My "9.1" setup

[bluseminole]

Though this is in regards to my setup, I thought this belonged here because it could make for good discussion of the theory in general. First, allow me to explain what I mean when I discuss my "9.1 setup".

We all know that no 9.1 content commercially exists. True, discrete 7.1 content is still rare--most movies are still mixed in 5.1 and remixed/processed for 7.1 releases. The only way to get "9.1" is via extrapolation or processing using proprietary algorithms--either ones implemented by a manufacturer for their pre/pro or receiver, or ones such as those offered in Dolby PLIIz. Much like other surround algorithms, however, each one is different, so one 9.1 configuration could vary drastically from another. So in short, what I am discussing is not in fact 9.1 sound, but rather standard 5.1/7.1 sources played back via one center, two main, and six surround speakers, plus one subwoofer.

I don't have a receiver or pre/pro with a 9.1 algorithm. So why and how did I go about creating such a setup? I stumbled on the idea when I discovered I had some extra surround speakers and extra channels of amplification....and ample speaker wire. I knew I couldn't process into 9.1, but then the thought struck me: movie theaters utilize significantly more than 9.1 channels to playback 5.1 sources. And they don't "fake" it. They use arrays--of course, for the purpose of delivering surround effects to the whole auditorium. The secret is effectively channel duplication. Even though the source is only 5.1, the effect of something running the length of the auditorium can be achieved by playing that identical signal through each surround speaker, provided that delay settings are properly calibrated.

I took that idea and implemented it in my home theater room, adjusting the levels to make sure the surrounds didn't dominate the soundfield. The surround L and R speakers are now operating in "pairs", with one set of surround speakers slightly forward of the listening position facing each other face-on across the room, with the other set (the original pair) located to the side and ever-so-slightly behind the listening position facing inward at an angle. The two surround back speakers are located on the back wall.

I have been very pleased with the results--though the accuracy of multichannel music suffers a bit with the sound localization reduced, the effect in movies is very much appreciated. The speakers have disappeared, making the sound much more ambient in nature and not as easily localizeable (is that a word?). In short, the sound is now very much like what is heard in the theaters.

And now at long last, the point of this whole post: I'd like your thoughts on this implementation. What do you think of the idea? I think this is a great topic for discussion--instead of utilizing discrete extra channels, why can't we expand on the same 5.1/7.1 sources by adopting the array mentality used in theaters?

[Animo]

Personally I think that may be overdoing things a bit, but......
I like the concept!!

[jcurban]

What are the measurements of the theater?

[Beta Man]

End Tables, Coffee tables, etc... as A/V racks...... I've been there before, and I'm still there

As far as 9.1 using an array.... here's my thoughts......

If I could add two more speakers to have two Left fronts, and two Right fronts (for example) to create a wider soundstage.... I would have to get matching speakers (same series, if not the same exact speakers) and for the price, I think I would have much better results from upgrading to better fronts than I currently have.... whether it be through a larger soundstage, or just simply a better sounding one.

I certainly wouldn't add poorer quality speakers to the fronts/rears/surrounds just to create "more" because if one speaker reproduces a background score with a warm sound, and the other has a brighter, or more muted etc. sound, it would conflict, and detract from the speakers I chose for their audio characteristics, and the reason I chose them was for those characteristics, I wouldn't want to add "other" audio to the mix that would basically be white-noise added in.

Also I feel that separation is good.... Without the silence between the audio, you lose the impact of the audio itself, so with that said, focus on 2-channel stereo..... some sounds come from the right, and some come from the left, and the effect that is caused by this is intentional in the mixing, so adding more speakers blurs the lines of separation.

This is why I feel 5.1 can be better in many people's applications because if you're meant to hear a discrete sound from the left, but your listening environment is too confined and you can't tell if that sound is coming from your left, or behind you, then the focal point that was intended during the mix is now lost.


I have no idea what your space is for your surrounds, and even if I did, there is no "Right" or "Wrong" because it's what you prefer in the end..... but from my experience, I had a 7.1 in my previous house, but now I have a 5.1 (soon to be 6.1) and given the narrow space I have on the rear wall, if I added 2 rears for 7.1, I would have to push them out from center, and the spacing from the surrounds to the rears would be too close, and the distinction between the two would be lost. So I'm adding a Center-Rear.

Investigating, researching, and trial-and-error are all great though, and you're certainly asking the right questions and exploring your options, which is definitely going to benefit you with whatever setup you settle on.

