In Reply to: Re: What is your reaction to multi-channel recordings? posted by Soundmind on November 10, 2006 at 15:13:53:
Remember I was around when 4 channel sound was anticipated to be viable.So was I, but as a kid audiophile in the early 70s. I used a Dyna Quadaptor too, back in '72 with Advents in the front and Smaller Advents in the rear. Columbia in particular made a big deal about their SQ recordings. On Santana's Abraxas album, you could hear Chepito's percussion in the rear. Wait a minute. When I saw them live, he wasn't playing from the lobby. The novelty wore off pretty quickly and I sold the Smaller Advents and tried double Advents in the front supplemented with Microstatic tweeters. Remember them? They were originally designed to add life to the insipid AR-3As.
I was using your H-K Citation 11 preamp and a "pro" Crown amp at age 17. I dumped them when I got my first full range electrostats in '77. About fifteen years ago, I bought a DSP based unit and again tried with a pair of RS Minimum 7s in the rear. Similar story. The novelty quickly wore off and eventually moved the speakers to the rears in a true 5.1 HT system.
I don't expect you to believe it but the mathematical analysis predicts multi channel can't work because there is no way to keep the direct sound out of the microphones designed to record the ambient channels.
Frankly, I have not been overwhelmed with what MC can do. Yet. That from the perspective of hearing a very nice Magnepan based system using a Meitner front end along with C-J and Edge electronics. My experience does not counter your theory.
...they have to be resynthesized using an appropriate mathematical algorithm, something you'd appreciate.
Indeed. While I always enjoyed the challenge of working with complex algorithms, my musical side responds that what you are doing is necessarily artificial. Applying a fixed set of rules to all recording venues. Which has been my reaction to a range of "decoders" I've experienced over the years that monkey with signal (usually with phase) in an attempt to provide "realism".
rw
This post is made possible by the generous support of people like you and our sponsors:
Follow Ups
- Strictly speaking, I wasn't asking about "decoders" - E-Stat 18:58:28 11/10/06 (20)
- Re: Strictly speaking, I wasn't asking about "decoders" - Soundmind 04:39:40 11/11/06 (19)
- Different strokes - E-Stat 08:37:12 11/11/06 (18)
- Re: Different strokes - unclestu52 14:11:11 11/11/06 (13)
- James Bongiorno Trinaural Processor? - thetubeguy1954 07:49:37 11/13/06 (2)
- Trinaural - unclestu52 11:03:33 11/13/06 (1)
- Re: Trinaural - David Yost 04:56:15 11/16/06 (0)
- I would like to hear Ray's setup - E-Stat 18:46:26 11/11/06 (9)
- Re: I would like to hear Ray's setup - unclestu52 11:09:43 11/13/06 (0)
- E-stat, If you were a REAL engineer.... - Soundmind 05:59:23 11/13/06 (7)
- And if you were half as smart as you think you are... - morricab 04:18:28 11/14/06 (5)
- Re: And if you were half as smart as you think you are... - Soundmind 06:56:45 11/14/06 (4)
- It would be interesting if you marketed your invention - kerr 09:28:58 11/14/06 (2)
- That was twenty years ago - E-Stat 14:06:58 11/14/06 (1)
- Re: That was twenty years ago - kerr 05:07:19 11/15/06 (0)
- Re: And if you were half as smart as you think you are... - morricab 09:06:15 11/14/06 (0)
- Despite the fact you are impressed with yourself - E-Stat 07:16:02 11/13/06 (0)
- Re: Different strokes - Soundmind 10:57:20 11/11/06 (3)
- As usual, completely different takes on life - E-Stat 11:34:49 11/11/06 (2)
- Re: As usual, completely different takes on life - Soundmind 13:32:18 11/11/06 (1)
- Thus Spake SMarathustra - E-Stat 18:34:14 11/11/06 (0)