Presence speakers - What do you think?

[StevenSurprenant]

I tried it. It was ok, but I liked having the extra two speakers in the rear instead. I think that the new RX-A3010 lets you run all 9.1 (or 9.2) at the same time. My RX-A3000 won't unless I add an external amp.

I never tried running 7.1 since I don't have the room. I suppose I could if I lay speakers on the floor behind the couch or mount them on the ceiling. But you like that better than the presence speakers. It would be nice to hear a complete setup with 7.1 and the presence speakers.

Anyway, you got my curiosity and I might just try it.

Thanks.

[GMichael]

I never tried running 7.1 since I don't have the room. I suppose I could if I lay speakers on the floor behind the couch or mount them on the ceiling. But you like that better than the presence speakers. It would be nice to hear a complete setup with 7.1 and the presence speakers.

Anyway, you got my curiosity and I might just try it.

Thanks.

My room is a bit longer than it is wide. (14x26)
That may be why I prefer the one over the other.

[Sir Terrence the Terrible]

Presence speakers are not needed, not supported, and not beneficial for audio or soundtrack reproduction. It is gimmicky, and was rejected by the studios who preferred 7.1 "on the ground" instead of 9.1 "in the air".

Nobody really needs a DSP to artificially raise sound effects(where they were never positioned during mixing), and move them around in a unnatural way. It sounds artificial, and soundtracks were never created to be heard that way. When I see people preferring this kind of set up, I see them as making up for deficiencies within their speaker system. You don't need ten speakers when eight will do just fine. We only need eight in the studio, and you only need eight at home.

[StevenSurprenant]

Presence speakers are not needed, not supported, and not beneficial for audio or soundtrack reproduction. It is gimmicky, and was rejected by the studios who preferred 7.1 "on the ground" instead of 9.1 "in the air".

Nobody really needs a DSP to artificially raise sound effects(where they were never positioned during mixing), and move them around in a unnatural way. It sounds artificial, and soundtracks were never created to be heard that way. When I see people preferring this kind of set up, I see them as making up for deficiencies within their speaker system. You don't need ten speakers when eight will do just fine. We only need eight in the studio, and you only need eight at home.

I only have a 5.1 system at home, and I much prefer how it sounds compared to a movie theater. I'm not saying that a movie theater doesn't have its strengths, but given a choice of duplicating a movie theater in my home or to use more conventional speakers of high quality, I would hands down go the home route. First off, horns just don't do a good job. They're great for loudness and dynamics, but fall short on the level of details. No offense intended to horn lovers, it's just a personal preference and I'm sure there are some great horns out there.

Horns are mainly used in theaters because they take less power to run and they get loud. It's a compromise of quantity over quality. For their purpose, they are perfect, but in the home, there is better.

As for DSP, well that too is a personal choice. Every room is different and the same system in a small room will sound much different than in a large room. Why should I deny myself something that I feel improves the sound? Why should I let some recording engineer dictate what I should like. Why don't recording engineers do a better job so that we don't have to resort to DSP?

The fact is, that in your world, everything you do makes sense to you, but in the real world outside the studio, it gets much more complicated, the equipment is different, the rooms are different, and peoples expectations are different. There is no one shoe fits all.

Strangely enough, I would never use DSP for my 2 channel system, but for surround, it seems to be useful.

[Sir Terrence the Terrible]

I only have a 5.1 system at home, and I much prefer how it sounds compared to a movie theater. I'm not saying that a movie theater doesn't have its strengths, but given a choice of duplicating a movie theater in my home or to use more conventional speakers of high quality, I would hands down go the home route. First off, horns just don't do a good job. They're great for loudness and dynamics, but fall short on the level of details. No offense intended to horn lovers, it's just a personal preference and I'm sure there are some great horns out there.

Have you heard all horn loaded speakers including custom ones? I don't think so, so to make a statement that horns are only good for dynamic and loudness, and not good on details is a rather ignorant statement.

