Without a center speaker, anyone not sitting dead center in the sweet spot will hear center channel sounds (mostly vocals) from either the left or right speaker with no clearly defined center image. To me that is worse than the problems center speakers are reported to suffer from.
-
Get an exclusive sneak peek into our new project. >>> Click Here
Can't decide if I should phantom or not
I'm using Infinity Beta 40's for my towers and the matching c360 center. I've been debating for a while on if I should go phantom or use the center. I've always been happy with a 2.1 setup but after some re-arranging I now have room for surround.
The subtle sounds on surrounds are much more noticeable than being dumped in the fronts. I now have a similar concern about not using a center. Are there subtle sounds that can be less noticeable on the mains by having the center info split into them? I've read posts that say using a center keeps your mains from getting over worked and that it helps to have more drivers in your system. Does this imply that there can be to much sound coming from one speaker for it to handle?
The c360 sounds boxy and another user agreed with me in another thread. I would like to get this clunky speaker out of the way but still have concerns about pouring the center info into the mains. It does seem to sound better without it but I can't deny the fact that a 5.1 track should have all speakers. As far as I can tell from my testing with a spl meter my receiver does not have any drc issues when using less than 5.1.
Center channels are frustrating. Hard to find a place for them and lower quality than towers.
The subtle sounds on surrounds are much more noticeable than being dumped in the fronts. I now have a similar concern about not using a center. Are there subtle sounds that can be less noticeable on the mains by having the center info split into them? I've read posts that say using a center keeps your mains from getting over worked and that it helps to have more drivers in your system. Does this imply that there can be to much sound coming from one speaker for it to handle?
The c360 sounds boxy and another user agreed with me in another thread. I would like to get this clunky speaker out of the way but still have concerns about pouring the center info into the mains. It does seem to sound better without it but I can't deny the fact that a 5.1 track should have all speakers. As far as I can tell from my testing with a spl meter my receiver does not have any drc issues when using less than 5.1.
Center channels are frustrating. Hard to find a place for them and lower quality than towers.
1 - 19 of 19 Posts
+1 on "bluesky636" comments. I personally do not like the vocal audio to float away from the TV as the listener moves to seating outside the sweet spot. I prefer the center channel setup to fix the vocals to the screen.
thanks for the opinions. I was also just reading another thread and found that some peoples preference for phantom could be due to the fact that they have been listening in stereo their whole life. I wonder if this could also be part of the reason a center sounds a bit funky to me.
I was just reading this article , in which the following was mentioned:
I thought that might be of interest to you.
Quote:
Back on April 27th 1933, Bell Telephone Laboratories conducted a historic experiment whereby the sound of the Philadelphia Symphony Orchestra was sent by radio and reproduced by loudspeakers hidden behind a curtain for an audience in Constitution Hall in Washington DC. A series of scientific and technical papers were written in 1933 based on the research and development done just prior to and subsequent to this milestone experiment; and they were presented at the American Institute of Electrical Engineers convention in January 1934 in NY, NY. These papers were presented by engineers and scientists, all working for or with Bell Telephone Laboratories who were members of either the Acoustical society of America or the AIEE. The fundamentals of audio reproduction are well covered and discussed in this series of papers. These technical papers were compiled by Paul W. Klipsch in 1964, and made available to serious audiophiles as the reprinted "Symposium of Auditory Perspective".
In the second of the reprinted papers, titled "Auditory Perspective - Physical factors" written by JS Steinberg and WB Snow, the forward reads "In considering the physical factors affecting it, auditory perspective is defined in this paper as being reproduction which preserves the spatial relationships of the original sounds. Ideally, this would require an infinite number of separate microphone-to-speaker channels; practically, it is shown (in their paper) that good auditory quality can be obtained with only 2 or 3 channels."
It is noteworthy that the system employed in Washington DC used not two, but three loudspeakers, with a center channel speaker being employed specifically to help the listeners perceive a sense of depth in the performance. The broadcasted performance in Philadelphia was captured by three microphones, one left, one right and one center.
