How Many Speakers Are Too Many? - Page 10 - AVS Forum
View Poll Results: How Many Speakers Are Too Many?
9 119 20.84%
11 101 17.69%
22 161 28.20%
45 46 8.06%
You can never have too many speakers 144 25.22%
Voters: 571. You may not vote on this poll

Forum Jump: 
 2Likes
Reply
 
Thread Tools
post #271 of 285 Old 05-28-2014, 12:19 PM
Member
 
LDizzle's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2013
Location: Keller, TX
Posts: 58
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 1 Post(s)
Liked: 15
For movies I definitely appreciate having a dedicated center as opposed to a phantom image, especially so when there are guests over.

I like the effect of the sound being anchored to the screen, feels more theatrical imo.

That being said I'm still partial to having at least two additional speakers at the rear of the room for that "next level" of ambiance that I feel stereo & 3 channel fall just shy of.

That's partly why I've grown to appreciate what virtual surround modes [aka re-channeling] are capable of.

I get a remarkable sense of space & envelopment but the directional sound is all on-screen.

Of course purists pretty much reject any "tampering" of the "director's intent" but for me it's generally a more satisfying experience.
LDizzle is offline  
Sponsored Links
Advertisement
 
post #272 of 285 Old 05-28-2014, 12:46 PM
Member
 
LDizzle's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2013
Location: Keller, TX
Posts: 58
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 1 Post(s)
Liked: 15
I should probably clarify that the re-channeling I'm referring to is designed to convert a two channel mix into five channels.
LDizzle is offline  
post #273 of 285 Old 05-28-2014, 05:42 PM
Senior Member
 
Robbiey60's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2013
Location: Christchurch, New Zealand
Posts: 406
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 3 Post(s)
Liked: 230
The best setup I have heard was my own 6.1. I base my opinions with gaming 1st. A good L/C/R setup can be similarly mirrored with a good surround L/C/R setup. This provides a full 360° soundfield so you can hear anything anywhere. Try playing any 1st person shooter and go somewhere that has a constant sound source ie fire and spin. The sound travels 360°. I think the quality of the speakers is FAR more important than the number. In a larger room maybe I would try wides between surrounds and mains?
Robbiey60 is offline  
post #274 of 285 Old 05-28-2014, 06:37 PM
AVS Special Member
 
BiggAW's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2004
Posts: 1,189
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 82 Post(s)
Liked: 47
Quote:
Originally Posted by LDizzle View Post

I should probably clarify that the re-channeling I'm referring to is designed to convert a two channel mix into five channels.

Unless you have DTS 7.1 audio on a blu-ray, a 7.1 channel setup is basically always going to have to do some processing, or else have speakers doing nothing. It's very subjective, but I've found even with only a good HTIB, I can always find a mode that sounds good. Since most audio is 2.0 or 5.1, I watch a LOT of content with the audio processed.
BiggAW is offline  
post #275 of 285 Old 05-30-2014, 09:04 PM
Senior Member
 
Robbiey60's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2013
Location: Christchurch, New Zealand
Posts: 406
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 3 Post(s)
Liked: 230
Quote:
Originally Posted by Robbiey60 View Post

The best setup I have heard was my own 6.1. I base my opinions with gaming 1st. A good L/C/R setup can be similarly mirrored with a good surround L/C/R setup. This provides a full 360° soundfield so you can hear anything anywhere. Try playing any 1st person shooter and go somewhere that has a constant sound source ie fire and spin. The sound travels 360°. I think the quality of the speakers is FAR more important than the number. In a larger room maybe I would try wides between surrounds and mains?
[IMG][IMG][IMG][IMG]
Robbiey60 is offline  
post #276 of 285 Old 05-30-2014, 09:07 PM
Senior Member
 
Robbiey60's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2013
Location: Christchurch, New Zealand
Posts: 406
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 3 Post(s)
Liked: 230
Quote:
Originally Posted by Robbiey60 View Post

