is moving from 5.1 to 7.1 worth the effort

[lovinthehd]

I have a Yamaha HTR -5150

Try this http://www.audioholics.com/home-theater-calibration/a-v-receiver-setup-crossover-distance-level-eq

 

[TLS Guy]

The problem is that there are few 7.1 discs, most re 5.1

However, in my view of there you do play a 7.1 like War Horse, then the gains of 7.1 are substantial.

However the best improvement comes when using PLIIx music. On good recordings the sense of space and ambiance is truly astonishing. I'm never aware of the sides or rear backs, until the clapping starts or it is a program with a lot of audience participation like the Last Night of the Proms, when the audience belt out Land of Hope and Glory, Rule Britannia and Jerusalem. 10,000 people in the audience plus a large orchestra, full organ and massed choirs make an enormous sound. So all speakers are really being pushed. The one amazing thing about that such a large audience sings on time and in tune.

The other advantage is that you can play the old remastered 4.0 recordings properly. For antiphonal SACDs I use the backs not the surrounds, so it sounds correct. That alone justifies the effort.

However it does mean that for the reproduction of what I'm talking about, all speakers have to be highly capable and closely matched.

 

[William Lemmerhirt]

Mr. Lemmerhirt,
He has 9.2 now, he added front Heights, he unit is a Yamaha 1050 as a pre-pro with a EMO XPA-5 driving the center, surrounds, and rear surrounds, XPA-2 driving L/R fronts and two Polk pro subs, the Yammy drives the heights. But when I heard Mad Max it was set in a 7.2. He added the front Heights about a year ago. It is a very sweet system them Polk LSi's are smooth man.

Ok, thx for clarifying that. You mentioned earlier about 5.1.2, so I wasn't sure where that was going. I should be clear. I LOVE my 7.3ch system, but if I could choose again, and had to compromise I would absolutely go 5.3.4. Atmos is better, however that's another thread lol.

 

[Tankman]

Ok, thx for clarifying that. You mentioned earlier about 5.1.2, so I wasn't sure where that was going. I should be clear. I LOVE my 7.3ch system, but if I could choose again, and had to compromise I would absolutely go 5.3.4. Atmos is better, however that's another thread lol.

Totally agree, right now I live in a apt, my system is in a 5.1. But come OCT, I will added front Heights which will give me a 5.1.2 set. Can't added rear surrounds cause me sofa is against the wall. or I could pull it from the wall about a foot and add rears for a 7.1. But for me if I had the room, 9.2 for sure.

 

[DD66000]

Agree. I don't have a direct comparison but I've always read that 5.x.4 is more immersive than 7.x.2. Pretty sure atmos isn't on the table here though. I went from 5.3 to 7.3 and the difference is pretty subtle. And on top of that, 5.1 tracks that are upsampled to 7.1 via PLIIx suffer from matrixing and lose the discrete experience. I watch 5.1 movies in 5.1 to avoid that.
OP should hang surrounds on the wall and only use the in ceiling speakers as rear surrounds if convenient which it sounds like is the case.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

From my experience, PLIIx is a joke.
I use an Oppo 105D as a processor and it uses DTS neo6 for stereo ~ 7.1 conversion. And it is superior. If the input is 5.1, then it stays as such.
And in any case, having matched (as in identical) speakers all around is the way to go.

 

[William Lemmerhirt]

Totally agree, right now I live in a apt, my system is in a 5.1. But come OCT, I will added front Heights which will give me a 5.1.2 set. Can't added rear surrounds cause me sofa is against the wall. or I could pull it from the wall about a foot and add rears for a 7.1. But for me if I had the room, 9.2 for sure.

For me, even moving out a foot would likely be worth it. Not for rear surrounds, but to get the LR surrounds behind the LP some, and hopefully better bass response. IMO 5' behind the LP is good. 1' is just a distraction and doesn't translate well. Fwiw, I've seen a lot of people who like front height speakers a lot. Are you doing atmos 5.1.2, or traditional 5.1 with front heights above the mains? By this fall, I may be trading my 7.3 for 5.3.4(atmos). Pretty excited about that! Apt life is a B$&@", I hope those heights can help take you somewhere else.

 

[William Lemmerhirt]

From my experience, PLIIx is a joke.
I use an Oppo 105D as a processor and it uses DTS neo6 for stereo ~ 7.1 conversion. And it is superior. If the input is 5.1, then it stays as such.
And in any case, having matched (as in identical) speakers all around is the way to go.

Pretty much agree. The exception for me being PLIIx music mode. I go through phases where I listen to music in stereo or PLIIx music. Some music benefits form it and some gets destroyed by it. Agree about matched speakers too. Many will say, nah, doesn't matter. But imo, the same care taken with the front of the room can easily be taken with the rear. IME, matching speakers(or at least the same line) and careful placement as to tie the front and rear of the room together creates a complete sound envelope. Why only take the time to position your mains for good soundstage and imaging, when you can get the effect on a larger scale? Ok, sorry, derail over.

 

[yepimonfire]

I've learned great deal here....just in time.

Planned on a 5.2.2 setup.

My RBH R5Bi surrounds just arrived last night...for the next day or two I will have them connected as the mains to get a few hours break in on them. This weekend I will get them installed as side rears most likely on speaker stands that will put them at ear height and slightly behind the LP.

While I was fishing speaking wire this weekend, I had given thought to a 7.2.2 setup (thinking more is better) since I moved the LP out from the back wall about 5'. I will halt that thinking for now.

I'd personally do a 5.2.4 configuration over a 7.2.2 if you've got the extra channels and speakers. Could also do a front wide configuration if the receiver supports it. You don't necessarily have to use in ceiling speakers. Just attach mounts to the ceiling.

Sent from my SM-G360T1 using Tapatalk

 

[Tankman]

For me, even moving out a foot would likely be worth it. Not for rear surrounds, but to get the LR surrounds behind the LP some, and hopefully better bass response. IMO 5' behind the LP is good. 1' is just a distraction and doesn't translate well. Fwiw, I've seen a lot of people who like front height speakers a lot. Are you doing atmos 5.1.2, or traditional 5.1 with front heights above the mains? By this fall, I may be trading my 7.3 for 5.3.4(atmos). Pretty excited about that! Apt life is a B$&@", I hope those heights can help take you somewhere else.

Yeah 1ft away from the back really won't help much. But it is in a 5.1 set I want to setup to 5.2.4 like what your looking to do. For limited space 5.2.4 would be ideal for my unit. I really like Atmos alot. When I first moved here after my divorce knowing how apts are I had just my HDTV and wasn't going to get back into audio/video but that lasted few months couldn't take just the lil speakers from just the hdtv it drove me nuts. So got started with a entry level Sony AVR and well as you know I jumped into that rabbit hole again. already upgraded the AVR to a 7.2 unit. I fear come Oct, it will be upgraded again to a 9.2, lookjng into Onkyos RZ900 or Yamahas 2050 with main speaker upgrades alone heights and one more sub and maybe a amp to run the L/R mains. I heard my Son's system and when he added heights it opened up the front sound stage a lot. He tried it with front wides first and found they didn't add as much as the heights did. So to me People with limited space like I have front Heights above L/R mains is the way to go. One more thing with not being able to set the rear surrounds behine the LP like they should, is I found that dipole, bipole rear surrounds help out lot.