|
|
|
I ascertained in an post earlier today that I just took delivery of a universal player, and so am ready to dip my toe in the waters of hi-res audio.
I note that many releases on SACD are in multichannel, as well as stereo.
Can someone with experience explain the concept of surround/ multichannel audio to me...
I understand the purpose of surround sound in movies, directional ambience to enhance the visuals etc.
But with audio? is the idea to create a soundstage that places me as a listener in the middle or sweet spot of the studio?
Taking a popular recording or two, like a Stones disc, or Depeche Mode disc. Where does listening to the multichannel mixes of those acts put me in the soundstage?
In the case of concerts, what happens? Do they fill the back channels with audience noise and reverb?
|
|
|
|
|
|
The Stones discs are all stereo-only, I believe. The Depeche Mode discs are stereo + multi-channel.
Like with any studio-recorded pop music, there is no actual sound stage as such. The listening experience will put you in a sound landscape created by the producer/sound engineer/etc at the mixing table -- just like with stereo, but far more compelling, in my opinion.
Among the few pop music SACDs, I believe there are almost no concert discs. As for classical (which is the main genre most posters here are interested in -- I seem to be one of the exceptions) the recording/mixing will typically use the rear channels to capture the ambience of the concert hall so you'll hear subtle sounds like the reverb and audience noise you mention, and (often less subtle) the audience's applause.
|
|
|
|
|
|
In classical music and, I hope, in other genres in which acoustic instruments are recorded to sound like they are the way you would hear them in a concert, (one of the better concerts of folk music I have attended was in a small church where the folk artist Gordon Bok sang and played guitar without amplification - both 12 string and classical), the multi-channel mix is intended to recreate the impression you get sitting in the hall.
In a really great hall, the hall itself contributes to or flatters the sound of the instruments. I often say I never heard a hall that flatters the sound of stringed instruments as Symphony Hall in Boston. (capacity approx 2500). The Troy Music Hall (much smaller) is another example of a famous hall. Recordings in 4 and 5 channel give the illusion that you are actually there in the hall with much less "suspension of disbelief" than is necessary in stereo.
Regarding electronically conceived music with a fender guitar or the like, I have no idea what the producers are trying to do. I see the benefit as relating to the reproduction of acoustic music.
|
|
|
Post by raffells February 8, 2007 (4 of 12)
|
|
trouble75 said:
I note that many releases on SACD are in multichannel, as well as stereo.
Can someone with experience explain the concept of surround/ multichannel audio to me...
I understand the purpose of surround sound in movies, directional ambience to enhance the visuals etc.
But with audio? is the idea to create a soundstage that places me as a listener in the middle or sweet spot of the studio?
Taking a popular recording or two, like a Stones disc, or Depeche Mode disc. Where does listening to the multichannel mixes of those acts put me in the soundstage?
In the case of concerts, what happens? Do they fill the back channels with audience noise and reverb?
I am getting suspicious.your now asking questions we would expect from the technical editor of the G*********e magazine etc...
.In an earlier reply it was mentioned that we have had a deep discussion about surrouind on this forum..I suggested you look at it...
This will answer far more than you as a begginner are likely to ask and advance your thinking on the subject...Use search...or go to thread. Is "high end" finally starting to take multi-channel seriously??? I dont think anything more could have been said on that thread,,,, you will soon read that there is no standard surround but it does provide a different listening experience..That is probably the only thing most agree on..(or not).
One comment/// when you buy your 5 channel leads remember to run them in for 30 plus hours before you start to judge...the sound will get better for many hours after that...
|
|
|
|
|
|
I came across the following while reading the program notes for CPO's recording of Ferdinand Rie's symphonies. This was written by Stephan Reh who supervised the recording:
"Ferdinand Rie's Symphonies in Surround Sound - A Listening Must?
"A number of questions always arise during the planning phase of every recording production: Why are we making this or that recording? What do we wish to accomplish with this recording? What hall offers the proper recording space? Today, however, advances in recording technique require that we ask an additional question: What does the option of a surround recording have to offer us?
"Let us consider for a moment the familiar listening situation of stereo recording technique. We are sitting in our living rooms, ideally in a middle position between the two speakers, and listening to the recording of Ferdinand Ries' symphonies.
"First the composer and his music occupy the foreground. we can easily follow his compositional technique, and we hear the power in his music, the alternation between winds and strings, the great importance of the timpani, the interlocking of motif and rhythm, and the great compositional dynamic. Moreover we are able to form quite a good impression of the performance by the orchestra and of the acoustical character of the huge church space in which the recording was made. One could rest content with all of the above - as one has had to do until now.
"If we listen closely >into< the music, however, we realize that there is always a distance between the speakers and the listening position. The sound picture opens up before the listener, but in the case of a stereo recording, it cannot embrace her or him. And it is here that the home listening situation differs from the musical experience in the concert hall. Side and back reflections are of decisive importance in the formation of the overall sound impression of a musical event. The temporal and dynamic relation between sound heard directly and sound reflected from the walls and ceiling conveys to us a very good impression about the room in which the music is performed. It is here that we find our first answer about the sense of a surround recording. It is only within certain narrow limits that a stereo recording is able to transport into our living rooms the immensely important information contained in the reflection.
