hope for multi-channel music?

[supervij]

So my gal and I went to take in Superman Returns at a 3D IMAX theatre yesterday. The movie was absolutely incredible, took me back to being a kid, the 2h40min flew by, etc. The point of my post is the intro they did before the movie even started.

The illuminated the area behind the screen so that people could see the four speakers and subwoofer(s) back there, and also drew spotlights on the surround speakers in the back, top corners of the auditorium. Then they played some sappy, poppy music, but did it in a really cool way.

The started with one melody coming from one speaker, then added drums from another, then added voice from another, and so on. It was a very effective demonstration of how cool multi-channel music is, and it kinda got me hoping that they would make some mention of how some albums have been remixed (or even conceived) in this fashion on SACD and DVD-A. I'm not surprised they didn't, but I hope that the m/c music stuck in a few people's heads and might get them to seek out SACDs and DVD-As. I mean, if I was struck by how cool it was, hopefully some others felt the same way. And that would make for more sales and more albums coming out on these formats.

A tall order, I know, but still.

Oh, and the movie rocked too!

cheers,
supervij

 

[WmAx]

The started with one melody coming from one speaker, then added drums from another, then added voice from another, and so on. It was a very effective demonstration of how cool multi-channel music is, and it kinda got me hoping that they would make some mention of how some albums have been remixed (or even conceived) in this fashion on SACD and DVD-A.

This is exactly the kind of surround mixing that turns me off, personally. I prefer a realistic perspective to a performance, not an absolute synthetic one with different instruments coming from each speaker all around me.

-Chris

 

[JoeE SP9]

This is exactly the kind of surround mixing that turns me off, personally. I prefer a realistic perspective to a performance, not an absolute synthetic one with different instruments coming from each speaker all around me.

-Chris

I've got to go along with you on this one. Hearing music as if I'm sitting in the middle of the band doesn't do it for me.

 

[Hawkeye]

This is exactly the kind of surround mixing that turns me off, personally. I prefer a realistic perspective to a performance, not an absolute synthetic one with different instruments coming from each speaker all around me.
-Chris

Kind of depends what you're listening to, no? For me I certainly wouldn't want to be sitting between the clarinet and the bassoon while listening to a recording of your favorite symphony. However, for me, that same line of thinking doesn't hold true while listening to Dark Side of the Moon or Yoshimi Battles the Pink Robots. For these I *want* to be immersed in the disc.

 

[Johnd]

Kind of depends what you're listening to, no?

Agreed. I was a hardline stereophile until I heard the DSOM and Brothers In Arms sacd's with my 'digms and Denon 5803. I have not looked back since. The key imho is quality music that you enjoy on a quality sacd on quality equipment. Cheers.

 

[WmAx]

Agreed. I was a hardline stereophile until I heard the DSOM and Brothers In Arms sacd's with my 'digms and Denon 5803. I have not looked back since. The key imho is quality music that you enjoy on a quality sacd on quality equipment. Cheers.

This is not about stereo vs. multi-channel. It's about the type of mixing used. I personally can not stand anything that uses the rear speakers for emitting instruments. The rear channels are great for adding in ambiance cues for music, assuming a mix that uses it for only such purpose. I don't yet have a multi-channel capability on my main stereo because of the lack of standards in music production and the small selection of titles that currently use multi-channel properly[leading back to lack of standards]. I could enjoy a total synthetic instrumental music with surrounding primary sounds, I suppose -- but if it has any resemblance to something that is supposed to have any realistic components -- it would drive me nuts at this time[maybe in the future my tastes will change in this regard].

-Chris

 

[Johnd]

Thus my caveat of "quality sacd". 95% of the music I listen to (in my listening room) is still stereo. I do thoroughly enjoy the sacd's that I've purchased though. Cheers.

 

[Sleestack]

There aren't that many multichannel audio SACDs or DVD-As that add instrumentation to the rears and still make it sound "right." I also generally prefer the mixes that just expand the soundstage or add crowd noises. Personally, I'm not that crazy about the way Steely Dan's Gaucho was mixed.

On the other hand, all of Porcupine Tree's albums sound stunning in 5.1. Steven Wilson really understand how to use the format effectively. He dosn't just mix in instruments to the rear. He uses the 5.1 system to create interesting imaging for sound effects, background vocals and some instrumentation. Listen to the bonus track Ambulanc Chasing on Stupid Dream. It is fairly simple song, but a great example of a song that is better in 5.1. PT really has one of the few sets of albums (In Absentia, Deadwing and Stupid Dream) that should be used as an example of how 5.1 can effectively be used in music.

Another good example of 5.1 audio is Cornelius' Five Point One.

