, the in-phase test should play from the back speakers, and the out of phase test should be heard from the left and right surround speakers.

Now turn on the CS3xJr and replay the test. The in-phase should still be heard from the back surrounds, but now the out of phase or "difference" signals should be heard from your "height" speakers.

I have added a page to MY SITE (http://cavx.blogspot.com/2007/08/surround-sound-beyond-51.html) that better explains what we are attempting to do...

Mark

Well My second CX3jr finally arrived and I wired it up over the weekend, it took me several hours of tweaking and calibration as I was trying decide where exactly I wanted the side axis placed then recalibratiing each time I moved them etc... but was worth it in the end.

I have them lined up with the sides, angled toward the listening area dead center of the front and the sides. This 9.1 +2 overhead surround sound is big, the new side axis really widen the front stage it gives it more of a commercial theatre sound.


I ran several tests and watched several movies and I am extremely happy with my new setup. I have it hooked up via a HTPC and the sound card I am using in the HTPC has a surround sound test where a helicopter sound travels from speaker to speaker, making a complete loop around the speaker system.

When the helicopter noise travels from front right to the side surround right the CX3jr picks it up in between them and plays it out of the right side axis for a smooth flawless transition from front to side. Like wise when the helicopter circles around and goes from side surround left to front left the CX3jr picks it up in between them and plays it out of the left side axis.

I also noticed improved steering of the overhead channel noises using this setup as well. In fact I like this new setup so much now I am thinking about ordering two more CX3jr's for future implementation as I don't have the amps or speakers to test.

What I am thinking now is using the same technique in the rear using left side and left rear for a new left rear side axis and right side, right rear for a new right side rear axis and as well as left and right rear overheads. :D

I might even take it a step further than that and get three more so I can setup a center overhead channels then use 6 tripole speakers for the overhead and place two in between the front side axis two in between the rear side axis and two in between the two side surrounds.

Well My second CX3jr finally arrived and I wired it up over the weekend, it took me several hours of tweaking and calibration as I was trying decide where exactly I wanted the side axis placed then recalibratiing each time I moved them etc... but was worth it in the end.

I have them lined up with the sides, angled toward the listening area dead center of the front and the sides. This 9.1 +2 overhead surround sound is big, the new side axis really widen the front stage it gives it more of a commercial theatre sound.


Did you happen to take a look at the link I attached in my last post? I am really glad that you like the results. I found the supplier, but he will not ship to Australia :(

I ran several tests and watched several movies and I am extremely happy with my new setup. I have it hooked up via a HTPC and the sound card I am using in the HTPC has a surround sound test where a helicopter sound travels from speaker to speaker, making a complete loop around the speaker system.

When the helicopter noise travels from front right to the side surround right the CX3jr picks it up in between them and plays it out of the right side axis for a smooth flawless transition from front to side. Like wise when the helicopter circles around and goes from side surround left to front left the CX3jr picks it up in between them and plays it out of the left side axis.
If they are doing there job, then they will simply "fill in" the hole and provide a much more solid sound stage - and it seems that they are working for you, well done :)

I also noticed improved steering of the overhead channel noises using this setup as well. In fact I like this new setup so much now I am thinking about ordering two more CX3jr's for future implementation as I don't have the amps or speakers to test. And your new "Height" channels should also be in STEREO not just plain boring old mono...

What I am thinking now is using the same technique in the rear using left side and left rear for a new left rear side axis and right side, right rear for a new right side rear axis and as well as left and right rear overheads. :D

I might even take it a step further than that and get three more so I can setup a center overhead channels then use 6 tripole speakers for the overhead and place two in between the front side axis two in between the rear side axis and two in between the two side surrounds.I think you'll be pushing the bonds a little to far as the back surround (with the exception of DTS ES Discrete 6.1) is matrix encoded into the LS and RS, so trying to extract half tones from the matrix might not quite work as well as extracting half tones from a pair of discrete channels - make sense?

But good luck with that...and I want to see some photos please...

Mark

Did you happen to take a look at the link I attached in my last post?

I think you'll be pushing the bonds a little to far as the back surround (with the exception of DTS ES Discrete 6.1) is matrix encoded into the LS and RS, so trying to extract half tones from the matrix might not quite work as well as extracting half tones from a pair of discrete channels - make sense?

But good luck with that...and I want to see some photos please...

Mark

Yes I saw the link, nice site and nice write up on the surround sound as well.

I am going to test the rear axis channels this weekend using my two CX3jr's just to see what kind of results I get. Granted those axis channels will not get near the work out the fronts do and will probably not make nearly as dramatic of an improvement. However I would think it be much better than just duping the left and right rears for four across the back like many do now, we shall see.

I will try and put up some pic's as soon as I find out which family member borrowed my digital camera but forgot to ask.

Yes I saw the link, nice site and nice write up on the surround sound as well.

Thanks :) I've tried to keep it as informative as I can...

I am going to test the rear axis channels this weekend using my two CX3jr's just to see what kind of results I get. Granted those axis channels will not get near the work out the fronts do and will probably not make nearly as dramatic of an improvement. However I would think it be much better than just duping the left and right rears for four across the back like many do now, we shall see.

Well no harm in trying. If it works, would you actually buy two more of these things? Tom Holman wrote in his book "5.1 Surround Sound: Up and Running" (a good read BTW) that we actually need more channels up front (and wide and height channels are still considered up front) than in the surrounds, and maybe this is why SDDS has 5 screen channels instead of four discrete surrounds. Four surrounds is certainly enveloping, though I do wish at times that the two back surrounds delivered stereo, not mono...

I will try and put up some pic's as soon as I find out which family member borrowed my digital camera but forgot to ask.

That would be so cool. The OP has been hammered out as a bit of wacko, but really, he had the best intentions, he just didn't take any guidance. So I am really glad that some one has finally tried this idea and proven that it works - well done :) I look forward to the photos...

Maybe you can start your own thread - I will be happy to back you up on that one ;) as I have wanted to do this my self for some time...

Mark

Any updates?

That setup is awesome!