Phd - my humble appologies for becoming unglued. I'm the result of 3 years of ridicule by other 2ch audiophiles. If I read something that reminds me of what I went through with other, I have a tendency to become a bit abrasive. It was not intended for you...the post just brought back a few memories, thats all. Like everyone else, I truely respect your opinion and thank you for your insight.
IMHO, I think you may have given up on MC prematurely. Not that it was even your fault though. Few have the first hand understanding to be of any help. Many tend to be more of a hinderance then anything. I think if you gave it another shot, may be with a little help, you may consider coming back to MC.
You have your priorities though, so if expanding from your receiver isn't one of them, then go with what works for you.
Like 883dave put it, if it brings a smile to your face, then what does the median matter?
My focus should be to help educate, not deliberate. Thats what an audiophile SHOULD be all about, agree? |
After giving it some thought, maybe some are confused as to the location of the previously posted question. Either that or many are still processing the very basic explanation. So...that being said I've copied it below.
-------Question primarily for 2CH'rs, but all are welcome to answer-----------
Is everyone aware that the very essense of MC is durived from the same principles of 2CH? Here's the easiest and most practical way I can explain it. Its like getting the same stereo magic between each of the 5 speakers. You know how when a 2Ch setup is locked in, the sound stage is detailed, deep and wide? Now imagine, if you will, this same phenomenon taking place, when done correctly, 5 times over. The results are truely amazing, not a gimmick.
Not only that but the purpose of the five is to really perform like one! Lost you didn't I. You see, when the 5 have been setup and calibrated properly, it creates a 360 degree soundfield. This is just as if your hearing the instrument or voice in front of you (in its orginial intended placement) and the reverb, echo attack and decay, ect...all around you. As if the performance was taking place in the room with you.
I'm really starting to see that people don't understand what I and other are getting at. It can be a tough concept to grasp at first. Trust me it was tough for me too. But when someone with more experience and complete understanding took me through the process, it clicked. Then I was able to replicate this same thing myself...on my system. My system has its limitations, more than what my mentor's system had. But the same principles apply. The results were still similar. Similar enough to know I knew what I was doing.
I have a long ways to go, but I'm on the right track. |
Judging my the lack of dialog I would assume 1 of 2 things, either everyone is just so asstounded they can't comment or no one really cares.
Sad part about it is, this forum is missing information such as this, practical information. Not spend another $800 for .5 meter speaker cable or switch out the components until you find the "right match", no matter how long that takes or how much it costs. If you don't, then you'll never achieve a holistic sound or warm smeared feeling to everything you play.
But hey, "you'll" get tired of component swapping and spending money only to get more frustrated because you're still in the same place you were before. Only this time you'll have even less money and 4th or 5th-hand used components.
When the times comes, practicality will be here, and so will MC. |
Madhf...thanks for the post. Glad to see someone who enjoyed MC from its infant stages until now. If you loved MC then, I can only amagine how much you're enjoying MC of today. Technology can be a wonderful thing. Viva MC!!! |
Thanks for the post ThomJohn...did you do much listening of 2ch CD's in surround? How did you like it? |
Don't have the time to bring you up to speed of its origin and how it works, but its a little known secret called processing! Basic knowledge of such is assumed and should be acquired prior to engaging in even the most casual conversations regarding MC and 2CH.
I'm sure there are plenty books and write ups for your reading pleasure available on both the internet and in your local bookstore.
Not sure where you were headed or implying with the question, but here is the civilized answer.
Any futher questions, Metralla? |
So ThomJohn...where were we?
"did you do much listening of 2ch CD's in surround? How did you like it?" |
Metralla...Glad I could help. If you do have a MC question, or even something that you've been wondering about MC, feel free to ask away. However, this forum was intended to help demistify MC, and enlighten 2CHer in the area of MC. |
I've noticed that no one has responded to the previously mentioned question I posed a few postings ago. I must say, its not my intention to be a pest about this, but I'm more than curious as to what legitimite answer anyone can come up with. Sooo.....back by popular demand...I'm posting the same question for the third time. Thanks for you patients!!