One caveat is that listening to music in 5.1 really requires a well balanced system. Otherwise, imaging really becomes a problem. Bass control is also key. I address both those problems with room correction using my TCS MKII, but I'm sure there are other ways.

 

[supervij]

Wow. Seems like some of you are really against the m/c music thing. Maybe it's cos I still feel like it's new to me, I'm still in awe of it, I still get a kick out of it. My first surround album was Blue Man Group's Audio, just over a year ago, and I thought it was an incredible experience. I can't get enough of surround music, and have to admit to a certain amount of surprise that others on this board don't like it. If surround sound on movies and TV shows is accepted (and loved!), then why not surround sound on music? After all, the movie is being projected in front of you, yet you're still getting sound from all around. I think surround music is a lot of fun, personally.

I remember reading that Peter Gabriel, one of my all-time favourite artists, said that recording in 2-channel feels very limiting. He likes the added space and dimension with 5.1 music, and plans on recording his next albums with surround in mind, rather than creating a stereo mix first and letting somebody else create a surround version. (Which is still great; both the SACD Up and the DVD Play features some awesome surround implementation.)

I guess if the audiophiles won't embrace surround music, then I guess it won't really go anywhere. Which is a shame, cos I love it. With albums like Dark Side of the Moon and Up, it's less like attending a concert or simply listening to an album. It's an experience. Something that (for me) is way beyond popping on a CD or something.

To each his/her own!

Aw, who'm I kidding? I'd prefer that everyone think like me!

cheers,
supervij

 

[Hawkeye]

There aren't that many multichannel audio SACDs or DVD-As that add instrumentation to the rears and still make it sound "right." I also generally prefer the mixes that just expand the soundstage or add crowd noises. Personally, I'm not that crazy about the way Steely Dan's Gaucho was mixed.

On the other hand, all of Porcupine Tree's albums sound stunning in 5.1. Steven Wilson really understand how to use the format effectively. He dosn't just mix in instruments to the rear. He uses the 5.1 system to create interesting imaging for sound effects, background vocals and some instrumentation.

Gaucho, In Absentia, and Deadwing were all mixed for surround by the same engineer - Elliot Scheiner.

As for liking the mixes that "expand the soundstage or add crowd noises" - for most discs I would agree. For instance, on "Frank Sinatra Live at the Sands" you're clearly in the audience as you hear people coughing, laughing, clearing their throats all around you. I for one am glad they left these in the mix. And if you listen carefully you can even hear the ice cubes tinkling in glasses of people sitting at the tables around you - a great effect.

I have exceptions though I mentioned a couple above.

 

[sivadselim]

Yeah, I always liked that speaker demo behind the perforated aluminum screen at the IMAX theatre.

Do you remember seeing anything about the name of the company responsible for the sound system, supervj?

 

[Sleestack]

Gaucho, In Absentia, and Deadwing were all mixed for surround by the same engineer - Elliot Scheiner.

As for liking the mixes that "expand the soundstage or add crowd noises" - for most discs I would agree. For instance, on "Frank Sinatra Live at the Sands" you're clearly in the audience as you hear people coughing, laughing, clearing their throats all around you. I for one am glad they left these in the mix. And if you listen carefully you can even hear the ice cubes tinkling in glasses of people sitting at the tables around you - a great effect.

I have exceptions though I mentioned a couple above.

Same engineer, but without Steven Wilson's input, the result is not thas good IMO. When I listen to Gaucho in 5.1 i hear some weird instrumentation placement, however, it may be that the music just doesn't lend itself as well to a 5.1 mix.

I have that Sinatra recording and really enjoy it. Alison Kraus & Union Station Live is another example of the effective use ambient crowd noises.

 

[jaxvon]

Same engineer, but without Steven Wilson's input, the result is not thas good IMO. When I listen to Gaucho in 5.1 i hear some weird instrumentation placement, however, it may be that the music just doesn't lend itself as well to a 5.1 mix.

I have that Sinatra recording and really enjoy it. Alison Kraus & Union Station Live is another example of the effective use ambient crowd noises.

I'm glad I'm not the only one who found the 5.1 mix of Gaucho to be "off". The instrumenation is strange, Fagen's voice is too isolated in the center channel, and the bass is WAY too strong.

 

[Hawkeye]

I have the DVD-A version of Gaucho and although I like the surround version of Babylon Sister, overall the disc is not one of my favorite surround recordings. I've never been a big fan of isolating the vocals in the center channel either. In fact for music I'd just as soon do away with the center channel in most cases.

Getting back to Gaucho, there were two different surround mixes made. The first, by Scheiner, was released in DTS. He later remixed the album for DVD-A and SACD release. I've never personally compared the two mixes but he once had this to say about the two...

