"It's the Multichannel, Stupid"

[Bernd]

This whole argument is about as dumb as trying to compare electic guitars to acoustic guitars. Which one is better? BOTH! 2-channel is great and so is 5.1. It's purely up to the listener as to which one he/she likes. If you want to invest money in 2 channel than so be it, if you feel that surround information adds to the experience than go that route. However, here is the bigger question....which one allows you to do both? Ahhhh, now that's where it gets interesting.

I can play things back in 2 channel and 5.1/6.1, but someone who has a dedicated 2 channel setup...they are not able to go to 5.1 with a flick of a button. So I play stereo when I want the pure 2 channel sound of CD's or even some 2.0 SACDs. I then swith over to 5.1 when playing content with that information on it.

Ok, let's see if this debate still goes on and on........

I think you missunderstood my intentions. I am not after to see which one is better. The same as you can't compare Apples with Oranges or electric guitar with an accoustic one.
I want to find out if it is possible, in a similar priceband, to get quality reproduction of the same high standard that I am used to with 2 CH, with MC.
So far my experience has not been so good. As I mentioned before if I have to split my Speaker budget from 2 to 5 I have to loose out somewhere on quality.
Also I am surprised how entrenched the two sides are when yet it is about enjoyment. I am only suspicious of the claims how much better MC is and I will try my best to satisfy my yearning, if I can solve the Speaker Issue.
I don't want a switch to select between 2Ch and MC. I am trying to build a dedicated MC system to compare. I will give it every chance and with a completely open mind.
Wooch thanks for some of the music recommendations. I could do with some more.
I will be loking at a Copland set up tonight (CVA 306 and CVA 535). Looks promising.
All advice and suggestions are welcome.

Peace

Bernd

[Resident Loser]

Those What multichannel music recordings have you actually heard that do this? You're talking a lot about multichannel, but I just wonder how much actual listening and/or hands-on experience with setting up multichannel systems went into forming these observations.

...I'm not so much talking about MC as I am about stereo recordings and the applicable, contemporary SOTA...unfortunately, the MC re-issues seem to be simply, for the most part, a reprocessing of multi-track masters...Unless they include separate ambience information channels, there really aren't too much different from mono reprocessed into stereo IMHO...and yes, I know it's an oversimplification, but I don't want to venure too far afield

Again, if you start from scratch and record a normal presentation AND also the ambient info (room cues, etc.), that would be fine...we all know however, that ain't happnin'...In the case of the Mercury Living Presence 3-channel re-issues, at least the real-deal software is there (albeit not ambient info, rather center-fill) to accomplish it's purpose...I think this is a perfect application for the MC technology...Everything else is an also-ran, a further manipulation of an already over-manipulated and less-than-optimum source.

Re: the performance art aspect...some time ago there was a thread or two, suggesting MC might be useful in the scenario of a centralized listener surrounded by the performers...I disagreed with the concept then as I do now...I mentioned it in this thread pre-emptively.

Waybackwhen after the quad fizzle, ambience recovery was a hot thing in audio circles...no new software required, just a magic box, another amp and two more speakers, I purchase a Sound Concepts SD550 and the other required hardware and the results were quite convincing...The trick was simply to continue the front hemisphere in an unobtrusive manner...judicious application of the processing was key...focus, localization, all improved (of course, it's only my strictly anecdotal opinion on that)...I'd still be using it today had the unit not malfunctioned and some of the internals gone MD...

So, in a nutshell, MC does little more than what that gear could do. Given the state of digital art, I'm quite sure a processor could have been devised that woud run rings around the 550 and not required any software reissues of that bought-and-paid-for catalog previously mentioned. I don't have a big problem purchasing hardware, it's the rendered-by-the manufacturer obsolete software that irk's me to no end. I have mono shellac and I have mono and stereo vinyl...home brew RTR tape...I have cassettes...I have CDs...each one supplanted by the next in the guise of technological improvement. More like pecuniary improvement for the industry if you ask me.

One other thing to consider: do we hear stereophonically or binaurally? There is a difference.

jimHJJ(...alas, we live in a world of uninspired remakes...teevee, movies, Broadway, plagiarised books...an artistic vacuum and a very proftiable one...)

