In Reply to: Re: DVD-A and SACD posted by csuzor on December 7, 2005 at 05:22:19:
When you identify some samples please let me know. I especially want to know if they are the exceptions or if that is th trend in audio engineering. Thus far I have never been left "wanting" on the low end of a multi-channel disc unless it was also "wanting" on the two-channel as well. The rule has been the opposite; I get a more robust, smoother (evenly distributed?) bass presentation with multi-channel.Also, and this is very important based on my experiences, in a SACD multi-channel system *all* speakers be full range. I believe that all speakers should at least "speak" in the 20 hz area and the mains should go below that. I have *many* recordings where there is a surprising amount of low bass energy coming from the rears that is supplementing the bass emanating from the mains. In those recordings the mains could actually be producing less bass than in the two-channel version because they are being assisted by the other three speakers. (I don't know that for a fact).
So, while it may be true that there have been some reports that the two-channel layer had more bass than the multi-channel version, I would closely examine what amps and speakers they used for the surrounds before I drew a definitive conclusion about the mix. It could be that the systems that consistently report lower bass reproduction with multi-channel in comparison to two-channel *do* need a subwoofer. But also, and we can't count this out either, it could be that the two-channel mix is simply superior in the low end or superior overall to the multi-channel mix and that a subwoofer might not solve the problem. This is not an uncommon complaint, especially with popular music.
Keep in touch.
Robert C. Lang
This post is made possible by the generous support of people like you and our sponsors:
Follow Ups
- Re: DVD-A and SACD - Robert C. Lang 09:25:24 12/07/05 (0)