Horns are mainly used in theaters because they take less power to run and they get loud. It's a compromise of quantity over quality. For their purpose, they are perfect, but in the home, there is better.

Steve, they use JBL or Klipsch THEATER speakers in the theater, and horn made for the home, in the home. The two are quite different not only sonically, but how it is implemented in each environment. These facts do not allow for generalization that are unsupported by lack of knowledge.

As for DSP, well that too is a personal choice. Every room is different and the same system in a small room will sound much different than in a large room. Why should I deny myself something that I feel improves the sound? Why should I let some recording engineer dictate what I should like. Why don't recording engineers do a better job so that we don't have to resort to DSP?

Improves the sound, or colors and render the sound spatially inaccurate. You say you are for accuracy, but yet choose this option. There is nothing accurate about DSP based spatial enhancement not account for on the dubbing stage. Your words, and your choices do not jive very well.

The fact is, that in your world, everything you do makes sense to you, but in the real world outside the studio, it gets much more complicated, the equipment is different, the rooms are different, and peoples expectations are different. There is no one shoe fits all.

This is such a BS statement. as it deifies logic. There is a reason that the ITU-775 speaker setup standard works for both the studio, and the home environment. They both will rendered the soundtrack spatially accurate and translatable from one environment to another. When you start doing stupid things like using three center speakers, DSP that steer sound upward, and esoteric speakers for soundtrack playback, then you need band-aids like this to make it work. If you follow the ITU-B775 standard, you don't need DSP to fill in the sonic holes that alternate placement create.

Strangely enough, I would never use DSP for my 2 channel system, but for surround, it seems to be useful.

I guess it is useful if you like colored and spatially inaccurate gimmicks.

[E-Stat]

There is nothing accurate about DSP based spatial enhancement not account[ed] for on the dubbing stage.

Amen!

rw

[StevenSurprenant]

Have you heard all horn loaded speakers including custom ones? I don't think so, so to make a statement that horns are only good for dynamic and loudness, and not good on details is a rather ignorant statement.

This is such a BS statement. as it deifies logic. There is a reason that the ITU-775 speaker setup standard works for both the studio, and the home environment. They both will rendered the soundtrack spatially accurate and translatable from one environment to another. When you start doing stupid things like using three center speakers, DSP that steer sound upward, and esoteric speakers for soundtrack playback, then you need band-aids like this to make it work. If you follow the ITU-B775 standard, you don't need DSP to fill in the sonic holes that alternate placement create.



I guess it is useful if you like colored and spatially inaccurate gimmicks.

No I haven't heard "All" horns, no-one has, but the many I have heard sound pretty decent, except they have, for lack of a better word, a hard sound to them. I have read about some horns that were supposed to be very good in relation to more conventional speakers. They sure were pretty! IMO I have never heard a horn sound as smooth and natural as other types of speakers. I'm also pretty sure there are some horns that will change my mind about them. I just haven't had the opportunity to hear those. As I said, it's a matter of taste. Some people don't like metal dome tweeters. There is no right or wrong. My opinion doesn't add up to a hill of beans except for those that feel as I do. Besides, everybody has their preferences. I had one guy tell me that my Quad ESL speakers sounded "almost" as good as his Bose. I didn't blast him for his opinion. If that's what he believed, then for him, it was true. We both went on our merry way. Besides, this isn't about horns. The only reason I mentioned it was because IMO other types of speakers sound more realistic and natural and if accuracy is what your main objective is, then you could do better.

I have no doubt that in a comparison between my system and yours, your system will blow mine out of the water for the wow factor, but play it at a more reasonable level like 85db peak, and my "budget" system would be more pleasing to listen to. Well, that's what I think. There is nothing wrong with horns, it only a matter of preference. The same applies to dipole planers versus box speakers. People who own box speakers rarely hear the boxes, but dipole speaker owners sure do.