The best setup I have heard was my own 6.1. I base my opinions with gaming 1st. A good L/C/R setup can be similarly mirrored with a good surround L/C/R setup. This provides a full 360° soundfield so you can hear anything anywhere. Try playing any 1st person shooter and go somewhere that has a constant sound source ie fire and spin. The sound travels 360°. I think the quality of the speakers is FAR more important than the number. In a larger room maybe I would try wides between surrounds and mains?
Robbiey60 is offline  
post #277 of 285 Old 05-30-2014, 09:09 PM
Senior Member
 
Robbiey60's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2013
Location: Christchurch, New Zealand
Posts: 406
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 3 Post(s)
Liked: 230
Quote:
Originally Posted by Robbiey60 View Post

The best setup I have heard was my own 6.1. I base my opinions with gaming 1st. A good L/C/R setup can be similarly mirrored with a good surround L/C/R setup. This provides a full 360° soundfield so you can hear anything anywhere. Try playing any 1st person shooter and go somewhere that has a constant sound source ie fire and spin. The sound travels 360°. I think the quality of the speakers is FAR more important than the number. In a larger room maybe I would try wides between surrounds and mains?
Robbiey60 is offline  
post #278 of 285 Old 05-31-2014, 12:34 AM
 
pokeme's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2013
Location: gta Canada
Posts: 783
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 3 Post(s)
Liked: 486
Sweet. Here's my photo with no caption to explain anything too!

pokeme is offline  
post #279 of 285 Old 05-31-2014, 09:50 AM
Member
 
LDizzle's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2013
Location: Keller, TX
Posts: 58
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 1 Post(s)
Liked: 15
Lol, priceless.
LDizzle is offline  
post #280 of 285 Old 05-31-2014, 10:27 AM
AVS Special Member
 
tgm1024's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2010
Posts: 5,872
Mentioned: 1 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 126 Post(s)
Liked: 563

LOL....not sure I've ever seen someone take a picture of a level on it's side either....  :-)


Well vinnie97, one of the kindest and most helpful and respected members here, was banned for silly reasons. And now vinnie_RIP is banned as well. The mark of an inexperienced moderator is to forget that their role is one of resource, not one of petulant authority and further that the members are doing the forum organization a favor by being here, not the other way around. They know darn well they screwed up here.
tgm1024 is online now  
post #281 of 285 Old 05-31-2014, 12:08 PM
Newbie
 
drakeroose's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2013
Posts: 11
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 13
The results are quite suprising to me but I'm not a hardcore audiophile. 9 is just more than I need...
drakeroose is offline  
post #282 of 285 Old 06-01-2014, 07:29 AM
AVS Special Member
 
SoundChex's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2008
Location: USA, west coast
Posts: 2,593
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 36 Post(s)
Liked: 66
Quote:
Originally Posted by Scott Wilkinson View Post

The big buzz in audio these days is so-called "immersive audio," which goes beyond conventional 5.1 or 7.1 to surround the listener in a more-or-less hemispherical soundfield. Examples include Dolby Atmos and Auro 3D in commercial cinemas, both of which include speakers on the ceiling, and Audyssey DSX and DTS Neo:X in home systems, which support up to 11 main speakers with extra front-wide and height channels.

The Advanced Rendering Lab at SRS (now owned by DTS) included 20 main speakers when I visited a few years ago.

Of course, one could even go beyond 11.1—NHK has demonstrated a 22.2 system at the NAB show, and I've heard systems with as many as 45 speakers in the walls and ceiling. But at what point does this game go too far? How many speakers are too many for a home-theater system?

In the absence of actual speaker layout standards "supported by the CEMs", we can check out the First Draft (version "-0") of Recommendation ITU-R BS.2051-0 (02/2014) Advanced sound system for programme production (link) (direct link to pdf) which details the eight nominal channel|speaker layouts 'floated' by ITU for "next generation broadcast audio systems".

