Post by armenian October 11, 2005 (11 of 15)
|
|
There is no way I have room for 6 floor-standing speakers, as I abhor the distorted thump thump bass of subwoofers. I have listened to many sub-woofers and the only one that didn't sound terrible is the Carver Amazing.
You said this very well, I have also listened to countless systems with subwoofers, they are simply not natural sounding, you can always tell that there is a subwoofer doing its "thump thump", the sound is unmistakable, just attend some live concerts and carefully pay attention to the bass, how it sounds, how it feels, then try the same music on your hi-fi and see how exaggerated the bass is if you are using a subwoofer.
Unfortunately there are so few speaker that can realistcally be called full range, speaker specs are pretty much meaningless when it comes to deep bass. Too many of my buddies have what they consider full range speakers, but they all have to add a subwoofer to "help" the low end a little.
Vahe
|
|
|
Post by audionoob October 11, 2005 (12 of 15)
|
|
Well it's just so strange that renown recording label like Telarc, Pentatone, and MF took pains to engineer in surround while CE mfrs choose to go stereo. Many recording enginners believe that MC, done properly, is the way forward for the format.
I don't think you need top end loudspeakers and amplifier to do proper MC playback. I have just an average surround system but yet I enjoy SACD MC playback so much. The issue with the subwoofer is controversial, but I know that many well mixed surround SACD don't use the LF channel at all.
For stereo playback I like my Vinyl setup better.
|
|
|
Post by stvnharr October 11, 2005 (13 of 15)
|
|
audionoob said:
I don't think you need top end loudspeakers and amplifier to do proper MC playback. I have just an average surround system but yet I enjoy SACD MC playback so much. The issue with the subwoofer is controversial, but I know that many well mixed surround SACD don't use the LF channel at all.
Most subwoofers designed for the home theatre market have crossovers designed to give a midbass hump in the response, hence the thumping.
However, there are subwoofers designed for the music listener, with crossovers designed to give a flatter response in the mid and low bass.
The following will give some direction here: www.rythmikaudio.com, also REL subwoofers are very good, though expensive even on the used market. Web searching on some of the audio forums can be very helpful here.
|
|
|
Post by Scott October 12, 2005 (14 of 15)
|
|
DSD said:
I own 2 SACD players and they are both 2 channel. I personally have no interested in Multi-Channel at all, as I prefer the greater depth and soundstaging of 2-channel audio even though it has a narrower "sweet spot" than Multi-Channel. Also I have 2 floor-standing speakers which took 6 months to find just the right spot to present a huge image. There is no way I have room for 6 floor-standing speakers, as I abhor the distorted thump thump bass of subwoofers. I have listened to many sub-woofers and the only one that didn't sound terrible is the Carver Amazing. I will stick with floor-standing speakers and 2 channel SACD, thank you.
Teresa
I agree with this as well. For me, it's simply a practicality issue. I love hi-end sound, but with three young kids and our furniture, six speakers are just not in the cards. Two-channel SACD is the format for me.
|
|
|
Post by Claude October 12, 2005 (15 of 15)
|
|
Most of my classical music listening is late in the evening, with headphones (AKG K1000). I prefer to listen to jazz over the speakers, but those recordings are allmost all stereo or even mono. Enough reasons why a stereo SACD player would be enough for me.
|
|