[bluseminole]

jcurban: Not very large. My issue is not filling the room with sound--that's easy. It's getting that sound to sound like it's coming from...where it's supposed to come from. If you'll take a look at my gallery, the room is a horrible, horrible shape. The result is that placing surround speakers where they belong is very tricky. That was what gave me the idea to use the "array" setup--because in theaters, the arrays allow for more accurate delivery of surround effects even to the crap seats than if single speakers were used. "Pairing" the surround speakers gives the ability to actually move the perceived soundstage emanating from the surround channels backwards or forwards by adjusting the level of either pair. Because my sofa is against the back wall, this method actually allows me MORE separation between the surrounds and the surround backs for 7.1 content.

Beta Man: I understand your point. I haven't upgraded my surrounds or my center to match my Monitor Audio L/R, so the quality of the speakers isn't an issue...yet. All my surrounds are from the same manufacturer, however (Onkyo ). Like I mentioned, the issue was that sound in my room was "blurry" even in basic 5.1 configuration. Check the pics in my gallery--speaker positioning for the surrounds is just bad. I feel adding more speakers has effectively removed a lot of the room's imaging problems, because instead of depending on the travel of sound from the surround speakers to create an effect, the pans are happening from REAL speakers instead of the "virtual" speakers created by some effects...does that make sense? Better to actually have the sound come from somewhere than rely on tricks to make the brain think the sound came from somewhere.

It's hard to say if I would do this in a non-mutant room. But if anyone has a free Saturday, enough wire, an extra pair of speakers, and some available amp channels--very likely, I suppose --I would recommend trying this out just for yuks. Just get approval before you make it permanent.

[Big Daddy]

Dolby, Audyssey and a few other companies are already talking about more enveloping sound (meaning more speakers) in home theater rooms.

My system is 10.4 or 10.6. I am not referring to content. I simply mean 10 speakers and 4 or 6 subwoofers. This a summary of the system:

• Front Speakers: Two Bipolar Def Tech Super Towers with 2 15" Built-In Subwoofers & 300 Watt Each Built-In Amplifiers
• Center Speakers: One Def Tech and One Martin Logan
• Side Surrounds: Two Bipolar Def Tech and Two PSB Bipolar speakers. The Denon 4308CI receiver supports 4 side surround speakers and calls them surround A and surround B. The built-in Audyssey program calibrates them separately first and then goes through them again as A+B.
• Rear Surround Speakers: Two Bose 901
• Subwoofers: Two 12" Hsu Cylindrical Subs, One 15" DIY Sub, and One 12" AA HD-SUB12.

All the speakers are powered by external amplifiers. and I have a Velodyne subwoofer analyzer/equalizer to calibrate and equalize the subs.

Don't say that my system is an overkill. I am already thinking about adding more ultra high-end DIY speakers and subwoofers. That is if I don't killed by my better half.

[JimShaw]

I hate this thread.

I have a 6.2 and now it's making me think of adding one more front left and right making it an 8.2. This I can do next January when my wife is on a three day cruise with all the women in the neighborhood. Maybe she won't notice two more 8 inch holes in the ceiling??

[naturephoto1]

Originally Posted by JimShaw

I hate this thread.

I have a 6.2 and now it's making me think of adding one more front left and right making it an 8.2. This I can do next January when my wife is on a three day cruise with all the women in the neighborhood. Maybe she won't notice two more 8 inch holes in the ceiling??

Jim,

How big is your room?

Rich

[naturephoto1]

Originally Posted by Big Daddy

Dolby, Audyssey and a few other companies are already talking about more enveloping sound (meaning more speakers) in home theater rooms.

My system is 10.4 or 10.6. I am not referring to content. I simply mean 10 speakers and 4 or 6 subwoofers. This a summary of the system:

• Front Speakers: Two Bipolar Def Tech Super Towers with 2 15" Built-In Subwoofers & 300 Watt Each Built-In Amplifiers
• Center Speakers: One Def Tech and One Martin Logan
• Side Surrounds: Two Bipolar Def Tech and Two PSB Bipolar speakers. The Denon 4308CI receiver supports 4 side surround speakers and calls them surround A and surround B. The built-in Audyssey program calibrates them separately first and then goes through them again as A+B.
• Rear Surround Speakers: Two Bose 901
• Subwoofers: Two 12" Hsu Cylindrical Subs, One 15" DIY Sub, and One 12" AA HD-SUB12.

All the speakers are powered by external amplifiers. and I have a Velodyne subwoofer analyzer/equalizer to calibrate and equalize the subs.

Don't say that my system is an overkill. I am already thinking about adding more ultra high-end DIY speakers and subwoofers. That is if I don't killed by my better half.