[shokhead]

Man,just buy 3 more speakers and listen to MC.

[Feanor]

...
I don't want a switch to select between 2Ch and MC. I am trying to build a dedicated MC system to compare. I will give it every chance and with a completely open mind
....
Bernd

I agree with this because I think the skeptic will be persuaded of the inherent advantages of MC with a relatively modest setup (-- such as the one I suggested above).

Software is important however. As R.L. (I think it was) pointed out, reissues in MC that were not recorded with MC in mind are not, in general, going to convince. Seek out the latest, best classical recordings produced with MC in mind. I will provide a short list of ones I think are pretty good as soon as I can get to it.

[kexodusc]

I agree with this because I think the skeptic will be persuaded of the inherent advantages of MC with a relatively modest setup (-- such as the one I suggested above).

Software is important however. As R.L. (I think it was) pointed out, reissues in MC that were not recorded with MC in mind are not, in general, going to convince. Seek out the latest, best classical recordings produced with MC in mind. I will provide a short list of ones I think are pretty good as soon as I can get to it.

RL's point was a good one. MC isn't a lost cause for "old" recordings though. Many modern recordings are done in multi-channel, and there are more than few classic recordings that were done in the Quad era....Beethoven's 5th and 7th Symphonies - Kleiber on Deutsche Grammaphone is the pinnacle of this, IMO. SACD was the first time ever that this performance was reproduced the way it was originally intended!!! What an amazing coincidence. I own it on vinyl, cd, and SACD. There is no comparison - hi-rez and tru multichannel. I am such a huge fan of this disc and Beethoven's 5th, that the decision to incororate MC audio into my setup was worth this masterpiece alone. Everything else is just gravy.

[Bernd]

[QUOTE=kexodusc] ....Beethoven's 5th and 7th Symphonies - Kleiber on Deutsche Grammaphone is the pinnacle of this, IMO. SACD was the first time ever that this performance was reproduced the way it was originally intended!!! [ QUOTE]

I had no idea you are that old.

Peace

Bernd

[kexodusc]

I had no idea you are that old.

Peace

Bernd

LOL.
I'll be honest, I'm not even 30 yet. But I had excellent music teachers (including my dad) and a father with a very large vinyl collection - fortunate enough to have developed an ear for good music I guess (though the old man questions many of my modern selections )

[bobsticks]

I had no idea you are that old.

Peace

Bernd[/QUOTE]

How old does one have to be to appreciate classical music? You aren't engaging in the age-old, time-honored, anti-PC stereotyping via age descrimination, are you friend Bernd??

[Bernd]

Not at all. No discrimination from these shores on anything
Just when Kex put that the 5th and the 7th sounded as it was intended I thought he had touched base with Ludwig von way back when.........
My wife constantly shakes her head at my music selection. She is a through and through musical and stage fan. Can't stand the stuff. But live and let live.

Peace

Bernd

[Resident Loser]

I had no idea you are that old.

Peace

Bernd

How old does one have to be to appreciate classical music? You aren't engaging in the age-old, time-honored, anti-PC stereotyping via age descrimination, are you friend Bernd??[/QUOTE]

...I think that was a joke...Bernd didn't know Kex and Ludwig were contemporaries...How would Kex know Beethoven's intentions..Oh...never mind...

jimHJJ(...whew!!!...)

[Resident Loser]

Not at all. No discrimination from these shores on anything
Just when Kex put that the 5th and the 7th sounded as it was intended I thought he had touched base with Ludwig von way back when.........
My wife constantly shakes her head at my music selection. She is a through and through musical and stage fan. Can't stand the stuff. But live and let live.

Peace

Bernd

...crossed in the virtual mail...

jimHJJ(...is it just me?...or is it hopeless around here?...)

[Bernd]

...crossed in the virtual mail...

jimHJJ(...is it just me?...or is it hopeless around here?...)

I know I know.
Just to divert slightly. When I went home to Berlin over Easter it was the first time in a long while I spent some time with my second youngest nephew. He is 14 years old and goes to a school for musically gifted children, but the weird thing is he dresses and looks like a Punk from the 70s yet is consummed by classical music (and heavy stuff at that) and that is what he listened to. Most unsettling when you see it.

