Where's the 7.1 master audio?

[PeterTHX]

I say the ONLY time a track should be 7.1 is if the master was that way or the original sound mixers remix the track.

These so-called 7.1 mixes are done at Mi Casa studio for New Line and Lionsgate and are the original masters sent through something similar to a PLIIx decoder. It's NOT a true 7.1 mix! I can do the same with any 5.1 with my receiver if I want to.

If it was 5.1 originally, leave it 5.1. Or do what Paramount did with Top Gun: remix it for 6.1/7.1 and have the original sound mix available (in lossless as well).

It's like OAR for video. Just because a Super35 frame may have more information than the original 2.40 ratio seen in theaters doesn't mean we should open up the frame to see more picture.

[Davekyn]

I'm glad those of you that are using it, are reporting a more envolped experiance, although at times I wonder if were striving to simply make justifications...not that your doing that...in fact, I feel pissed off, because I can't justify using up so much space that I don't really have in order to attempt 7.1 properly if I ever wanted! I dont think many people do, however if you do and it works...Then all the glory to ya...

I do howeva feel, as many in here seem to be now indicating; that those of us without a 7.1 setup, are not really missing anything. The fact 7.1 recievers are being sold, with 5.1 being the primary source & still is, leads to all this confusion and will soon have posts titeling 5.1 Vs 7.1, when really there is no compitition at all.

Here is somthing I found that explains the whole thing about surround sound really well by AES (audio engenering society)themselves. You don't have to be a tech head to understand it. I found it very insightfull.

http://www.aes.org/technical/documents/AESTD1001.pdf

It may help you understand Why 5.1 is still being used...but is really Great to help people understand what surround sound is.

Just trying to help is all
Dave.

[Canada]

I don't care about 7.1 all I care about is if the disk is lossless.

[bluseminole]

Originally Posted by Davekyn

The primary reason 7.1 is used, is for LARGER listening areas & that is it! Marketing is going to benifit with the sale of extra speakers & cabeling so it's in thier best interest to make out as if your going to get some new listening exsperiance out of it, or in fact that you need it....HAHAHAHAHAAAAAAAAA....iT'S ALL A CROCK OF &^%$.

In fact...you can actually do more damage than good by using 7.1 in a room that does not need it. MOST homes do not need 7.1. I would even go as far to say, that most serious Home Theater enthusiasts with a newer 7.1 amp use a 5.1 speaker setup unless in a room large enough for it.

I believe it will be some time, before its practical to change the current 3/2/1 recordings...try studdying more un "Surround Sound 101" and you will understand just how useless 7.1 is in the average home & how it's really only hype for the avaerage Joe.

It's a bit like people saying 1080i PQ sucks....hehe...They miss the point completely

My room is not very large. My extra 2 back speakers are not optimally located. But you know what...simple calibration with an SPL meter and the receiver's distance correction make those speakers a huge contributing factor in my system's sound. I love my 6.1/7.1 titles--they are so much more enveloping. I can only imagine how seamless and smooth they would be in a better room, but to claim it's "useless" in the average home--which mine certainly is--is not an accurate statement. I speak from experience, and while I am no expert, my knowledge on the basics here keeps me from falling into the J6P category.

[pmac]

Buy War! with 7.1 and Jet Li Jason Statham (spelling). There is a scene in it where there is some pane of glass shattering (or exploding, i forget the exact reason it is breaking) This scene in this movie is where I first noticed 7.1 audio, it was also my first 7.1 movie to play with the new setup. It went from smashing infront of me straight at me and flew past me and landed behind me I actually turned my head out of instict to see what was behind me, and then just gave a big GRIN as it all came together ...Ohh the sweet sweet sound of WAR!

Paul

[zweet77]

I would like for 7.1 to be standard on action movies.I have a small listening area and entry level set up and I notice a huge difference on a good 7.1 track like pans labyrinth from when I only had 5.1 but I agree that some movies dont need it like semi pro for example.

[ClaytonMG]

Originally Posted by PeterTHX

I say the ONLY time a track should be 7.1 is if the master was that way or the original sound mixers remix the track.

These so-called 7.1 mixes are done at Mi Casa studio for New Line and Lionsgate and are the original masters sent through something similar to a PLIIx decoder. It's NOT a true 7.1 mix! I can do the same with any 5.1 with my receiver if I want to.