"In the case of the Ries symphonies we have employed the surround recording for the transmission of the parameters described. The careful selection of microphone types and the positioning of the surround microphones have enabled us to simulate the sound in the manner that it is heard in an ideal and central position behind the conductor in the church. The listener with a surround system set up perfectly in his or her living room can now form a very precise picture of the performance space - yes even experience the performance as if he or she were sitting in the church. The sound is no longer in the distance, we no longer listen >into< the music. The decisively important side reflections now present include the listener in the sound event with the highest degree of realism.
"This inclusion becomes apparent, for example, in the case of the trumpets and trombones. The blaring playing of these instruments produces a wealth of reflections on the back wall and thus lends the sound picture an enormous depth. The cantilenas of the cellos, which now radiate a greater warmth and openess, are also impressive to hear. The motivic interplay between the instrumental groups also takes on a new dimension. And many more examples could be cited along these lines.
"The result is a greatly enhanced, intensive sound experience conveying Ries' music to us in an entirely different manner. The enhanced richness of sound also improves the clarity and listening quality of the recording - which not least supports the composition and with it the authenticity of the score."
Stephan Reh
Translated by Susan Marie Praeder
Copied from the booklet accompanying CPO's recording of the Ries' Symphonies # 7&8.
This item describes pretty well what the surround recording was intended to accomplish. Some do not think any surround recording is anything but a bunch of baloney. Others, like myself, think these guys (several studios deserve credit here) have done an incredible job and have advanced the art of recording to a new level of excellence!
|
|
|
|
|
|
raffells said:
I am getting suspicious.your now asking questions we would expect from the technical editor of the G*********e magazine etc...
.In an earlier reply it was mentioned that we have had a deep discussion about surrouind on this forum..I suggested you look at it...
This will answer far more than you as a begginner are likely to ask and advance your thinking on the subject...Use search...or go to thread. Is "high end" finally starting to take multi-channel seriously??? I dont think anything more could have been said on that thread,,,, you will soon read that there is no standard surround but it does provide a different listening experience..That is probably the only thing most agree on..(or not).
One comment/// when you buy your 5 channel leads remember to run them in for 30 plus hours before you start to judge...the sound will get better for many hours after that...
Not sure what G*********e magazine is, but let me assure you I am no journalist (actually, I once was, but now I'm an british ex-pat graphic desginer living in Canada).
I will search the forum. However, the post after you seemed to answer my question thoroughly.
My experience with surround audio thus far has been limited to electronic music in the sense that they've just used the various channels to shift audio around seemingly mindlessly, with random blips and beeps etc coming from all directions.
This I see as being entirely different to meticulously creating a 360 degree soundstage by mic'ing the back channels so that their job is to capture the reverb and accoustic properties of the room the recording was made in, presumably giving a much greater depth of field than engineering a recording with just two (L&R) channels. I can't wait to hear what this is like!
|
|
|
Post by Beagle February 10, 2007 (7 of 12)
|
|
trouble75 said:
Not sure what G*********e magazine is, but let me assure you I am no journalist (actually, I once was, but now I'm an british ex-pat graphic desginer living in Canada).
Gramophone is the unmentionable publication, aka Granny-phone for its antediluvial attitudes.
You have just taken me on a walk down Memory Lane: In the early 1970s, I was a young free-lancer in Toronto, trying to get a Real Job at Macmillans Canada -- and they imported yet another Brit for the position. But hey! welcome to the Wonderful World of Higher-Fidelity. Just plug the damned thing in and spin some discs. Anything is better than the 1970s technology of CDs.
|
|
|
Post by raffells February 10, 2007 (8 of 12)
|
|
Beagle said:
Gramophone is the unmentionable publication, aka Granny-phone for its antediluvial attitudes.
You have just taken me on a walk down Memory Lane: In the early 1970s, I was a young free-lancer in Toronto, trying to get a Real Job at Macmillans Canada -- and they imported yet another Brit for the position. But hey! welcome to the Wonderful World of Higher-Fidelity. Just plug the damned thing in and spin some discs. Anything is better than the 1970s technology of CDs.
Brilliant,shows how small the world is.he may even be a neighbour LOL.....Pity the techno editors of G*********e didnt apply for that job...maybe they would have heard and understood what sacd is by now..thats two different statements....?...
I really wonder if the statement I heard recently that their obsession with downloads of Mp3s (suspect reason) has lowered their credibility as a "Quality" mag...
Also think we have an interesting addition to our forum...seeing his new post...A pop music listener who Listens?...
|
|
|
Post by Peter February 10, 2007 (9 of 12)
|
|
Dave, sadly I think it's a desperate snuffling around for new readers which made G jump on download bandwagon. I think they backed the wrong horse. By all accounts the March issue's SACD article is a step in the right direction. Now, if only they'd deliver me my copy.........
|
|
|
Post by hawk February 12, 2007 (10 of 12)
|
|
Among the few pop music SACDs, I believe there are almost no concert discs.
Depeche Mode 101 is such an album...concert pop SACD, but I would not recommend
it; the other albums that have come out since are much better. Your question seems
to have been answered, but I just wouldlike to add that not all SACDs are alike;
some stay true (AKA high fidelity) to the original recording ambience, others
are more experimental in termsof using the rear speakers. It is really a matter
oftaste and preference, but to really inderstand SACD I think you need to start
getting some and listening. the top recommendations on this site
are a good place to start. On final note: I avoid stereo SACDs because my system
is not very high end so cannot really differentiate between stereo SACD and
a good normal CD. So I prefer and recommend MC SACD.
|
|