"..the difference between the original and new surround mix was absolutely staggering. I'd transferred the analogue tapes to Steinberg's Nuendo and mixed from that. It was like a veil had lifted off the original mix."

 

[BGLeduc]

I'm glad I'm not the only one who found the 5.1 mix of Gaucho to be "off". The instrumenation is strange, Fagen's voice is too isolated in the center channel, and the bass is WAY too strong.

I like bass, but I find thal ALL of the newer Dan or Fagen stuff has over powering low end. The DVD of "Two Agaist Nature", the DVD-A of "Everything Must Go", the DVD-A of "The Nightfly", and even the CD of Fagen's new one "Morph the Cat" all require that I dial the bass back substantially. And this is true whether they are played on my 5.1 rig, 2.1 rig, or on my iPod!

Makes me wonder about the mastering suite where these things are produced. The good news is that the overall frequency balance is fine, once the bass level is dialed back.

Brian

 

[My Rantz]

I like bass, but I find thal ALL of the newer Dan or Fagen stuff has over powering low end. The DVD of "Two Agaist Nature", the DVD-A of "Everything Must Go", the DVD-A of "The Nightfly", and even the CD of Fagen's new one "Morph the Cat" all require that I dial the bass back substantially. And this is true whether they are played on my 5.1 rig, 2.1 rig, or on my iPod!

Makes me wonder about the mastering suite where these things are produced. The good news is that the overall frequency balance is fine, once the bass level is dialed back.

Brian

I disagree, the bass is how Steely Dan/Fagan do it. I have never found the bass too much on any of their albums - including Gaucho, which I think is a good MC mix though not quite as good as Two Against Nature or Kamikiriad imho. And if the lead vocal doesn't belong in the center speaker, can anyone tell me where it does? I believe it keeps the focus where it belongs especially when there is more than one listener on the couch. I am a big fan of MC hi-res music and find it no less realistic than stereo (which I also like) when comparing to a real event. With true speaker placement, 5.1 creates a wide arcing soundstage, not specifically a round or a front and back one. Unfortunately, not every room lends itself to true speaker placement and this does often create 'unreal' effects. While it's true that some engineers prefer full use of surrounds for effects and instrument placement, and perhaps sometimes go a bit overboard for our personal tastes, surround mixing, I think, emulates our own listening abilites where our ears let us hear from all around so we don't need to get sore necks from having to face the direction of the sounds we hear.

 

[Geno]

I'm with supervij on the surround thing. Sure, the old recordings we all love won't sound the same, and maybe that's the way it should be. The older stuff that's been well mixed (like DSOTM, Brothers in Arms, Gaucho) sound absolutely great in surround, IMHO. I look at surround music as a whole new experience in itself, not necessarily related to conventional mono or stereo recordings. Like supervij, I find it really exciting. I mean, what'd we buy all those speakers for?

 

[Sleestack]

I disagree, the bass is how Steely Dan/Fagan do it.

Generally I think Fagen gets the bass just right. Both The Nightfly and Aja are great exmples of how bass should sound in music.

 

[supervij]

Miles, I'm afraid I was too dazzled by the pretty lights and surround sound demonstration to pay attention to that little detail. Your question has me curious though. Maybe if we go again (cos the movie truly was awesome), I'll try to get a good look.

Geno, nice to see I'm not the only one who gets a kick out of surround music. The surround album shouldn't necessarily replace the stereo/mono recordings we all know and love; they can just be a different experience. For example, there are certain CDs that I've been dying for a chance to listen to in DPLIIx. Kate Bush's The Ninth Wave (Side B of Hounds of Love), or Marillion's Brave or Radiohead's Kid A would all be amazing experiences in m/c. I'm sure there might be jarring moments when I think, "That's not how I remember it!" but that's okay, cos it's simply a different way of experiencing the album, not a way that will replace the older way.

I just think it's fun. And isn't that what this hobby is all about?

cheers,
supervij

 

[FierceTIMbo17]

Yes i saw it too in imax, pretty sweet except the 3d on the plane scene made me sick. Also think the sub was not working in my theater because ive experinced more bass out of a bose satillite speaker. But thats dispite the fact great movie great sound 3d was a neat touch. Def. recomend it. go check it out.
And super vij how is the blue man group audio dvd audio? i love the blue man groups style and sound and if its good ill be ordering it.
I also perfer m.c. music, cant say ive experince it on classical like you guys are talking since i dont know any good classical surround cds to try (any recomendations would be cool) but i am new to it as well, 2 channel is great but i perfer surround if its done properly