Peace

Bernd

[GMichael]

I know I know.
Just to divert slightly. When I went home to Berlin over Easter it was the first time in a long while I spent some time with my second youngest nephew. He is 14 years old and goes to a school for musically gifted children, but the weird thing is he dresses and looks like a Punk from the 70s yet is consummed by classical music (and heavy stuff at that) and that is what he listened to. Most unsettling when you see it.

Peace

Bernd

Kinda know how you mean, unsettling. I remember when first I walked down the hall at IBM's TJ Watson Research Center and saw a guy in cut off jeans, a tie died t-shirt, long unwashed hair & beard. I turned to my new coworkers and asked why we were in suits & ties while he dresses like a hippy. Their reply: "He won a nobel prize. He wears what he wants."

Huh?!

[Resident Loser]

but the weird thing is he dresses and looks like a Punk from the 70s yet is consummed by classical music (and heavy stuff at that) and that is what he listened to. Most unsettling when you see it. Peace

...to do with that old saying about books and their covers...

jimHJJ(...can you say peer pressure?...)

[Resident Loser]

This whole argument is about as dumb as trying to compare electic guitars to acoustic guitars. Which one is better? BOTH! .

...it depends...are you playng Fernando Sor's "Variations On A Theme From Die Zauberflote" or the James Gang's "Funk 49"?

jimHJJ(...different tools for different jobs...)

[Feanor]

[quote=Bernd]

....Beethoven's 5th and 7th Symphonies - Kleiber on Deutsche Grammaphone is the pinnacle of this, IMO. SACD was the first time ever that this performance was reproduced the way it was originally intended!!! [ QUOTE]

I had no idea you are that old.

Peace

Bernd

I bought the Klieber on vinyl just after it was released. Today I own the SACD as well.

[kexodusc]

Just to reiterate...Beethoven composed the music, Kleiber did a good job of ensuring a solid performance, but the goal of the recording that night was to capture the performance in that particular hall. And it did - mission accomplished.

Pretty sure Ludder (as I call him) would have been a multi-channel advocate too...

[bobsticks]

...but I think RL's comment was directed at me. For the record, I was in on the joke and was merely taking a poke at Bernd's more liberal sensibilities. Much to his chagrin and much to my delight, it makes him backpeddle a bit---no matter how senseless the charge.
...For my next trick, I'll have Bernd running for a position in the English Parliament on the new, American-style "Neo Conservative Party" with Pat Buchanan as Issues Director and Ann Coulter as Chief Spokeswoman/Spokesperson...

Cheers

[GMichael]

...but I think RL's comment was directed at me. For the record, I was in on the joke and was merely taking a poke at Bernd's more liberal sensibilities. Much to his chagrin and much to my delight, it makes him backpeddle a bit---no matter how senseless the charge.
...For my next trick, I'll have Bernd running for a position in the English Parliament on the new, American-style "Neo Conservative Party" with Pat Buchanon as Issues Director and Ann Coulter as Chief Spokeswoman/Spokesperson...

Cheers

One vote from me. I know that he wants more money in everyone's pockets. No hunger or war. And a pair of great speakers in everyone's living room.

[Woochifer]

...I'm not so much talking about MC as I am about stereo recordings and the applicable, contemporary SOTA...unfortunately, the MC re-issues seem to be simply, for the most part, a reprocessing of multi-track masters...Unless they include separate ambience information channels, there really aren't too much different from mono reprocessed into stereo IMHO...and yes, I know it's an oversimplification, but I don't want to venure too far afield

Again, if you start from scratch and record a normal presentation AND also the ambient info (room cues, etc.), that would be fine...we all know however, that ain't happnin'...In the case of the Mercury Living Presence 3-channel re-issues, at least the real-deal software is there (albeit not ambient info, rather center-fill) to accomplish it's purpose...I think this is a perfect application for the MC technology...Everything else is an also-ran, a further manipulation of an already over-manipulated and less-than-optimum source.

