| Search | Login/Register
   Home » Playback Listening » 2+3 surround sound?? (114 posts, 6 pages)
  Print Thread | 1st Post |  
Page 6 of 6 (114 items) Select Pages:  « First ... « 2 3 4 5 6
   Target    Threads for related reading   Most recent post in related threads   Forum  Replies   Views   Started 
  »  New  A revision of playback with reverberation injection or ..  Time Alignment...  Playback Listening  Forum     113  149261  08-03-2021
04-22-2025 Post does not mapped to Knowledge Tree
N-set
Warsaw, Poland
Posts 631
Joined on 01-07-2006
Post #: 101
Post ID: 28136
Reply to: 28123
Speakers
Thank you Romy and others for the input! For the time being I will concentrate the efforts on the Yamahas.
 Romy the Cat wrote:

 In terms of speakers and amplifications for reverberation channels by Yamaha topology it is kind of tricky. As you would be listening quote Yamaha field injection channels output you will see it is not a normal signal and you will find that good acoustic system not necessary need to be there. 

That is my big question now: what type of speakers? I don't have anything at hand so they will be acquired/DIYed for the purpose. I remember you mentioned at some point that you believed bookshelf speakers would be enough. I guess that might be true in the context of your very capable bass channels of the main speakers. I'm wondering what should I look for in the context of Dannoys + near field listening (about 2m for either speaker)?

 Romy the Cat wrote:

You are about to discover a lot of very interesting experiences and I sincerely believe service proper reverberation injection you would not be looking for an options to extend the bottom knee of your Dannoy.

That is exactly my hope. Edgar says the same thing.


 Romy the Cat wrote:

If you read carefully what I stated in my thread about ampX then you recognize the time made some comments which suggest that a proper bass during sound reproduction should not be the same signal as a driven that mid frequency channels. I know that old people pretty much bypasses is comment as meaningless but it is not, and people do not understand what I meant. What I meant however is very crucial. The distribution of harmonic context across amplitude for meat frequency and base supposed to be different and you would need a very very very very very very very smart amplifier which would not be working linear in terms of harmonics but to have on brain how to bias it in actave-dependent fashion. AmpX doesn it natively, for most of us are amplifiers you would need a harmonics equalizer, which is very hard to implement properly. Hypothetically, you might have educated bass amplifier which act at combination of direct, delayed, and harmonically reformed signal but to the best of my knowledge there is no amps who does it. So, when you see super good Bass driver in any enclosure driven by a super good amplifier.... then it is just a bad design from the people who are completely blind to the fact that a linear signal should not be driven base channels.

Interesting. I guess we all feel that "bass is different". Were your experiments with RI the motivation for ampX?


Cheers,
Jarek
04-24-2025 Post does not mapped to Knowledge Tree
Romy the Cat


Boston, MA
Posts 10,337
Joined on 05-28-2004
Post #: 102
Post ID: 28146
Reply to: 28117
As promised...
 Romy the Cat wrote:

It is not necessary needs to be DSP 100. There are around a dozen of Yamaha DSP processors good for reverberations. I probably need to record a video about entering a reverberation injection world. If I have a time I will record it later on today


 

"I wish I could score everything for horns." - Richard Wagner. "Our writing equipment takes part in the forming of our thoughts." - Friedrich Nietzsche
04-24-2025 Post does not mapped to Knowledge Tree
anthony
Posts 344
Joined on 08-18-2014
Post #: 103
Post ID: 28147
Reply to: 28146
Dvc
Dual voice coils Romy.  Not sure if the Auros have dvc but if they do then perhaps different amps on each voice coil.
04-25-2025 Post does not mapped to Knowledge Tree
Romy the Cat


Boston, MA
Posts 10,337
Joined on 05-28-2004
Post #: 104
Post ID: 28148
Reply to: 28147
Debating...
 anthony wrote:
Dual voice coils Romy.  Not sure if the Auros have dvc but if they do then perhaps different amps on each voice coil.

DVC would be wonderful if any good woofers were made with DVC. I am debating whether to make my infinite baffle assembly with one driver acting as ULF and another driver as AURO reverb woofer vs to create a simple summing circuit with two resistors and to drive the infinite baffle power amp from bass crossover and Auro processor at the same time.

"I wish I could score everything for horns." - Richard Wagner. "Our writing equipment takes part in the forming of our thoughts." - Friedrich Nietzsche
04-25-2025 Post does not mapped to Knowledge Tree
Paul S
San Diego, California, USA
Posts 2,753
Joined on 10-12-2006
Post #: 105
Post ID: 28149
Reply to: 28148
The Chart
All very interesting. As far as dual VC, of course there is the Altec 604 cult driver...  As far as dual woofers, I immediately thought of textbook problems from having two membranes doing "the  same frequency range" from different sources on the same baffle, to the extent there was overlap. Since I never tried it I can't answer real world questions, but where overlap occurs theory predicts very ragged response, with extreme summing and cancelation. But perhaps that's what one wants here?