I mention this as it seems a good number of readers are of the opinion that the need for a center channel speaker was an idea born with the advent of Dolby 5.1. It actually preceded it by many years. The sense of depth was shown in the Auditory Perspective paper as requiring that third center channel, and the idea was kept alive from the 40's through the 1990's by Paul W Klipsch who often touted two Klipschorns and a Center Channel LaScala as the ultimate 3-channel High Fidelity Speaker system for the home. That good sound requires a center channel speaker is not a new idea. When measured by the length of our lifespans, it is a very old one.
I thought that might be of interest to you.
Interesting article, thank you. I have read that one and how stereo was originally intended to be 3 speakers. I don't doubt that 3 identical speakers would be better for trying to reproduce the sound as would be heard from a actual stage. As for movies when most of the sound is mixed for the center it seems less filling and 1 dimensional to me. I bet for some movies if you were able to condense everything into the center they wouldn't sound much different than having a complete surround setup.
I very well may be happier with another tower but I don't have room or don't want to raise my display that high. If the center channel is the most important speaker wouldn't it make sense to use the mains where you can get better sound quality? I have my towers toed in and don't have any complaints about hearing more dialogue from one side. I find the sweet spot to be more critical with surrounds. I suspect the issues from not having a center could be the more subtle sounds from having the sound track condensed. I will probably keep the center around for a while and give myself a chance to get used to it before I reevaluate.
I very well may be happier with another tower but I don't have room or don't want to raise my display that high. If the center channel is the most important speaker wouldn't it make sense to use the mains where you can get better sound quality? I have my towers toed in and don't have any complaints about hearing more dialogue from one side. I find the sweet spot to be more critical with surrounds. I suspect the issues from not having a center could be the more subtle sounds from having the sound track condensed. I will probably keep the center around for a while and give myself a chance to get used to it before I reevaluate.
Three channel "stereo" was never practical, so it was a non starter. In the 30's, everything was mono and sound quality was poor. 2 channel stereo was not even available until the 50's!
You have to breakout your movies better. In my opinion 5.1 movies sound better being played back in a 5.1 system. Cinema modes can add a bit of "life" to the sound, but that depends on the movie.
Now, there are tons of 1.0 and 2.0 movies out there. Some are mono, some are stereo, and some are matrix 2.0 surround. I have moved my receiver settings from the matrix playback movie modes to the music modes. PL-2 music and Neo music sound better to me than PL-2 movie and Neo movie. You end up with a wider soundstage.
Experiment a bit. Give everything a try for 2 channel movie/tv material. For music, I prefer straight 2.1 channel sound.
Quote:
Originally Posted by JediSpork /forum/post/18118986
Interesting article, thank you. I have read that one and how stereo was originally intended to be 3 speakers. I don't doubt that 3 identical speakers would be better for trying to reproduce the sound as would be heard from a actual stage.
Three channel "stereo" was never practical, so it was a non starter. In the 30's, everything was mono and sound quality was poor. 2 channel stereo was not even available until the 50's!
Quote:
Originally Posted by JediSpork /forum/post/18118986
As for movies when most of the sound is mixed for the center it seems less filling and 1 dimensional to me. I bet for some movies if you were able to condense everything into the center they wouldn't sound much different than having a complete surround setup.
You have to breakout your movies better. In my opinion 5.1 movies sound better being played back in a 5.1 system. Cinema modes can add a bit of "life" to the sound, but that depends on the movie.
Now, there are tons of 1.0 and 2.0 movies out there. Some are mono, some are stereo, and some are matrix 2.0 surround. I have moved my receiver settings from the matrix playback movie modes to the music modes. PL-2 music and Neo music sound better to me than PL-2 movie and Neo movie. You end up with a wider soundstage.
Experiment a bit. Give everything a try for 2 channel movie/tv material. For music, I prefer straight 2.1 channel sound.