Once I was listening to some Avalon speakers and I was thinking they sounded pretty good until my friend stood between them and began singing. That's when I realized how artificial they sounded. I think Avalon speakers are pretty good, but there was no way to confuse them with the real thing. The same applies to almost every stereo system I've heard. As good as speakers can get, they all pretty much sound like stereo's. That, in no way, diminishes our enjoyment of them, but this epiphany I had brought me back to my senses. As I told you before, at today's level of technology, we are dealing with a flawed technology and we delude ourselves into thinking that it's better than what it is. So, when you talk about accuracy, you are talking about technology that still has a long way to go before we can use the term "accurate".

"There is nothing accurate about DSP based spatial enhancement not account for on the dubbing stage"

The thing you seem to ignore is that each room changes the sound, sometimes dramatically, and what you hear in the studio is not what people hear in their home. The only way it could is if the home owner had an exact duplicate of the recording studio "in their home", room and all. That fact alone destroys any chance of duplicating what you hear in the studio. The room is every bit as important as the audio system. You say that people shouldn't use DSP, but would you be just as critical about the "room" which can have an even more profound effect on the sound. Then there is the fact that no-one uses the same speakers at home as you use in the recording studio. What you hear on your studio monitors will sound different than what I hear at home. I have yet to hear two speakers of different brands sound alike, at any price point. So, even before you get into DSP, you have to deal with room effects and different voiced speakers. If the goal is to duplicate what you hear during a recording session, the battle is lost before it begins.

As for the "ITU-775 speaker setup standard ", that is exactly how my system is set up within the constraints of my room.

"The fact is, that in your world, everything you do makes sense to you, but in the real world outside the studio, it gets much more complicated, the equipment is different, the rooms are different, and peoples expectations are different. There is no one shoe fits all."

[This is such a BS statement. as it deifies logic]

Really? Need I say more?

BTW, I picked up a sound pressure meter, as you suggested, and spec'd my speakers which I had adjusted by ear. They were all right on the money and needed no adjustments. It was money wasted, but I do like the conformation that it is right.

[Sir Terrence the Terrible]

No I haven't heard "All" horns, no-one has, but the many I have heard sound pretty decent, except they have, for lack of a better word, a hard sound to them. I have read about some horns that were supposed to be very good in relation to more conventional speakers. They sure were pretty! IMO I have never heard a horn sound as smooth and natural as other types of speakers. I'm also pretty sure there are some horns that will change my mind about them. I just haven't had the opportunity to hear those. As I said, it's a matter of taste. Some people don't like metal dome tweeters. There is no right or wrong. My opinion doesn't add up to a hill of beans except for those that feel as I do. Besides, everybody has their preferences. I had one guy tell me that my Quad ESL speakers sounded "almost" as good as his Bose. I didn't blast him for his opinion. If that's what he believed, then for him, it was true. We both went on our merry way. Besides, this isn't about horns. The only reason I mentioned it was because IMO other types of speakers sound more realistic and natural and if accuracy is what your main objective is, then you could do better.

The beginning of this comment should be prefaced with the words "in my very limited exposure to horn speakers". They make horn loaded speakers that don't even sound like horns, like my system in my signature. There is a whole world out there in regards to horn loaded speakers that you have no exposure to, and what makes your comments so laughable.

I have no doubt that in a comparison between my system and yours, your system will blow mine out of the water for the wow factor, but play it at a more reasonable level like 85db peak, and my "budget" system would be more pleasing to listen to. Well, that's what I think. There is nothing wrong with horns, it only a matter of preference. The same applies to dipole planers versus box speakers. People who own box speakers rarely hear the boxes, but dipole speaker owners sure do.

Here is the problem with this statement. You have zero basis to make it. You have never heard my system play, whether loud of soft, so you have no idea of its performance against your "budget" system. This is a prime example of someone pulling crap out of the air, and throwing it against the wall to see if it would stick. It doesn't, so perhaps one should stop throwing it against the wall.