Whereas in the past (e.g.) TV audio could be broadcast in 2.0 or 5.1, the ITU seems to suggest a future with broadcast audio channel mixed as 2.0, 5.1, 7.1, 9.1, 10.1, 10.2, 13.1, or 22.2, with the six new channel configurations offering a variety of 3Daudio possibilities. It seems the intent is that these configurations might be used in either channel based or hybrid channel-object based systems.

Of course, this still leaves open the option of upmixing|remapping before-and-after decoding|rendering to deliver additional customized in-home playback speaker configurations...?! biggrin.gif

Hopefully future revisions will include more about (planned) scene based audio standards . . . but this (first) draft seems only to address channel based and hybrid channel-object based audio in any detail (unsurprisingly, as NHK apparently supported|performed much of the grunt work to get the draft recommendation into print . . . presumably to ensure "correct standards" are codified for their own Hamasaki 22.2 sound system...?!)
_

[Home Office system schematic]
"My AV systems were created by man. They evolved. They rebelled. There are many speakers. And they have . . . A PLAN."

SoundChex is offline  
post #283 of 285 Old 06-01-2014, 09:16 AM
AVS Special Member
 
BiggAW's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2004
Posts: 1,189
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 82 Post(s)
Liked: 47
Quote:
Originally Posted by SoundChex View Post


Whereas in the past (e.g.) TV audio could be broadcast in 2.0 or 5.1, the ITU seems to suggest a future with broadcast audio channel mixed as 2.0, 5.1, 7.1, 9.1, 10.1, 10.2, 13.1, or 22.2, with the six new channel configurations offering a variety of 3Daudio possibilities. It seems the intent is that these configurations might be used in either channel based or hybrid channel-object based systems.

And combinations of those leave a lot of other possibilities open, like 13.2 or 13.4 The 10.1 or 10.2 seems like a step backwards since there is already an 11.2 setup out there that has a pair of rear heights. You combine that with the other 11.2 setup (front wides), and you logically get to 13.2. Add a another pair of subs, and you've easily gotten to 13.2...
BiggAW is offline  
post #284 of 285 Old Today, 12:39 PM
Newbie
 
Join Date: Jul 2014
Posts: 3
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 0
I think the two Speakers may be sufficient if they are such)
grols is offline  
post #285 of 285 Old Today, 12:58 PM
AVS Special Member
 
tgm1024's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2010
Posts: 5,872
Mentioned: 1 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 126 Post(s)
Liked: 563
Quote:
Originally Posted by BiggAW View Post
Quote: Originally Posted by SoundChex

Whereas in the past (e.g.) TV audio could be broadcast in 2.0 or 5.1, the ITU seems to suggest a future with broadcast audio channel mixed as 2.0, 5.1, 7.1, 9.1, 10.1, 10.2, 13.1, or 22.2, with the six new channel configurations offering a variety of 3Daudio possibilities. It seems the intent is that these configurations might be used in either channel based or hybrid channel-object based systems.

And combinations of those leave a lot of other possibilities open, like 13.2 or 13.4 The 10.1 or 10.2 seems like a step backwards since there is already an 11.2 setup out there that has a pair of rear heights. You combine that with the other 11.2 setup (front wides), and you logically get to 13.2. Add a another pair of subs, and you've easily gotten to 13.2...
Are the sub configurations of .2 and .4 because there's a believe that you can actually hear the multichannel audio that low, or just an effort to balance the sources of the sound around you?

Well vinnie97, one of the kindest and most helpful and respected members here, was banned for silly reasons. And now vinnie_RIP is banned as well. The mark of an inexperienced moderator is to forget that their role is one of resource, not one of petulant authority and further that the members are doing the forum organization a favor by being here, not the other way around. They know darn well they screwed up here.
tgm1024 is online now  
Reply Community News & Polls

Tags
Polls

User Tag List

Thread Tools
Show Printable Version Show Printable Version
Email this Page Email this Page


Forum Jump: 

Posting Rules  
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are Off
Pingbacks are Off
Refbacks are Off