If it was 5.1 originally, leave it 5.1. Or do what Paramount did with Top Gun: remix it for 6.1/7.1 and have the original sound mix available (in lossless as well).

It's like OAR for video. Just because a Super35 frame may have more information than the original 2.40 ratio seen in theaters doesn't mean we should open up the frame to see more picture.

I agree with you 1000%. And here's another thing, these people seem to think that surround sound should be entirely active and don't seem to understand the point.

The point of surround sound is to serve the picture, not to distract viewers into going "wow! that sound came from right there!!!"

Personally, I prefer a 5.1 track with THX Select2/Ultra2 enabled.

[Darth Lavender]

I understand the tendancy to want 'excessive' surround sound. When I first got my system, I was constantly wondering if I'd set it up improperly, etc. and even went as far as turning the rear speakers all the way up to maximum so that I could be sure I was getting the benefit. (As you might imagine, this sounded terrible. Dialogue was distractingly muted by comparison)

But, I suggest you all listen very closely next time you're in a theatre. Listening to 'The Dark Knight' I noticed a few 'enveloping' effects, and moments were only the left or the right rears were used, but that was because I was specifically looking for them.


As to 5.1 vs 7.1, maybe 7.1 really does have an advantage, I don't know (although, as mentioned above, I'd wonder about 7.1's fidelity to the original sound-mix. If any of you are into foreign films, Ruscico is infamous for heavily remixing all their releases (most of which were originally mono) and the result is a real workout for the surround which can border on distracting and is a real abomination on the original film (on an unrelated note; beware of Ruscico's NTSC transfers. I got burnt on an $80 bootleg-quality copy of 'War and Peace')) back to what I was saying about 7.1 vs 5.1, if you're going to do a direct comparison, be sure to reposition the 'side' speakers for 5.1 sound. Basically, in a '7.1' setup, the side speakers should be 90 degrees from the screen, but in a proper 5.1 setup, they should be 100 to 120 degrees from the screen (mine are actually about 130 degrees because of the size and shape and of my room, but I think that ruins some of the directional effects a tad. C'est la vie)

[nycomet]

If surround sound is TOO MUCH for you, you could always use just ONE speaker. But that would be a travesty.

[Davekyn]

Originally Posted by bluseminole

My room is not very large. My extra 2 back speakers are not optimally located. But you know what...simple calibration with an SPL meter and the receiver's distance correction make those speakers a huge contributing factor in my system's sound. I love my 6.1/7.1 titles--they are so much more enveloping. I can only imagine how seamless and smooth they would be in a better room, but to claim it's "useless" in the average home--which mine certainly is--is not an accurate statement. I speak from experience, and while I am no expert, my knowledge on the basics here keeps me from falling into the J6P category.

I dont think you will get many people doing a calibration with an SPL meter. I still stand by my statement that for the average joe...7.1 is a waste of time. I'll go by the many others who also speak from 1st hand exsperiance...I'm glad it's working for you though...kudos

[bluseminole]

Originally Posted by Davekyn

I dont think you will get many people doing a calibration with an SPL meter. I still stand by my statement that for the average joe...7.1 is a waste of time. I'll go by the many others who also speak from 1st hand exsperiance...I'm glad it's working for you though...kudos

That is probably a fair statement. But maybe 7.1 could be a learning experience for the J6P...I mean, if they could understand even the simple conversation we're having here, that would nonetheless be a dramatic step forward, no?

I will, however, go out on a limb and say that no matter how you achieve it--whether it's on the disc, or processed via THX/PLIIx--7.1, properly calibrated, will deliver in spades a degree of envelopment and seamlessness that 5.1 systems simply can't, though they may come very close. The emphasis on room size is, IMHO, grossly overstated. And I have no problem with studios remixing audio for home theater, as long as it's well done. After all, home theater is a vastly different venue than commercial theaters.

[Davekyn]

Originally Posted by bluseminole

That is probably a fair statement. But maybe 7.1 could be a learning experience for the J6P...I mean, if they could understand even the simple conversation we're having here, that would nonetheless be a dramatic step forward, no?