Once I was listening to some Avalon speakers and I was thinking they sounded pretty good until my friend stood between them and began singing. That's when I realized how artificial they sounded. I think Avalon speakers are pretty good, but there was no way to confuse them with the real thing. The same applies to almost every stereo system I've heard. As good as speakers can get, they all pretty much sound like stereo's. That, in no way, diminishes our enjoyment of them, but this epiphany I had brought me back to my senses. As I told you before, at today's level of technology, we are dealing with a flawed technology and we delude ourselves into thinking that it's better than what it is. So, when you talk about accuracy, you are talking about technology that still has a long way to go before we can use the term "accurate".

This statement has the profoundness of a tea spoon of water on a sidewalk. We are not trying to reproduce the real thing, we are trying to reproduce what a microphone captures. There is a difference. If a speaker can reproduce all that the microphone captures, it is an accurate speakers. Not all speakers can do this, but that is the goal.

Anyone who uses a an unbalanced voice next to a speaker reproducing music as a reference, needs his head checked.

"There is nothing accurate about DSP based spatial enhancement not account for on the dubbing stage"

The thing you seem to ignore is that each room changes the sound, sometimes dramatically, and what you hear in the studio is not what people hear in their home.

Which is why I always check my studio mixes on my home systems. I have not ignored anything, you are assuming much.

The only way it could is if the home owner had an exact duplicate of the recording studio "in their home", room and all. That fact alone destroys any chance of duplicating what you hear in the studio. The room is every bit as important as the audio system. You say that people shouldn't use DSP, but would you be just as critical about the "room" which can have an even more profound effect on the sound. Then there is the fact that no-one uses the same speakers at home as you use in the recording studio. What you hear on your studio monitors will sound different than what I hear at home. I have yet to hear two speakers of different brands sound alike, at any price point. So, even before you get into DSP, you have to deal with room effects and different voiced speakers. If the goal is to duplicate what you hear during a recording session, the battle is lost before it begins.

Again you are making a ton of assumptions, and propagating BS red herring arguments. I am not interested in matching a home "sound: with a studio sound. I am interested in whether a home system can capture everything we have mixed in the studio, room aside. I am not interested in the room signature of the home, but the resolution of the speaker system itself. Room signature is one thing, speaker resolution is another completely different thing. I don't have the two mixed up, but you do.

As for the "ITU-775 speaker setup standard ", that is exactly how my system is set up within the constraints of my room.

Steven, either you follow the standard, or you don't. If the constraints of your room do not allow for it, then you are not following the standard PERIOD!

"The fact is, that in your world, everything you do makes sense to you, but in the real world outside the studio, it gets much more complicated, the equipment is different, the rooms are different, and peoples expectations are different. There is no one shoe fits all."

I don't live in a either or world, I live in both worlds. I have a studio system AND several mutlichannel systems in my homes. This idea that I only live in one world is born out of more assumptions on your part. Don't assume, ask questions and get the facts, then make an opinion. This is how you keep the horse before the cart, and not the other way around.

[This is such a BS statement. as it deifies logic]

Really? Need I say more?

Please don't, you have said quite enough.

BTW, I picked up a sound pressure meter, as you suggested, and spec'd my speakers which I had adjusted by ear. They were all right on the money and needed no adjustments. It was money wasted, but I do like the conformation that it is right.

Now you are blowing smoke in my face. Our ears do not make good measuring or balancing devices, and science has proven this over and over again. Unless your hearing is can tell 72db from 75db(and nobody's can) then you are BS'ing me.

Steven, I am convinced that you think I am stupid as hell. There is no way in the world you can think otherwise, and present this kind of BS to me. Go tell this kind of BS to somebody completely ignorant of how the ear works, but please do not present this kind of crap to me.

[E-Stat]

Horns are mainly used in theaters because they take less power to run and they get loud. It's a compromise of quantity over quality.

They provided the necessary solution for when amplifier power was measured in single digits. As for quality, there is one brand which takes a very different approach from the rest of the crowd. While they are multi-way, all drivers radiate from a common mouth which provides consistent and controlled directivity across the frequency spectrum. Such is not found in traditional designs where each driver does its own thing and coherence is compromised. Like the professional Sound Lab speakers, they are designed to be used in arrays to widen the horizontal and vertical coverage. That company is Danley Sound Labs where the founder and chief designer is also a fan of full range electrostats since they also exhibit controlled frequency independent directivity.