Paaul S
04-25-2025 Post does not mapped to Knowledge Tree
Romy the Cat


Boston, MA
Posts 10,337
Joined on 05-28-2004
Post #: 106
Post ID: 28150
Reply to: 28149
Okay, now I have a name for it
I do not see any room for summing and cancelation. Where would they come from? It is two completely separate signals, both in phase. One of them has information of sound sub 20 cycles and whatever come along with second order crossover. And second will have I would say under 100 cycles delayed. I do not see why they would be competing against each other. The delay signal will run over Doppler excursion, which is in my view for those frequencies is negligible. Those two signals will be injected into the amplifier which drives the infinite puffle. So, all the time talking about integration of Base channel and reverberation channel into one channel. Of course I will need to try all of this and to confirm that that preamps that would be divided probably 10 kOm resistors will not be talking against each other. However, and this is big, really huge advantage of what I'm doing, is that even my Auro processor and Passover will be in any way impact each other, it will not impact my main channels and main amplifiers as they are not participating in all of it. I never seen the concept of integration subwoofer  and delete channel into one device. Just in case the time of first who proposed I would like to name this topology as  SBC, which come from the"Schrodinger Bass Cat"

"I wish I could score everything for horns." - Richard Wagner. "Our writing equipment takes part in the forming of our thoughts." - Friedrich Nietzsche
04-25-2025 Post does not mapped to Knowledge Tree
anthony
Posts 344
Joined on 08-18-2014
Post #: 107
Post ID: 28151
Reply to: 28148
18"
I am building subwoofers right at this moment.   Have gone with a modern 18" that I've never heard and a large AB amp to power them.  Will be low passed somewhere around 30Hz so I doubt that driver quality will matter... at least I hope not.   This will make the system 7 ways with four bass channels including upperbass horns.

I think the quality of my bass thus far is outstanding.   Truly outstanding. Soft, articulate, enveloping, powerful and all run by DSET.  My direction with bass although similar in topology to yours is quite different in implementation.  My room reverberation is very controlled and is very even from my lowest room mode of 30Hz all the way to 20kHz.  I think this even reverb time is very important to being able to hear the room information on the recording and I am theorising that it will also help the immersive channels to function optimally.   The tremendous upside to controlling room reverberation is that bass spl is so much more even throughout the entire room...modal behaviour has not been eliminated,  but has been attenuated. 

Over time I've been following your RI exploits and although I've not had time to duplicate them I have been planning my own multichannel audio and home theatre as well. Bills contribution seems to have been valuable to you and to be honest, from what I've been able to discern from afar,  his approach gels with my tendencies.    This week, a Trinnov processor arrives and once the subs are finished and final Macondo time alignments are complete I will install the last of the immersive channels to be a 9.2 system.  The immersive system will have subwoofers separate to those that are part of Macondo, based on your experience (they are already built).

For expedience,  I am using some active JBL monitors as inmersive channels.  They use switching amplifiers and have a good sound that I think compliments Macondo, or at least do not sound overly sluggish in comparison.   Ported bass of course so will have to figure out where to cross them all to the immersive subs before too much damage is done to the sound but that should be super easy to arrange with the Trinnov.  
04-26-2025 Post does not mapped to Knowledge Tree
Romy the Cat


Boston, MA
Posts 10,337
Joined on 05-28-2004
Post #: 108
Post ID: 28152
Reply to: 28151
Trinnov or not Trinnov

I personally do not support any multi-channel audio concept and I really opposed of idea of high quality audio for movie reproduction. I mean it perfectly fine to be at the level of normal consumer electronic but in my view it should not diving into high end world. I was there back in the end of the nighties and I do not like the result, not necessarily the result that I got but conceptually I don't like it. 


Regarding what you are trying to do. Are you trying to replace line level conserving in your amplification with Trinnov processor? It might be a good idea but if I was going to this direction I would certainly keep my main right and left channels not driven by Trinnov. I think if you use Auro Trinnov compromises main right and left channels. I'm not convinced but it is feels like. What however absolutely shock me about Trinnov is the quality of stereo it produces when it does not use any immersive processing. I am not kidding, Bill has absolutely stunning stereo, absolutely the best I ever seen. I do not know if it is his Trinnov or he's quite unique room but the result is very very cool. It would be interesting to hear your feedback about Trinnov stereo. It's very much might not be the quality of Trinnov processing by the fact that build channels are time aligned this insane precision that Trinnov can offer. Another hypothesis is that I have that country to all Bills assurancs Trinnov immersive channels are still shipping some signals through even when the unit is set to run pure stereo.