I've run into folks that thought the centre channel was invented for movies, even referring to it as the "dialogue channel". Ironically, the first movie to use 3 speakers across the front was Disney's 'Fantasia', hardly a dialogue driven film. BTW, the movie used the same orchestra and conductor (Leopold Stokowski, a huge proponent of stereo) as the Bell Labs experiment mentioned in your post.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Gertjan /forum/post/18118564
I was just reading this article , in which the following was mentioned:
Quote:
...it seems a good number of readers are of the opinion that the need for a center channel speaker was an idea born with the advent of Dolby 5.1.
I've run into folks that thought the centre channel was invented for movies, even referring to it as the "dialogue channel". Ironically, the first movie to use 3 speakers across the front was Disney's 'Fantasia', hardly a dialogue driven film. BTW, the movie used the same orchestra and conductor (Leopold Stokowski, a huge proponent of stereo) as the Bell Labs experiment mentioned in your post.
Not necessarily, since the mains are closer to the side walls AND reproduce centre content as dual-mono, both of which increase comb filtering. For mono content that is supposed to image at the centre of the front soundstage, you're better off using a single speaker at the centre of the front soundstage.
Quote:
Originally Posted by JediSpork /forum/post/18118986
If the center channel is the most important speaker wouldn't it make sense to use the mains where you can get better sound quality?
Not necessarily, since the mains are closer to the side walls AND reproduce centre content as dual-mono, both of which increase comb filtering. For mono content that is supposed to image at the centre of the front soundstage, you're better off using a single speaker at the centre of the front soundstage.
Just try it and see what you like best.
Technically, a centre channel serves more purpous in a big venue such as a movie theatre because of the scale in relation to the speed of sound.
Because the big distance between the speakers and the viewer in a big venue is large when sitting off-centre by some degrees, it will create a much bigger difference in arrival time betwen left and right channel compared to sitting at the same angle in a small venue like a normal home theatre.
The big difference in arival time in the big venue will tend to shift the sound almost completely to the side you're sitting at. Put in a centre channel in the middle of the screen and you'll move the sound more into the screen.
There are speakers specifically designed to counteract these effects in a smaller venue by carefully controlled directivity and off-axis response (like the speakers I have that maintain the stereo perspective perfectly even sitting considerably off-axis). In reality however, going phantom may degrade the sound in other ways, such as the dynamic compression that is used by some of the formats when downmixing the centre.
H
Because the big distance between the speakers and the viewer in a big venue is large when sitting off-centre by some degrees, it will create a much bigger difference in arrival time betwen left and right channel compared to sitting at the same angle in a small venue like a normal home theatre.
The big difference in arival time in the big venue will tend to shift the sound almost completely to the side you're sitting at. Put in a centre channel in the middle of the screen and you'll move the sound more into the screen.
There are speakers specifically designed to counteract these effects in a smaller venue by carefully controlled directivity and off-axis response (like the speakers I have that maintain the stereo perspective perfectly even sitting considerably off-axis). In reality however, going phantom may degrade the sound in other ways, such as the dynamic compression that is used by some of the formats when downmixing the centre.
H
I'll admit most of this is over my head. I've read that comb filtering normally doesn't matter but it does when I don't have a center?
After watching several movies and going between stereo and mc I can now tell what you mean by dual mono vs having it come from a single speaker by the display. I can't decide which I prefer. In stereo voices sound deeper and more spacious although a bit more hollow. With the center on voices are more natural sounding but also sound boxy. I'm not sure if the boxy sound is my imagination or if its due to using a horizontal center. It becomes less noticeable the more I listen to it so it could be because I'm used to stereo.
I was also digging through other threads and you mentioned that if movies were mixed for no center it would be done differently than a avr down mixes. This is concerning. What about people that want to listen with headphones? Besides not being aesthetically pleasing the center also blocks all my components under the display which I'm using a finicky remote extender to control. I have my blu player sitting behind the display so I can still change discs. Placement of a huge 35 pound speaker is my issue. I'm starting to wish all movies came with a separate track optimized for stereo for those of us that don't have a at projector screen and trying to stay living room friendly. Do the creators of this content assume every ht enthusiast is going to have 3 perfect sounding perfect matching speakers?