Some stuff found here or visit the website.

rw

[StevenSurprenant]

They provided the necessary solution for when amplifier power was measured in single digits. As for quality, there is one brand which takes a very different approach from the rest of the crowd. While they are multi-way, all drivers radiate from a common mouth which provides consistent and controlled directivity across the frequency spectrum. Such is not found in traditional designs where each driver does its own thing and coherence is compromised. Like the professional Sound Lab speakers, they are designed to be used in arrays to widen the horizontal and vertical coverage. That company is Danley Sound Labs where the founder and chief designer is also a fan of full range electrostats since they also exhibit controlled frequency independent directivity.

Some stuff found here or visit the website.

rw

Interesting speakers. From some of the reviews, it looks like it could be a major contender for a very good home theater system. On person compared them with some very high end speakers and liked them better. I'm almost afraid to hear them because they may make me hate my system. It's happened before...

[E-Stat]

Interesting speakers. From some of the reviews, it looks like it could be a major contender for a very good home theater system. On person compared them with some very high end speakers and liked them better. I'm almost afraid to hear them because they may make me hate my system. It's happened before...

Here's a pic of a guy using three SH-50s up front in his HT.

rw

[Hyfi]

As for DSP, well that too is a personal choice. Every room is different and the same system in a small room will sound much different than in a large room. Why should I deny myself something that I feel improves the sound? Why should I let some recording engineer dictate what I should like. Why don't recording engineers do a better job so that we don't have to resort to DSP?

Best set of questions in the thread. I'm awaiting the answers.

Interesting how almost every other statement Steve made was picked apart, but these very important questions were not addressed.

The fact is, we all have to take whatever the RE jams down our throats whether we agree with it or not. If we don't agree, we all have the options to change it to what we as individuals like. Everybody's hearing is different as well as what they like. There is no one way for all in audio or we wouldn't have all the options we have. I don't give a rats ass as to what something measures. Does it sound good to ME? That is the only thing that matters.

[jjp735i]

"Nobody really needs a DSP to artificially raise sound effects(where they were never positioned during mixing), and move them around in a unnatural way.It sounds artificial, and soundtracks were never created to be heard that way. When I see people preferring this kind of set up, I see them as making up for deficiencies within their speaker system."

This has to be the biggest load of BS I have ever heard. If you don't like the presence speakers fine, but to say they don't sound correct or artificial is BS. I also have a full Yamaha surround system and use the presence speakers in the back instead of the front, Yamaha gives you this option and I love the way it sounds. Adds so much more to the movie. And they don't make up for deficiencies in the speaker system. If you don't have nice speakers then presence speakers are not going to help.

I post very little on this site because of post just like this. Just because you don't like something doesn't mean it's not good.

[StevenSurprenant]

" I also have a full Yamaha surround system and use the presence speakers in the back instead of the front, Yamaha gives you this option and I love the way it sounds. Adds so much more to the movie. And they don't make up for deficiencies in the speaker system. If you don't have nice speakers then presence speakers are not going to help.

I post very little on this site because of post just like this. Just because you don't like something doesn't mean it's not good.

I wish my receiver would allow this. I like what the front presence speakers do and can only image what a rear pair would sound like.

[Sir Terrence the Terrible]

"Nobody really needs a DSP to artificially raise sound effects(where they were never positioned during mixing), and move them around in a unnatural way.It sounds artificial, and soundtracks were never created to be heard that way. When I see people preferring this kind of set up, I see them as making up for deficiencies within their speaker system."

This has to be the biggest load of BS I have ever heard. If you don't like the presence speakers fine, but to say they don't sound correct or artificial is BS.

It may be BS to YOU, but I heard a full Yamaha setup using soundtracks I mixed as demonstration materiel. These DSP put stuff all over the place, except for the correct place.

