|
|||||||
| Home | Forums | Articles | Gallery | Blogs | Register | Donations | FAQ | Calendar | Search | Today's Posts | Mark Forums Read | Search |
| Everything Else Anything related to audio / video / electronics etc) BUT remember- we have many new forums where your thread may now fit! .... Parts, Equipment & Tools, Construction Tips, Software Tools...... |
|
Please consider donating to help us continue to serve you.
Ads on/off / Custom Title / More PMs / More album space / Advanced printing & mass image saving |
|
![]() |
|
|
Thread Tools |
|
|
#1 |
|
diyAudio Member
Join Date: Jun 2002
Location: Where work is
|
I feel that the current trend of research towards developing encode/ decode equipments with more channels is wrong. Neither is it a step close towards REALISM nor are we achieving it through less signal processing. (The best solution should always be simple)
From the consumer angle, with the increase in complexity, hardware, cost and floor space are all increasing. If we take a look at the ladder from Mono to 5.1or may be 7.1, we have never tried to correct the degradation that tool place when making a transition from Stereo to 3-Ch sound. We lost all the magic (Realism, warmth and for that matter life) of Stereo by introduction of centre ch to correct problem of keeping the dialogues anchored in the centre. Then it was simply addition of channels in an attempt for better results. The missed trick according to me was: Getting centre from Lt and Rt from a stereo signal and having a rear ch. for effects, realism, missing dimension...etc. So the system consisting of only Centre and Surround should do all the necessary things we are running after...realism, width, depth height. All this through 2 channels (i.e. Stereo processed to get centre, surround). In phase signals come from the Centre, Out of phase signals come from the Surround and the random ones envelope us from both the front and rear. (Rear speakers can be more in number to create an envelope). And that's it! There isn't any other signal left to play with. The rechordists will love playing with phase (only) to get the desired effects for realism. We will all agree that this configuration will give best and realistic separation (front to back) without having to do much processing.(and lose the original signal) I would like to go a step further (against the trend) and say that if this is achieved in analog domain, We are keeping even the purists happy. This is a very controversial topic just like the surround channel. But thank goodness, my suggested configuration does have surround channel. I would love interaction with forum members from the world over on this topic. Thanks for your time. bimbla. |
|
|
|
#2 |
|
diyAudio Member
Join Date: Sep 2002
Location: Ontario, Canada
|
Sounds a lot like Dolby Pro Logic, to me...
|
|
![]() |
| Currently Active Users Viewing This Thread: 1 (0 members and 1 guests) | |
| Thread Tools | |
|
|
Similar Threads
|
||||
| Thread | Thread Starter | Forum | Replies | Last Post |
| Internal sound card change to external? | EmergencyDpt | Digital Line Level | 4 | 31st August 2008 06:57 PM |
| diy surrounds | aarono | Multi-Way | 4 | 24th March 2005 06:40 AM |
| Did you know that the tightness of the jacket materials could change the sound? | commstech | Parts | 26 | 14th November 2004 10:36 AM |
| JRC4580 to OPA2134 change in Waveterminal 192l pc sound card | ashok | Digital Source | 1 | 21st February 2004 12:33 PM |
| Does the speed of sound change? Opinions... | purplepeople | Multi-Way | 15 | 11th July 2003 05:13 PM |
| New To Site? | Need Help? |
| Page generated in 0.06258798 seconds (70.89% PHP - 29.11% MySQL) with 10 queries |