.............Agreed

I will, however, go out on a limb and say that no matter how you achieve it--whether it's on the disc, or processed via THX/PLIIx--7.1, properly calibrated, will deliver in spades a degree of envelopment and seamlessness that 5.1 systems simply can't, though they may come very close. The emphasis on room size is, IMHO, grossly overstated. And I have no problem with studios remixing audio for home theater, as long as it's well done. After all, home theater is a vastly different venue than commercial theaters.

.............Perhaps in the near future such considerations will be adopted & implemented. I guess with so many foramts and speaker configurations that it's all still experimental. One can only hope that we will reach a standard that we can all feel comftable/enjoy & agree upon in the near future.

[DIY_HD]

Originally Posted by Davekyn

Here is somthing I found that explains the whole thing about surround sound really well by AES (audio engenering society)themselves. You don't have to be a tech head to understand it. I found it very insightfull.

http://www.aes.org/technical/documents/AESTD1001.pdf

It may help you understand Why 5.1 is still being used...but is really Great to help people understand what surround sound is.

Dave.

Thanks for the article, Dave. It was a bit beyond my understanding, but it did explain a few things.

I still like having the rear speakers since my kitchen is right behind my chair in the living room. Acoustically, it fills in that sound void. My AVR synthesizes the rear channels from 5.1 sources and even though they are not discrete, they round out the sound field.

I used a speaker placement guide and measured appropriate distances for all the speakers in an attempt to achieve surround balance. I also used the adjustments in my AVR which control speaker firing times based on the distance to the primary listening position. I'm not an expert on acoustics, but I think it sounds pretty good.

As for the debate of 5.1 vs. 7.1, I think everyone will have their own opinion about it. I bought my 7.1 AVR believing that 7.1 was a coming standard. At least for the present, most studios apparently don't feel that the benefit is significant enough to justify the expense. Perhaps once the installed base of 7.1 receivers grows to a large enough percentage, we will see more movies produced that provide true 7.1 channel sound. Whether individuals will pay to add the extra two speakers is dependent on the perceived value of the additional sound information. Will it make or break a movie viewing experience? No, of course not. Some will feel it's worth it. Others will not.

Interestingly, Disney is producing many (if not all) of their new films in 7.1. As if a 6 year old could tell that the back channels are missing when he is watching Fantasia! Perhaps Disney simply wants to keep on the leading edge of technology.

I hope to see more 7.1 titles in the future. I think it's worth it.

[jw]

Originally Posted by lgans316

OP,

If you are that desperate to experience 7.1ch audio why don't you pull the trigger on the Hong Kong Blu-rays that usually features double lossless audio tracks.

Shouldn't have to import them, These movies should be released that way without having to ask

[Davekyn]

Thats teriffic news about disney... DIY-HD...I'm glad you got some things out of the article Sounds like you got a decent setup going. I was impresed that my avr gave me the option to use a mic (suplied) for an automatic setup. Technology stills seems to be leaping ahead in leaps and bounds these days.

Like many others out there, I will be jumping at the chance to try out 7.1 when indeed there is plenty of Titles to pick from in an uncompressed format...and buy the sounds of it, we may not have to wait that long.

[ClaytonMG]

Where did the information that Disney is producing 7.1 films come from?

I think people still are ignoring the fact that the "7.1" films that are out now probably would've been better had your reciever applied PLIIx to them or even any of the THX sound modes. THX Select2/Ultra2 puts ambient sound into the extra channels to help fill the room (just like in theaters with the extra channels in the rear).

Another thing people are ignoring (except a select few) is the fact that you're not supposed to really be able to tell discretely where sounds are coming from for the surrounds. It should basically be like "left side, right side or behind you." Not "right there from that speaker!!!" Get what I am saying? Like the room is supposed to be full of sound, not just 4 spots in the rear. And you absolutely 10000% do NOT need 7.1 for that.

[Davekyn]

This is great as I was hoping this discussion would bring out all these finer points, but perhaps without the sarcasim…Bababaaaababaaaabaaaaa…(that’s a sheep trying to fit in with the crowed there clayton….Just kidding pardon the pun.
Seriously I understand what you’re getting at with the ambient sound rather than hear it all come out the one speaker thingy. I get more goose bumps hearing the sound suddenly appear in between the speakers myself…It’s really a magical feeling that has stuck with me ever since I heard surround the first time.