Quote:
Originally Posted by sdurani /forum/post/18121384
Not necessarily, since the mains are closer to the side walls AND reproduce centre content as dual-mono, both of which increase comb filtering. For mono content that is supposed to image at the centre of the front soundstage, you're better off using a single speaker at the centre of the front soundstage.
I'll admit most of this is over my head. I've read that comb filtering normally doesn't matter but it does when I don't have a center?
After watching several movies and going between stereo and mc I can now tell what you mean by dual mono vs having it come from a single speaker by the display. I can't decide which I prefer. In stereo voices sound deeper and more spacious although a bit more hollow. With the center on voices are more natural sounding but also sound boxy. I'm not sure if the boxy sound is my imagination or if its due to using a horizontal center. It becomes less noticeable the more I listen to it so it could be because I'm used to stereo.
I was also digging through other threads and you mentioned that if movies were mixed for no center it would be done differently than a avr down mixes. This is concerning. What about people that want to listen with headphones? Besides not being aesthetically pleasing the center also blocks all my components under the display which I'm using a finicky remote extender to control. I have my blu player sitting behind the display so I can still change discs. Placement of a huge 35 pound speaker is my issue. I'm starting to wish all movies came with a separate track optimized for stereo for those of us that don't have a at projector screen and trying to stay living room friendly. Do the creators of this content assume every ht enthusiast is going to have 3 perfect sounding perfect matching speakers?
Most of us have spent a lifetime listening to vocals reproduced as dual-mono phantom images, so it sounds familiar and normal for home audio. Not surprising that you can't decide which you prefer. However, as you've already noticed, you're going through an unlearning process as you listen more and more using a centre speaker.
Quote:
Originally Posted by JediSpork /forum/post/18137863
I can't decide which I prefer.
...
It becomes less noticeable the more I listen to it so it could be because I'm used to stereo.
Most of us have spent a lifetime listening to vocals reproduced as dual-mono phantom images, so it sounds familiar and normal for home audio. Not surprising that you can't decide which you prefer. However, as you've already noticed, you're going through an unlearning process as you listen more and more using a centre speaker.
In the past, when i had a cheapo HTiB setup, which had a dedicated center speaker, there was indeed a clear difference in the audio coming from the L/R vs C speakers.
For several years now i have had 3 identical speakers in the front. I do not have the "boxy" sound or anything like that with the center anymore. The 3 speakers sound exactly the same. In fact, in the past i have played around with switching the AVR between stereo L+R and L+C+R, and in some situations i was unable to tell whether the center channel was on or not until i got up close to hear if sound was coming from it!
The main difference i notice with using the 3 vs 2 speakers is when i sit off-center, the center speaker helps anchor the sound to the center better, providing a better distribution of the sound across the screen. In my limited experience, this seems to be more critical when you have a large screen where the L+R speakers would be quite a ways apart (like at least 4-5 feet).
I hope that the content creators will assume you have the best possible equipment, and produce the content as neutral and uncolored as possible. That way it would play back on that equipment to the fullest potential, and you can tweak it to your own tastes as desired. Think of the dreaded EE for example - It's supposed to make for picture that's perceived to be sharper. On lesser display devices, this may be desirable. But on high-end displays, you don't want it. By introducing it into the source, you can't get rid of it though. It'd be better to not put that EE in there, and leave the source neutral, and let the end-user change the settings on his display to get the desired picture. The same goes for the audio - Put it on there neutral, and let the end-user tweak it through his equipment. Of course, i would also hope that on cheaper equipment it still sounds acceptable...
Quote:
Originally Posted by JediSpork /forum/post/18137863
After watching several movies and going between stereo and mc I can now tell what you mean by dual mono vs having it come from a single speaker by the display. I can't decide which I prefer. In stereo voices sound deeper and more spacious although a bit more hollow. With the center on voices are more natural sounding but also sound boxy. I'm not sure if the boxy sound is my imagination or if its due to using a horizontal center. It becomes less noticeable the more I listen to it so it could be because I'm used to stereo.