Quite the contrary. While a lot of older recordings (e.g. Miles Davis' In A Silent Way) indeed don't provide enough channels to produce a more enveloping listening experience with a 5.1 setup, plenty of reissues DO incorporate the ambient cues in a very convincing way. To compare this with the old "electronically reprocessed for stereo" LPs is laughable if you actually get around to hearing what a multichannel reissue is capable of versus the degraded sound quality that those reprocessed mono recordings provided. The results are very different. Like I asked before, what recordings are you listening to that would lead you to equate discrete multichannel reissues with processed monophonic issues?

Another thing to consider is that a new multichannel mix also allows for big improvements in the sound quality, because the multichannel mix does NOT use the original two-track mixdown as the master source (there are plenty of two-channel SACD reissues that already do that). The original mixdown might have used inferior analog recorders that degraded the signal during successive mixing passes, and used a lot of signal processing (to create the phantom center stereo effect) and compression (to compensate for limitations of the LP medium) along the way. The multichannel Concord Jazz SACD reissues are great examples of how a new mix taken from the original multi-track masters can significantly improve the sound quality over the original two-track mixdowns.

Waybackwhen after the quad fizzle, ambience recovery was a hot thing in audio circles...no new software required, just a magic box, another amp and two more speakers, I purchase a Sound Concepts SD550 and the other required hardware and the results were quite convincing...The trick was simply to continue the front hemisphere in an unobtrusive manner...judicious application of the processing was key...focus, localization, all improved (of course, it's only my strictly anecdotal opinion on that)...I'd still be using it today had the unit not malfunctioned and some of the internals gone MD...

HUGE difference comparing discrete multichannel with the old matrixed schemes. Matrix decoders can only do so much compared to the precision and accuracy that discrete surround channels provide.

Even the so-called discrete quad formats entailed so much processing and signal manipulation that I would highly doubt the transparency between the quad LP playback and the original four-track master. The multichannel Aubort/Nickrenz SACD reissues are taken from the original four-channel quad masters that were recorded with mic positions in the hall to capture the ambient cues. The SACD is really the first time that those master recordings have been heard as originally intended because the original quad release used matrix encoding. If you want a demonstration of what multichannel is capable, just do a comparison of the two-channel mixdowns of those recordings (which already sound great) with the four-channel discrete track. In my listenings with a variety of matrix decoders over the years, I've never heard anything that approaches the subjective realism that those four-channel recordings provide.

[Bernd]

So here is my experience on my first step on my MC journey.
I arrived at the guys house (a friend of a client of mine) last night to listen to his MC set-up.
Big TV between the two front channel. Not a good start. Anyway modernistic home (pebbles in glass bowl, etc).
He had the mentioned Copland CVA 306 and CVA 535. Very nice looking electronics.
Primare DVD-30 Universal Player and Proac Speakers Response 1SC,Response D15 Centre Cannel1 and a ER1 Sub. Never been a big fan of proacs floor standers but their Standmounts are very good. Cables were all by Chord Co.
So off we go.
The very first thing I noticed was an artifical low frequency reproduction I did not like and it almost stoped the trial there and then. I asked him to take the sub out as I will not use one in my home. No integration at all, if that is at all possible.
So onwards.
The whole set up sounded very clean, nice but ultimately un-engaging, boring and somehow artifical to me and lacking in Soundstage and Detail.
However I really liked the presentation of the Coplands. So I reckon that the digital player and the Proacs where holding proceedings back.
Anyway we carried on. Unfortunatly he had no TT. So all the comparisions were done with the silver discs.
Before I went to him I popped to the local Virgin store and bought 3 SACD.
Kraftwerk-Minimum Maxium
Moody Blues -Days of Future Past
Ian Shaw - Drawn to all things,the songs of Joni Mitchell
he had for my pleassure
The Eagles - Hotel California
and some Mike Oldfield

The Moody Blues piece I know very well as I have it on prestine Vinyl and it sounds superb. What I heard yesterday I did not care for very much. It was boring and confusing. I had sound coming from behind me and nothing seemed to hold together. Man this disc played on a decent TT with a good Moving coil cartridge into a Tube Phono stage into 2CH wipes the floor with the SACD.
It progressed in a similar vein. Very nice but no excitment, and somehow very artifical and enoying.
I can see how people will be impressed by this presentation and as a second system or to watch movies it is doing a good job. But for ultimate Music enjoyment it failed the test for me.
So the score is 2CH (one) - MC (nill).
But this will not be the only trial.I don't give up that easy. Next week I will try and listen to a Unison Research amp with Final Speakers and a Esoteric Silver disc spinner. Looking forward to it.
The Copland Combo found a place on my shortlist. I am sure with a better disc spinner and different speakers it can do a good job.