I also have a full Yamaha surround system and use the presence speakers in the back instead of the front, Yamaha gives you this option and I love the way it sounds. Adds so much more to the movie. And they don't make up for deficiencies in the speaker system. If you don't have nice speakers then presence speakers are not going to help.

Well goody for you! This is another example of one mans floor versus another ceiling. You are correct, it does add something...it is call spatial errors, and fuzzy wuzzy sound. Since what is going to those speakers is bandwidth limited, there is no reason in the world to include good speakers to reproduce the sound these DSP produce.

I post very little on this site because of post just like this. Just because you don't like something doesn't mean it's not good.

This is not about what I like, but what is accurate and true to the soundtrack. If the soundtrack was not mixed on a system with height channels, then they should not be used with height channels. DSP's rerouting already mixed signals is not going to lead to accuracy, and will not work on all program material. I know, I have heard it.

[jjp735i]

Presence speakers are not needed, not supported, and not beneficial for audio or soundtrack reproduction. It is gimmicky, and was rejected by the studios who preferred 7.1 "on the ground" instead of 9.1 "in the air".

Nobody really needs a DSP to artificially raise sound effects(where they were never positioned during mixing), and move them around in a unnatural way. It sounds artificial, and soundtracks were never created to be heard that way. When I see people preferring this kind of set up, I see them as making up for deficiencies within their speaker system. You don't need ten speakers when eight will do just fine. We only need eight in the studio, and you only need eight at home.

It's all in what you like and what your ears enjoy. I love my presence speakers and always use them. An it's not for the lack of my speakers. You can never compare a theater set up to home theater set up. There are to many varibles in the home to change the sound.

I say if you like it keep it. Just because the "studio " didn't record it that way doesn't mean it doesn't sound good. I also use Yamaha and I love some of there DSP programs. Thsi subject has been gone over before and you will also have people jumping in to saying it's not needed. Use what you like and enjoy, that is what home theater is all about.

I have to agree with you on that the presence speakers add a nice depth around the screen, AND it doesn't make anything sound Artificial.

[Sir Terrence the Terrible]

It's all in what you like and what your ears enjoy. I love my presence speakers and always use them. An it's not for the lack of my speakers. You can never compare a theater set up to home theater set up. There are to many varibles in the home to change the sound.

I made no comparison between a theater set up, and a home theater set up.

I am not interested in subjective salt and pepper that you personally want to add that distorts the signals, and creates something that was not there. That is your business, but it is not accurate, and it is not needed.

Disney, MGM, Lionsgate, and Warner(on some titles) all use special made for home theater mixes that are created using a high quality 5.1 sub sat system just like most folks have in their home. At least on Disney titles we try and reduce any variables between the kinds of equipment(Not the quality) used in the home, and what we use in the mixing suite. When I create the Disney mixes, I use 5 or 7 very high quality mini monitors, and a high quality sub(or two) in a acoustically neutral room. There is a sufficient amount of depth already in the track before it leaves the studio, your home system just has to reproduce it correctly.

I say if you like it keep it. Just because the "studio " didn't record it that way doesn't mean it doesn't sound good. I also use Yamaha and I love some of there DSP programs. Thsi subject has been gone over before and you will also have people jumping in to saying it's not needed. Use what you like and enjoy, that is what home theater is all about.

I know a lot of folks love degraded and distorted sound, which is why Yamaha creates this stuff. A good quality well set up basic hometheater does not need any of this crap to sound good, it can stand on its own. The only system that needs this kind of help, is a system that is not well set up, or is in a room without sufficient diffusion. Hence the salt and pepper to juice it up.

I have to agree with you on that the presence speakers add a nice depth around the screen, AND it doesn't make anything sound Artificial.

A nice artificial depth, I know because I owned a Yamaha pre-amp that had all of those artificial DSP environments. A properly designed and calibrated 5.1 system has all of the depth cues you need without adding more that are artificially created by a DSP.

I fully recognize people like different things. Some folks love accuracy(I am one of those), and others like artificiality reproduced by DSP's. I say more power to you if this is your kick.