"I wish I could score everything for horns." - Richard Wagner. "Our writing equipment takes part in the forming of our thoughts." - Friedrich Nietzsche
04-26-2025 Post does not mapped to Knowledge Tree
Bill
Kensington, NH
Posts 125
Joined on 03-15-2010
Post #: 109
Post ID: 28153
Reply to: 28152
Opposite feeling
Anthony. You'll love the trinnov. Since you are only going to be using 9.2 for 11 channels and trinnov a16 has 20, I suggest using the remaining channels as active crossovers for your main speakers. You can set them up from second to fourth order, linkewitz riley, butterworth or other. Also would recommend running the main left and right speaker. subwoofer as subwoofer channels. As the trinnov does great time alignment, all drivers using the trinnov crossovers will be perfectly time aligned.  This also allows the front channel subwoofers to be used as subwoofers for the room also, which then allows you to either do their waveforming, or allows the regular subwoofers to have long delays which adds to ambiance warmth. Also, the more high end your system, the better it works for movies. Also recommend using the extra frequency curves giving more bass and less highs for large hall orchestral recordings.If you speak German go to a YouTube channel called Audio-Freak for great information on setup, and for English, visit the Trinnov channel before you start your own experimentation. If your dealer is doing original setup, make sure you pester him with questions, and have him do multiple setups of stereo, and 9.2 channels with and without the central channel if your center channel doesn't match the qualities of your main channel. If it doesn't, it will negatively affect your music experience. It took me three years to master the intricacies of what the trinnov can do, so enjoy the ride.Bill
04-26-2025 Post does not mapped to Knowledge Tree
Romy the Cat


Boston, MA
Posts 10,337
Joined on 05-28-2004
Post #: 110
Post ID: 28154
Reply to: 28153
I would vote for analog line level filtration

I certainly not an expert on Trinnov but I think the table is set to make a great experiment for you Anthony, that would be very expensive and very difficult for anybody else to repeat. It is my strong conviction that digital filtration is a fundamental evil. No matter how it implemented it's damages sound purely theoretically and practically. So, if I have multichannel DSET amplification with line level filtration then it would be perfectly fine to drive them from Trinnov channels, witch have spectacular time alignment capacity, but do not engage the crossovering at Trinnov. Time delay at digital is perfect.  You steal might use Trinnov crossovering for low frequency channels if you feel you need to. 


Another very interesting would be to see if Trinnov own DAC are as good as forever best DAC are available out there.  Then of course there is a reasonable question: if Trinnov has DACs which let's say inferior to some kind of other DAC then can it be compensated by writing a custom curve with  Trinnov? A custom curve means digital crossovering inside of Trinnov. It would be fun to learn where you find and where you lose practicing all of this.



"I wish I could score everything for horns." - Richard Wagner. "Our writing equipment takes part in the forming of our thoughts." - Friedrich Nietzsche
04-26-2025 Post does not mapped to Knowledge Tree
Bill
Kensington, NH
Posts 125
Joined on 03-15-2010
Post #: 111
Post ID: 28155
Reply to: 28154
Unhapily
You cannot do time alignment of the front channel drivers unless you also do the crossovers digitally.But you can still time alignment all of the main and ambiance channels.Happily, the trinnov has 29 areas to store various setups. So you can do both analog and digital crossovers for the main speakers, and even either use the internal or external dacs for the men channels.Now, what I need to ask Romy, if he said above “ Bill has absolutely stunning stereo, absolutely the best I ever seen.,” and I use the trinnov digital crossovers and dacs, then what is wrong with using digital instead of analog?
04-26-2025 Post does not mapped to Knowledge Tree
Romy the Cat


Boston, MA
Posts 10,337
Joined on 05-28-2004
Post #: 112
Post ID: 28156
Reply to: 28155
Many ways to skin a Car...
Bill, it is not about criticism what I, you, Anthony or anybody else to do but this is a conversation about a concept.  Your solution based upon a few compromises, purely conceptually compromises, is that I recognize as a compromises. I'm not insisting that I am right, I just expressed my position on the subject. Digital crossovering is compromise, digital streaming is compromise. Having a playback where they cannot make an assessment of quality of digital to analog converters is it compromise. I'm not saying that the result is bad, I'm just saying it is enclosed package. Trinnov, do not produce one da converters and they did not produce digital interfaces. They sources it from pro market. It is highly possible that is a wonderful but the point that I'm making that using Trinnov ecosystem we cannot make objective judgment about their quality relative to the best stand alone units available out there. If they were able to ride on operation system for thier computer then I do not know why they did not implement it on DA and digital interfaces. 