In the past, when i had a cheapo HTiB setup, which had a dedicated center speaker, there was indeed a clear difference in the audio coming from the L/R vs C speakers.
For several years now i have had 3 identical speakers in the front. I do not have the "boxy" sound or anything like that with the center anymore. The 3 speakers sound exactly the same. In fact, in the past i have played around with switching the AVR between stereo L+R and L+C+R, and in some situations i was unable to tell whether the center channel was on or not until i got up close to hear if sound was coming from it!
The main difference i notice with using the 3 vs 2 speakers is when i sit off-center, the center speaker helps anchor the sound to the center better, providing a better distribution of the sound across the screen. In my limited experience, this seems to be more critical when you have a large screen where the L+R speakers would be quite a ways apart (like at least 4-5 feet).
Quote:
Do the creators of this content assume every ht enthusiast is going to have 3 perfect sounding perfect matching speakers?
I hope that the content creators will assume you have the best possible equipment, and produce the content as neutral and uncolored as possible. That way it would play back on that equipment to the fullest potential, and you can tweak it to your own tastes as desired. Think of the dreaded EE for example - It's supposed to make for picture that's perceived to be sharper. On lesser display devices, this may be desirable. But on high-end displays, you don't want it. By introducing it into the source, you can't get rid of it though. It'd be better to not put that EE in there, and leave the source neutral, and let the end-user change the settings on his display to get the desired picture. The same goes for the audio - Put it on there neutral, and let the end-user tweak it through his equipment. Of course, i would also hope that on cheaper equipment it still sounds acceptable...
Content creators neither know nor care what speakers you have. They mix content so that it sounds good to them (and the director) on their system in their studio.
Quote:
Originally Posted by JediSpork /forum/post/18137863
Do the creators of this content assume every ht enthusiast is going to have 3 perfect sounding perfect matching speakers?
Quote:
Originally Posted by Gertjan /forum/post/18140490
I hope that the content creators will assume you have the best possible equipment, and produce the content as neutral and uncolored as possible.
Content creators neither know nor care what speakers you have. They mix content so that it sounds good to them (and the director) on their system in their studio.
When I bought my first 5.1 system I knew very little about how everything "should" be setup. I bought the cheapest center in the store. It was mismatched to my mains and would distort when you turned it up very loud. I've been using phantom until now. Although the speaker was junk the way the sound was presented had something different about it. I noticed the same thing on a few other low end setups but didn't understand why until it was pointed out to me here.
I temporarily switched one of my towers with the center and I'm detecting the same differences as before when switching from stereo to mc. This is besides the fact that the tower is slightly ahead on sound quality as the center. Even if a person sits in the sweet spot there is something different about having a center that is hard to describe.
I'm starting to like having the center the more I listen to it. I now find my horizontal center acceptable after being able to narrow down why it sounded different than using phantom. Thank you for pointing this out to me. Its always been a question that I've had but didn't know how to ask.
I temporarily switched one of my towers with the center and I'm detecting the same differences as before when switching from stereo to mc. This is besides the fact that the tower is slightly ahead on sound quality as the center. Even if a person sits in the sweet spot there is something different about having a center that is hard to describe.
I'm starting to like having the center the more I listen to it. I now find my horizontal center acceptable after being able to narrow down why it sounded different than using phantom. Thank you for pointing this out to me. Its always been a question that I've had but didn't know how to ask.
If the conclusion was that "good auditory quality can be obtained with only 2 or 3 channels", then the fact that the testing was performed with 3 channels is not really noteworthy, unless it's being argued that the conclusion didn't actually follow from the results of the experiment.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Gertjan /forum/post/18118564
I was just reading this article , in which the following was mentioned:
Quote:
...
practically, it is shown (in their paper) that good auditory quality can be obtained with only 2 or 3 channels."
