In regards to surround sound, we have heard rumors that 11.1 seems to be the new number coming down the pipe by years end. As such we wanted to ask the AVS Forum members, how many speakers do you think really is needed in the home for surround sound?
As it is now, we have 7.1 that covers Left (L), Center (C), Right (R), Left Surround (LS), Right Surround (RS), Left Rear (LR) and Right Rear (RR), SUB. The 4 extra channels would add, from what we understand, Left Front Wide (LW), Right Front Wide (RW), Left Front Height (LH), and Right Front Height (RH).
Please be so kind to vote in the poll and feel free to leave your thoughts and comments on the topic of how many speakers you think are needed in home surround sound. (We know configurations can be differnt for differnt people. Thus is a general poll on set # of speakers/channels on how many YOU think are needed.)
Back in the late 70's when I bought my Quadraphonic system, I use to tell people that one day our sound systems will have a small speaker for every instrument and everything will sound "live".
Quote:
Originally Posted by HiFiListener /forum/post/18781007
Voted 7.1, but in reality 5.1 is plenty... What we need from CE manufacturers is NOT more bells and whistles... tis all marketing gimmicks. We need manufacturers to build quality components that will last and provide a quality av experience.
Yeah thats what i think, to me the best part of the 5.1 is the center and the sub. The others sound good too but if i cant hear what they say i dont know whats going on. The .1 is the best part that low rumble at times is the best.
I still use just 5.1 as my living room/theater area isn't large enough to benefit from 7.1. Now, if I ever have a chance to build a dedicated theater room then I'll move to 7.1 no questions (I'd even consider something like 9 or 11.1 if it would suit the room). Just adding speakers to add speakers will not always create a better experience, just like louder is not always better (something local movie theater owners don't understand).
My room size is 30 X 14 and I'm currently using 7.2 .
F-left-low Center-low F-right-low 2 Subs up front
L-side-high r-side-high
L-Back-ear level R-back-ear level.
I only have one row of seating, so I find 7.2 to be more than adequate. I imagine if you have multiple rows of seating I could see using 11.1, otherwise I think it's overkill.
I have 7.1 and could see 9.1 being beneficial. It would seem to me that the front height and width speakers could be combined and just use 2 front speakers placed high and wide. That's what I'd probably do if I went with a 9.1 format. Then the decision would be which decoding format to use - height or wide?
That's what I was going to say. Or even more coarsely, do you have (a) a true dedicated HT like you see in the magazines, or (b) a room you've adapted to contain a TV and surround system?
I voted 7.1 because it seems quite sufficient to me. But my current room features and geometry can only support 5.1, which is what I have. 7.1 would be better for the size of the room, but it's not physically possible without a structural remodel.
Because it's a room and not a theater, all the speakers are visible, especially the Thiel CS2.2s serving as L and R fronts. More than 6 speakers would be overkill in my room.
But if I ever move into or build a house with a true dedicated HT, my response to this question would be "as many as is supported by current state of the art media and equipment; bring it on!"
Voted 7.1 but only because seven channels are needed for 5.1 plus wides. There's just not enough material for 9.2, much less 11.2 but if the idle amplification could be used on the front arrays......well that's another poll.
Quote:
Originally Posted by gobrigavitch /forum/post/18781602
I have 7.1 and could see 9.1 being beneficial. It would seem to me that the front height and width speakers could be combined and just use 2 front speakers placed high and wide. That's what I'd probably do if I went with a 9.1 format. Then the decision would be which decoding format to use - height or wide?
It seems likely that with judicious application of a some [new] "high + wide" coefficients derived from the SMPTE speaker placement rules [codified in SMPTE 428-3-2006 D-Cinema Distribution Master Audio Channel Mapping and Channel Labeling] a CEM could create a "non standard" [playback only!] "high + wide" speaker pair location for use with high resolution audio (along the lines that DTS followed with DTS-HD Speaker Remapping). [Yamaha's long existing Front Presence speakers appeared to be 'ideally' placed for such a 'retasking'.]
However, the speaker environment codified in SMPTE 2036-2-2008 Ultra High Definition Television - Audio Characteristics and Audio Channel Mapping for Program Production looks like it might contemplate future speaker remapping and channel mixdown rules which are more akin to "replay device independence", and it explicitly includes a "high + wide" speaker pair Top Front Left (TpFL) and Top Front Right (TpFR). So if you just wait 'a little longer', you might not have to choose between two 'slightly inappropriate' upmix algorithms...?!
7.1 is plenty IMO. I doubt the vast majority of rooms would see ANY significant benefit from 9.1 or 11.1. Having said that, I would be curious to hear a 11.1 vs 7.1 comparison to see how much/little difference there actually would be with something that is discrete 11.1 mixed.
Well, how many DVds and BDs have been released with 7.1?
Since the rears rarely have that much sound, doesn't the extra 2 speakers on the side or the rear just make the rears louder? I've never heard 7.1 and my new HT isn'r going to have the extra 2.
I answered 7.1 mainly because it said home environment. I agree with many posters on the "it depends on the room" category. Most home environments I have seen would require the 7.1 speakers to define the back edge of there theater. In my own room however there is no space for another set of rear speakers, my couch is against the back wall.
More importantly than extra speakers beyond the usual 5.1 and the two varieties of 7.1 (presence speakers and rear surrounds), extra sub woofer crossover control and processing would help more in filling a space. In my own perfect room, I would have a 7.2 or 7.4 system with flat base response down to 15hz. If I had a projection screen a 9.2 or 9.4 system would be great to level the dialog with the mouths on the screen.