Peace

Bernd

[Resident Loser]

...but I think RL's comment was directed at me. For the record, I was in on the joke and was merely taking a poke at Bernd's more liberal sensibilities.

...as evidenced by his response (which pre-dates mine by mere minutes; both simply crossed in the mail), Bernd seems to have been under the same impression as I was...curious that...and no, my further comment was meant as a more general indictment...a closer reading of some of the posts will easily reveal my motivations...As I've said to others in the past, you'll know when it's personal...

jimHJJ(...as of yet, I see no reason for it to take that tack...)

[Feanor]

RL's point was a good one. MC isn't a lost cause for "old" recordings though. Many modern recordings are done in multi-channel, and there are more than few classic recordings that were done in the Quad era....Beethoven's 5th and 7th Symphonies - Kleiber on Deutsche Grammaphone is the pinnacle of this, IMO. SACD was the first time ever that this performance was reproduced the way it was originally intended!!! What an amazing coincidence. I own it on vinyl, cd, and SACD. There is no comparison - hi-rez and tru multichannel. I am such a huge fan of this disc and Beethoven's 5th, that the decision to incororate MC audio into my setup was worth this masterpiece alone. Everything else is just gravy.

I had another listen this morning to the 1st movement to reinforce my opinion. And that is that this DG SACD is a not an ideal MC demo, especially for those disinclined to believe in MC's inherent strengths.

To put it succinctly, there is too much instrumental content coming through the rear channels -- too easy for the skeptic to dismiss this as gimmicky.

In the same short audition I also listen to other, IMO, much more convincing SACDs:

• Shostakovich: Symphonies 5 & 9; Valery Gergiev / Kirov Orchestra. Philips 470 651-2; (recorded/mastered in 24 bit / 48 kHz PCM)
• Haydn: The Creation; VokalEnsemble Koln, etc. Naxos 6.110073-74; (mastered in DSD)

Both of these are excellent and use the rear channels purely for ambience. The soundstage and imaging are truly amazing, transcending anything possible in stereo, IMO. (The centre channel not doubt helps with the precise imaging, but I'm not sure its the whole explanation.) My impression is that the reproduction of crescendos with tympani or other bass, reaches a whole new level of impact unknown in stereo even when using a sub -- maybe this is merely the result of 6 bass drivers instead of 2 or 3, I can't say for sure.

On the issue of PCM record/master versus pure DSD, I have no opinion. Both of the above sounded great, but the Haydn perhaps better: this might or might not have to do with DSD vs. PCM.

[Resident Loser]

(1)... plenty of reissues DO incorporate the ambient cues in a very convincing way.

(2)...To compare this with the old "electronically reprocessed for stereo" LPs is laughable

(3)... Like I asked before, what recordings are you listening to that would lead you to equate discrete multichannel reissues with processed monophonic issues?

(4)...Another thing to consider is that a new multichannel mix also allows for big improvements in the sound quality, because the multichannel mix does NOT use the original two-track mixdown as the master source (there are plenty of two-channel SACD reissues that already do that). The original mixdown might have used inferior analog recorders that degraded the signal during successive mixing passes, and used a lot of signal processing (to create the phantom center stereo effect) and compression (to compensate for limitations of the LP medium) along the way. The multichannel Concord Jazz SACD reissues are great examples of how a new mix taken from the original multi-track masters can significantly improve the sound quality over the original two-track mixdowns.

(5)...HUGE difference comparing discrete multichannel with the old matrixed schemes. Matrix decoders can only do so much compared to the precision and accuracy that discrete surround channels provide.