It is noteworthy that the system employed in Washington DC used not two, but three loudspeakers, with a center channel speaker being employed specifically to help the listeners perceive a sense of depth in the performance. ...
I thought that might be of interest to you.
If the conclusion was that "good auditory quality can be obtained with only 2 or 3 channels", then the fact that the testing was performed with 3 channels is not really noteworthy, unless it's being argued that the conclusion didn't actually follow from the results of the experiment.
I just found another article that looks interesting. I don't understand much of it but does this mean that in the future a phantom center could be more like a real center?
Quote:
AES E-Library
Fixing the Phantom Center: Diffusing Acoustical Crosstalk
When two loudspeakers play the same signal, a “phantom center” image is produced between the speakers. However, this image differs from one produced by a real center speaker. In particular, acoustical crosstalk produces a comb-filtering effect, with cancellations that may be in the frequency range needed for the intelligibility of speech. We present a method for using phase decorrelation to fill in these gaps and produce a flatter magnitude response, reducing coloration and potentially enhancing dialogue clarity. This method also improves headphone compatibility, and it reduces the tendency of the phantom image to move toward the nearest speaker.
Author: Vickers, Earl
Affiliation: STMicroelectronics, Santa Clara, CA, USA
AES Convention:127 (October 2009) Paper Number:7916
http://www.aes.org/e-lib/browse.cfm?elib=15111
Sure. It's a common misconception that a centre speaker is only useful for off-axis listeners. Fact is, it also benefits the listener in the sweet spot.
When you hear phantom vocals at the centre of the soundstage, you're actually hearing that voice four times. The sound from the left speaker first hits your left ear (it's nearer) and then wraps around your head and strikes the right ear a short time later. Same for sound from the right speaker, first arriving at the nearby ear and then the opposite ear.
By comparison, vocals from a centre speaker shoot directly to both ears, just as would happen if a real person was talking in front of you. Not having to deal with two pairs of arrival times is also why a centre speaker does a better job of reproducing soundstage depth than a phantom centre (one of the reasons why Bell Labs used 3 speakers across the front for their first public demonstration of "stereo").
So a centre speaker is useful for the listener in the sweet spot. And yes, it will sound different from a phantom centre (whether that difference sounds better or worse will come down to personal preference).
Good to hear. I hope at some point down the road you end up with three speakers across the front that are more closely timbre matched.
Quote:
Originally Posted by JediSpork /forum/post/18142921
Even if a person sits in the sweet spot there is something different about having a center that is hard to describe.
Sure. It's a common misconception that a centre speaker is only useful for off-axis listeners. Fact is, it also benefits the listener in the sweet spot.
When you hear phantom vocals at the centre of the soundstage, you're actually hearing that voice four times. The sound from the left speaker first hits your left ear (it's nearer) and then wraps around your head and strikes the right ear a short time later. Same for sound from the right speaker, first arriving at the nearby ear and then the opposite ear.
By comparison, vocals from a centre speaker shoot directly to both ears, just as would happen if a real person was talking in front of you. Not having to deal with two pairs of arrival times is also why a centre speaker does a better job of reproducing soundstage depth than a phantom centre (one of the reasons why Bell Labs used 3 speakers across the front for their first public demonstration of "stereo").
So a centre speaker is useful for the listener in the sweet spot. And yes, it will sound different from a phantom centre (whether that difference sounds better or worse will come down to personal preference).
Quote:
I'm starting to like having the center the more I listen to it. I now find my horizontal center acceptable after being able to narrow down why it sounded different than using phantom.
Good to hear. I hope at some point down the road you end up with three speakers across the front that are more closely timbre matched.
1 - 19 of 19 Posts
- This is an older thread, you may not receive a response, and could be reviving an old thread. Please consider creating a new thread.
AVS Forum
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!
Full Forum Listing
Top Contributors this Month
View All
WilliamR
961 Replies
BASSAHOLIC
529 Replies
bass addict
401 Replies
Recommended Communities