BD,

So are you telling us that your room consists of only speakers and components with no space left for seating or anything else?

Rich

[JimShaw]

Originally Posted by naturephoto1

Jim,

How big is your room?

Rich

20 feet wide by 18 deep.

I was really kidding but if two more fronts would help

[jerix]

Having observed the multiple speaker system in theaters, I also tried to simulate the same in my HT. I got 2 center speakers connected on series, one, above my DIY projector screen and one below the screen. My fronts have 2 speakers each also on series. My L and R surrounds have 2 each also connected series. And lastly, i got 2 speakers on my back surrounds. With that, i also got 2 subs. All in all, I have 14.

I dont use uniform brand and model of speakers, I just hooked what are available around, I guarantee that the sound of my HT is a blast. There may be substantial differences on the sound taking into account the different brand and models of speakers i used. However, having been overwhelmed by the more enveloping sound effects it brought than the usual 5.1 setup, which in the first place is my primary goal in setting that multiple speaker setup, I no longer can recognize which speaker is this, or that.

I am not that sensitive and critical when it comes to the effect i hear on my HT. As long as the breaking glass sounds like it, or the blasting gun fire sounds real, then its alright. One thing, i dont believe that there are better and best sound for CRASH! BOOM, BANG that is brought about by better and more pricey brand of speakers. What count most is how your mind accept and process these sounds and turn it into source of happiness.

[Big Daddy]

Originally Posted by naturephoto1

BD,

So are you telling us that your room consists of only speakers and components with no space left for seating or anything else?

Rich

It is 20ft x 24ft dedicated HT room. We use it for audio/video and excercise bike only. I prefer not to get into other applications of the room.

[DIY_HD]

Makes me want to double all of my speakers and drive each channel through 2 speakers at 4 ohms for a 14.2 setup!

[Animo]

Originally Posted by Beta Man

As far as 9.1 using an array.... here's my thoughts......

If I could add two more speakers to have two Left fronts, and two Right fronts (for example) to create a wider soundstage....

you lose the impact of the audio itself, so with that said, focus on 2-channel stereo..... some sounds come from the right, and some come from the left, and the effect that is caused by this is intentional in the mixing, so adding more speakers blurs the lines of separation.

First you mention adding to the front for a wider soundstage, and then you say more speakers blurs the lines of separation. I tend to agree with the latter, and unless the listening room was the size of an airplane hanger built to house a B-52, I wouldn't use more than a L/C/R for the front of a room, and would concentrate more along the lines of the OP by using extra speakers in an array for the side channels.

[Monkey]

Beta-Man, your post reminds me of a car audio system I encountered back in the day when I sold car audio gear.

This guy had a truck completely filled with pretty much any speaker he encountered, it was nuts. He had tweeters, mids, etc from radio shack, component seperates, multiple subs (sealed, ported, band pass).. 6x9's, 4x6 plates, etc.

I'm pretty sure the wiring was just bridging off a couple amps all over the place ( a miracle nothing caught on fire)!

I can't say it sounded bad, was definitely interested..

[jlynn33]

WOW! I thought I was pretty happy with 7.2.

[bluseminole]

Raises another interesting question: Are there SUPPOSED to be lines of separation in the sound? Dipole speakers were developed with the primary purpose of delivering sound effects "diffusively", in such a way so that you couldn't tell exactly where the sound was coming from. Seeing as "hard-panned" effects are not as frequently used as effects mixed to multiple channels for "placement" in the room, couldn't there actually be an advantage to eliminating discernible separation between the channels?

[Beta Man]

Originally Posted by bluseminole

Raises another interesting question: Are there SUPPOSED to be lines of separation in the sound? Dipole speakers were developed with the primary purpose of delivering sound effects "diffusively", in such a way so that you couldn't tell exactly where the sound was coming from. Seeing as "hard-panned" effects are not as frequently used as effects mixed to multiple channels for "placement" in the room, couldn't there actually be an advantage to eliminating discernible separation between the channels?

I think so.... but I suppose everyone has the right to configure their system the way they want to.....

I know you're modeling it after an actual theater...... but I don't think the theater is trying to remove the distinction between the discrete audio channels..... it's just the fact that they want the 1st, 20th, and 50th rows to all be able to experience the surround sound effect...... For many many many people, they don't get exposed to multi-directional audio outside of the local theaters.

[FSUGeoff]

Just poping in to say GO NOLES!!!!!!!!!!!

[Beta Man]

Originally Posted by FSUGeoff

Just poping in to say GO NOLES!!!!!!!!!!!

I saw the "Last Post" and your user-name, figured it was going to be something like that