I stand corrected sdrani. I also don't think there is a right or wrong answer to this poll. High end Audio and HT Video is all about experimenting, and tweaking. One person's 5.1 nirvana is another's 22.2. I prefer the 2 sub setup. So IMHO 5.2 and and 7.2 is plenty of discrete steering logic to achieve a totally realistic soundspace as long as the low speaker array is duplicated up high. I do not subscribe to adding additional and complex 5.2 or 7.2 steering logic circuitry to create 100% discrete 9.2, 11.2, 12.2 or 14.2 sound patterns. Only the main (low) array need this IMHO. Careful attention to the High speaker placements will naturally add the proper space, ambiance, depth and delays based on calibrated output from the original 5.2 or 7.2 signals.
The natural, up high delays will lock in images and signals unlike anything one has ever experienced before without adding any additional steering logic artifacts. As I stated earlier, my dual, high/low 7.2 setup (14.2 speakers) literally melt the walls, ceiling, and floors away in the listening room. Sound images emerge in the room eerily consistent with where they belong on the screen. And sometimes, planes, spaceships, rockets, trains, cars actually seem to move beyond or emerge from boundaries past the walls. If a scene in a movie occurs whereby a person is yelling in an apartment below, beside or above the one depicted on screen; the sound literally appears to emerge from below the floor, beyond the wall or through the ceiling. It is completely lifelike. As someone suggested, the high speakers do not have to be big. But they should be rugged. By that I mean, capable of handling high power and current to approximate the low speakers. The mic calibration should be done on the low speakers to achieve the accurate and natural High speaker delays.
Quote:
Originally Posted by sharpsuxx /forum/post/18782109
I answered 7.1 mainly because it said home environment. I agree with many posters on the "it depends on the room" category. Most home environments I have seen would require the 7.1 speakers to define the back edge of there theater. In my own room however there is no space for another set of rear speakers, my couch is against the back wall.
More importantly than extra speakers beyond the usual 5.1 and the two varieties of 7.1 (presence speakers and rear surrounds), extra sub woofer crossover control and processing would help more in filling a space. In my own perfect room, I would have a 7.2 or 7.4 system with flat base response down to 15hz. If I had a projection screen a 9.2 or 9.4 system would be great to level the dialog with the mouths on the screen.
the trick is to make that back wall with the couch disappear. By adding a high left back and high right back above your low speakers (near ceiling height), you will be shocked at what happens. The back wall will disappear when a scene dictates it in a movie.
11.1, though I confess I haven't heard it yet, since the best I can manage with my equipment is 5.1 plus two front height speakers. My ideal AVR would be some sort of affordable 7.1 system with 11.1 pre-outs, leaving me free to add auxiliary amplifiers and speakers as I wish. Or, better, 11.3 pre-outs.
Quote:
Originally Posted by GregLee /forum/post/18782323
11.1, though I confess I haven't heard it yet, since the best I can manage with my equipment is 5.1 plus two front height speakers. My ideal AVR would be some sort of affordable 7.1 system with 11.1 pre-outs, leaving me free to add auxiliary amplifiers and speakers as I wish. Or, better, 11.3 pre-outs.
So I guess we're once again into the mode of "Let's see what's new at CEDIA this year!" But at least 2010 might be better than 2009, as we're starting(?) to get over the recession . . . and just possibly the CEMs will bring out some of the 'new tricks' they held back last year (as 'wasted on Christmas 2009') in order to generate better sales numbers this Christmas season...?!
I voted 71. That's the current configuration of my 8 seat Theater. I'm not sure with my current CH masking screen that I would have the ability to add the additional fronts.
What I would possibly like to see is assignable/software driven solution for multiple side surrounds, staggered according to the seating layout, and keeping with each location having seperate EQ control.
I believe that 7.1 or .2 is the most that is needed for today's content. Like others have said, most movies don't go beyond 5.1 now and I do not know of any the go beyond 6.1 or higher then that.
Ghpr13 said "I use to tell people that one day our sound systems will have a small speaker for every instrument and everything will sound "live"". I couldn't help but think if the "fantasound" process that Disney created when they released the original Fantasia in theaters that was supposed to do just that. Seemed like a good idea at the time then too. The question I suppose we are all trying to figure out is when does the rule of diminishing returns really apply? My answer is "when you stop having fun"
So far I am still having fun. I hope the rest of us are as well.
7.1 is what creates a better surround effect, especially in larger rooms where you can adequately apply the two back surround speakers. I have tried only 5.1 in a room before 7.1 was done and there seemed to be a "hole" in the surround effects before it was done, as if something was missing and the surround effects were too localized with 5.1.
Recently, I did a setup using the 9.1 configuration using the Denon 4810CI - it is good, but its not as effective as the 7.1 in creating a fuller surround field, it seemed as though nothing was added (much) to the audio effects with DPLIIz processing as DPLIIx does, IMO.
As others have said, yes the source material is almost always 5.1. But PLXII (and other) processors put this out into 7.1 speakers, giving a much better surround experience (provided your sitting positions have some space behind them).
Quote:
Originally Posted by barrelbelly /forum/post/18782219
the trick is to make that back wall with the couch disappear. By adding a high left back and high right back above your low speakers (near ceiling height), you will be shocked at what happens. The back wall will disappear when a scene dictates it in a movie.
I'm starting to like this guy. I have a Yamaha RX-Z11 that has the rear height speakers. Just finished watching The Book of Eli and its mix contains sound effects that crawled up my back wall !
The whole idea of have more of the sound field in front really does make a big difference over conventional 5.1 -7.1 setups.
This is an older thread, you may not receive a response, and could be reviving an old thread. Please consider creating a new thread.
Related Threads
?
?
?
?
?
AVS Forum
34M posts
1.5M members
Since 1999
A forum community dedicated to home theater owners and enthusiasts. Come join the discussion about home audio/video, TVs, projectors, screens, receivers, speakers, projects, DIY’s, product reviews, accessories, classifieds, and more!