There is also, a big hanging question with your "best stereo". You do have unique room, you do have unique positioning of your mid base horn which is certainly very beneficial for stereo imaging.  However, whatever I know how stereo forms, does not explain why purely stereo presentation in your system is absolutely remarkable. Went to know if used only two channels to drive your main speakers then it should produce only normal stereo that you use to have years back as a position of your speakers did not change. You did not have that spectacular stereo imaging in the past. It become to be reality just a few months ago. I do feel that it is possible that this all upgrades you have from Trinnov they started to do some kind of processing of pure stereo signal which complements it and make it much better than it's used to be.  The best things about your 2 channel presentation is that is significantly more interesting that is expected from it. I might agree or disagree with various aspects of your sound but as far as stereo imaging with two channels is through it being any explanations. I think your turn off do something sinister. Interesting that when in your room it runs Auro, it has on submerging effect that I do not particularly care,  and the magic of your stereo imaging is gone. 

It is ironic because I typically advocate reverberation channels as something that will eventually destroyed stereo imaging and replace it with 3D fields. However, I do not like this effect in your system because I personally feel that you're stereo presentation has significantly more potential and more pleasure, at least to me, isn't your surround presentation. I really would like you to humor me and to run your main channels in the pure stereo mode, and then run your surround channels purely for delay channels. I do not know if Trinnov will be able to do it. 

I drove my corner horns from main channels of my Denon Auro processor.  It was surprisingly much better than I expected but it was inferior to the settings when I drove my corner horns without Auro prepro.

Yes there are many ways to skin a cat. However, purely for theoretical debate and pursuing hypothetical best, I feel there is a one way to do it, and it is what I advocate. Again I advocated purely as theoretical concept, not that I feel that me you or anybody else should pursue it.

"I wish I could score everything for horns." - Richard Wagner. "Our writing equipment takes part in the forming of our thoughts." - Friedrich Nietzsche
04-26-2025 Post does not mapped to Knowledge Tree
Romy the Cat


Boston, MA
Posts 10,337
Joined on 05-28-2004
Post #: 113
Post ID: 28157
Reply to: 28156
What is the best? Sounds like I jointed a wrong phorun

The best explanation of my position in regards of hypothetical best is my possession of multi-channel horns and multi-channel amplifications with line level filtration. This is concepts that I "invented" for myself tested it and was inherented for 25 years. I have all evidences and justifications aligned, very much supported with my practical results. The fact that I do not listen right now my Milq and Macondo absolutely does not defeat the concept of DSET.  My main system performs significantly better than my corner horn in so many parameters and you was the witness of it. Those corner horns mapped to AmpX is an accident which is by the way still not completely explained by me. I do not develop from my success with this corner horn and this amplifier as a some kind of universal theory of success as I am not completely convinced where success is coming from.  If you ask me what I feel today is the most advantageous topology in Audio I would certainly proclaim that vertically arranged multi-channel horns with DSET amplification and line filtration. 


From what I observe I do feel that substitution DSET with AmpX is very very very very interesting direction to try. And I am planning to do it sometimes in the future. There is a problem however, and I've been talking with many people about it. AmpX is at solid state device and neither me or anybody else know how to get specific quality of tone from solid state amplification.



"I wish I could score everything for horns." - Richard Wagner. "Our writing equipment takes part in the forming of our thoughts." - Friedrich Nietzsche
04-26-2025 Post does not mapped to Knowledge Tree
Paul S
San Diego, California, USA
Posts 2,753
Joined on 10-12-2006
Post #: 114
Post ID: 28158
Reply to: 28155
Time Alignment
I am another one who has and acts on the idea of physically positioning drivers so they are "time aligned" with respect to voice coil positioning. However, it has long been my understanding that what we refer to as time alignment refers to phase, which also relates to frequency as rendered by analog X/Os at any point in the information stream that ultimately affect/deliver what they deliver with respect to truly coherent/perfect phase/time alignment. If digital time alignment delivers "all frequencies at once" to several drivers despite X/O anomalies, then that's 1 for digital, IMO. Once one accepts digital processing, why not do this?

https://www.stereonet.com/forums/topic/119601-digital-time-alignment-with-analog-crossovers/

Paul S
Page 6 of 6 (114 items) Select Pages:  « First ... « 2 3 4 5 6
   Target    Threads for related reading   Most recent post in related threads   Forum  Replies   Views   Started 
  »  New  A revision of playback with reverberation injection or ..  Time Alignment...  Playback Listening  Forum     113  149261  08-03-2021
Home Page  |  Last 24Hours  | Search  |  SiteMap  | Questions or Problems | Copyright Note
The content of all messages within the Forums Copyright © by authors of the posts