(6)...Even the so-called discrete quad formats entailed so much processing and signal manipulation that I would highly doubt the transparency between the quad LP playback and the original four-track master. The multichannel Aubort/Nickrenz SACD reissues are taken from the original four-channel quad masters that were recorded with mic positions in the hall to capture the ambient cues. The SACD is really the first time that those master recordings have been heard as originally intended because the original quad release used matrix encoding. If you want a demonstration of what multichannel is capable, just do a comparison of the two-channel mixdowns of those recordings (which already sound great) with the four-channel discrete track. In my listenings with a variety of matrix decoders over the years, I've never heard anything that approaches the subjective realism that those four-channel recordings provide.

Let's see if I can provide some conceptual continuity to my participation in this thread:

Here's the premise...

Post #30...I am of the opinion...that, with few exceptions, multi-channel (along with ever-changing media) is an industry-wide contrivance...engineered to render, on a regular basis, most hi-fi systems obsolete, behind-the-times, old school, whatever and to provide a plausible reason to repackage/reissue the paid-for (many times over) catalog of music already in the archives...Couple that last reason to the dearth of capable songwriters/performers and fact that most of the so-called new music is cr@p and you got yerself a fool-proof business plan...

Re: point (1)....I don't recall ever saying MCs couldn't be convincing, I did say however:

Post #66...My only objection... ...to multi-channel (other than those previously stated) is that for the most part it has little or no relationship to reality...

Post#72...just my point...since most of the catalog consists of either re-issues or newer recordings done with the tried-and-true methodology......

Re: Points (2)(4)(6)

Post #66...If you are starting from scratch, recording a smallish ensemble in a controlled environment, you might be able to translate it into a relaistic experience in playback...maybe.

Post #77...I'm not so much talking about MC as I am about stereo recordings and the applicable, contemporary SOTA...unfortunately, the MC re-issues seem to be simply, for the most part, a reprocessing of multi-track masters...Unless they include separate ambience information channels, there really aren't too much different from mono reprocessed into stereo IMHO...and yes, I know it's an oversimplification, but I don't want to venure too far afield

Again, if you start from scratch and record a normal presentation AND also the ambient info (room cues, etc.), that would be fine...we all know however, that ain't happnin'...In the case of the Mercury Living Presence 3-channel re-issues, at least the real-deal software is there (albeit not ambient info, rather center-fill) to accomplish it's purpose...I think this is a perfect application for the MC technology...Everything else is an also-ran, a further manipulation of an already over-manipulated and less-than-optimum source.

Re: point (5)

Post #77...Waybackwhen after the quad fizzle, ambience recovery was a hot thing in audio circles...no new software required, just a magic box, another amp and two more speakers, I purchase a Sound Concepts SD550 and the other required hardware and the results were quite convincing...

The 550 was not a matrix decoder...the software wasn't encoded ergo...As I understood it, it was more of an electronic embellishment of the Dyna-Quad concept with adjustable delay times and reverb levels...and it worked anecdotally well IMHO.

My apologies for going out of sequence, but it works for me...

Re: point (3)As mtry oftimes said..."stereo, I don' need no stinkin' stereo"...Why would I need to own the software or hardware to make any of the statements that I have posted, which in essence equates to the following:

I am of the opinion that due to limitations with regard to use of: close miking techniques resulting in virtually mono signals devoid of real localization cues, overuse of pan pots, overuse of reverberant contrivances to restore those sonic cues, that most of the older master tapes ( and even most of the more contemporary ones) are found to be lacking and that...

...MC product is built on shaky ground...you can put a prom dress on a pig, but she'll still squeal in the mud...

jimHJJ(...tol'ya'so, I knew I'd say it again...See my sign-off Post #66...)

[Bernd]

...
...For my next trick, I'll have Bernd running for a position in the English Parliament on the new, American-style "Neo Conservative Party" with Pat Buchanan as Issues Director and Ann Coulter as Chief Spokeswoman/Spokesperson...

Cheers

Thanks for proposing me. I have thought about it all night (another sleepless one, damn), and I must decline as I am not twisted enough to compete with the Scheisters of the moment. I am however standing, for money in everybodys pocket, no hunger, no war and a decent pair of speakers (if you want MC you have to spent some of that green yourself) in everybodys home. Now that's a start.

Peace

Bernd