Are you aware that the very essense of MC is durived from the same principles of 2CH? Here's the easiest and most practical way I can explain it. Its like getting the same stereo magic between each of the 5 speakers. You know how when a 2Ch setup is locked in, the sound stage is detailed, deep and wide? Now imagine, if you will, this same phenomenon taking place, when done correctly, 5 times over. The results are truely amazing, not a gimmick.
Not only that but the purpose of the five is to really perform like one! Lost you didn't I. You see, when the 5 have been setup and calibrated properly, it creates a 360 degree soundfield. This is just as if your hearing the instrument or voice in front of you (in its orginial intended placement) and the reverb, echo attack and decay, ect...all around you. As if the performance was taking place in the room with you.
|
Metralla...thanks for the post but I think I'm a little lost. You wouldn't be suggesting people, whether 2ch or MC, are listening to interference, are you? Cause if you are, I don't think you gonna have many happy audiophiles. :)
However, I do believe I see where you're headed. In theory, yes. Just as a properly setup 2ch system produces the euphoric soundstage soooo many audiophile rave about, for the most part, the same rules apply for MC to acheive this outcome. Difference is, your actually working with five "stereo pairs". L to C, C to R, R to SR, SR to SL, and SL to L.
But just one other thing though. Just as audiophiles don't imagine thier "phemonemon" taking place between thier two speakers, MC listeners don't have to imagine either. WHY? because the same things 2chers are hearing takes place for MC, only 5 times over within the 5+1 speakers. |
Ted...thanks for the response the to question that is not a question because it doesn't have a question mark....go figure. Please excuse the grammatical errors. I was hoping to pose the initial question in the beginning, with a ? of course, and complete the thought thereafter with a (.). By no means imposing any impression of bitternesss. Cynical...to some degree...sure why not! Input does = output!!
Charge it to the head and not the heart. Now I know mispelled words and puntuation "bear more weight" then the content, which seems to be the norm with many; I'll try at all cost to be more careful in the future.
I can tell you didn't read much of the previously posted thread or else you have a better understanding as to who the question was initially presented for. Not a problem though, because you confirmed my assumptions that at least one other person, other than myself was aware of the similarities between 2ch and MC. I'm glad you were able to conclude what the mispelling of durived ment...thanks for getting the point!!!
Glad to see there are audiophile who can appreciate both 2ch and MC together, even though you don't have a preference. Please keep in mind, its not an ultimatum to pick between the two; just a thread to see who would pick what, hence the original posting...please see the top of pg 1 for further details. Thanks for your input on the gon, and many others you patronize.
There's plenty of "poison" to pass around. So...if you decide in the future, MC will be here.
Thanks and Happy Listening
PS - I'm having the toughest time finding any media in 7.1? Especially for movies! Any suggestions. |
Ted...no blood no foul. Glad to see someone else has at least considered MC. This is mindset I'm running to more and more with audiophiles. Few have even considered MC. Fewer have actually heard a setup. They hate it, partially because almost none have heard it done correctly to properly judge. My biggest goal is to push the envelope and try to give MC the much needed exposure. If that means posing questions such as this or trying to somewhat educate, then so be it. I just don't was MC to be written off so quickly without it being considered as "audiophile worthy" as 2CH.
Sometimes I have to take the more aggressive posture only to show the seriousness of the hobby. Besides, I don't want anyone to take my milk money anymmore. :) I've only been in this thing for 3 years; I have a lots of growing to do.
Thanks for you posting and happy listening, Ted. |
Wow...I must be doing something wrong here. I would've never thought $14k to spend on audio gear is considered "limited" funds. |
Any other contenders...don't be shy now! :) |
Tim...thanks for the very thorough breakdown of your system. Looks like you've dropped a nice penny into it.
Hows the performance? |
Thanks JMC
I would've guessed no brain..er, as well!
Enjoy |
Eandylee - would you be willing to be walked through the process to better enhance your MC system?
It seems as if you have a good grasp of things, but there could be more potential to bring out of it; which could sway you opinion to the other side.
No long drawn out process, just a little extra help. And it won't cost you a dime. You keep your own equipment. Sounds like something that would interest you? |