I’m unsure about what prologic would sound like in 7.1 as after hearing surround in dolby digital and so forth after that…it really showed how much distinction prologic was missing. I mean like clarity/Hi fidelity & precision type of thing…Prologi does not seem to move around the room as distinctive as the DD/DTS & so on.

Perhaps this is different now as I have not tried it in this plX thingy mode (no point with 5.1)…Is it perhaps different now with prologic being more effective in the now 7.1 uncompressed mode???...is it played uncompressed??
Could you straighten me out on this at all…would be appreciated
Cheers
Dave

[bluseminole]

Originally Posted by ClaytonMG

Another thing people are ignoring (except a select few) is the fact that you're not supposed to really be able to tell discretely where sounds are coming from for the surrounds. It should basically be like "left side, right side or behind you." Not "right there from that speaker!!!" Get what I am saying? Like the room is supposed to be full of sound, not just 4 spots in the rear. And you absolutely 10000% do NOT need 7.1 for that.

I generally agree, and that is why I beg to differ with your last statement. 7.1 is MUCH MORE EFFECTIVE at reducing the "OMG, I can tell exactly where my surround speakers are" effect. Placing sounds directly behind the listener is effectively a trick of 5.1 sound. With 7.1, you are not depending on adequate stereo imaging between the surrounds as much, because you can actually put the sound back there. Honestly, I think 6.1 is the ideal, but I recall reading somewhere that 7.1 is better because sound coming from one speaker directly behind the listener might actually be perceived as coming from the front??? I don't know, but the extra rear channel simply makes the wall of sound effect easier to pull off and potentially to do so more accurately. Like the room is supposed to be full of sound, not just 2 spots in the rear.

As far as processing is concerned, I would rather not mess with any of the lossless audio signals once they enter my receiver. Better for the studio to handle it for me, as their equipment is certainly better anyhow. IMHO, 7.1 should always be an option, as should the original mix.

[bluseminole]

Originally Posted by Davekyn

I’m unsure about what prologic would sound like in 7.1 as after hearing surround in dolby digital and so forth after that…it really showed how much distinction prologic was missing. I mean like clarity/Hi fidelity & precision type of thing…Prologi does not seem to move around the room as distinctive as the DD/DTS & so on.

Perhaps this is different now as I have not tried it in this plX thingy mode (no point with 5.1)…Is it perhaps different now with prologic being more effective in the now 7.1 uncompressed mode???...is it played uncompressed??
Could you straighten me out on this at all…would be appreciated
Cheers
Dave

ProLogic IIx works by extrapolating two extra rear channels from the existing mix, which can range from mono to 5.1. Prologic IIx, AFAIK, cannot be applied to uncompressed LPCM, though if IIRC, THX processing can. However, on plain ol' DD signals, PLIIx does an adequate job of expanding them to 7.1, but I have found it to be less than convincing. My 7.1 Blu-ray discs sound much better as far as envelopment is concerned than do my 5.1 discs expanded to 7.1 with PLIIx, but that's not really a fair comparison because the 7.1 is LPCM and the 5.1 is DD.

[ClaytonMG]

Originally Posted by bluseminole

ProLogic IIx works by extrapolating two extra rear channels from the existing mix, which can range from mono to 5.1. Prologic IIx, AFAIK, cannot be applied to uncompressed LPCM, though if IIRC, THX processing can. However, on plain ol' DD signals, PLIIx does an adequate job of expanding them to 7.1, but I have found it to be less than convincing. My 7.1 Blu-ray discs sound much better as far as envelopment is concerned than do my 5.1 discs expanded to 7.1 with PLIIx, but that's not really a fair comparison because the 7.1 is LPCM and the 5.1 is DD.

PLIIx can be applied to LPCM. Same as THX being applied. I can pretty much guarantee you that if someone played you something in 7.1 compared to 5.1 w/ THX Select2 enabled, you wouldn't be able to tell the difference.

And again, my argument isn't that the 7.1 speaker layout isn't needed. I do think to fill in the gaps it does a pretty good job. However, I truly believe that in a propper set up, THX Select2/Ultra2/PLIIx will do just as good of a job with 5.1 sources. There is no true need for 2 more extra channels.