[[email protected]]

Okay I never really experienced 5.1, then I went to a BOSSE store,

it had a huge theatre room with 5.1 surround sound or maybe it was 6.1, I went into and started watching the lion King, i skipped to the part where Simba is the middle of the running....

I really didnt find anything that great about it, you dont really notice the separate channels except the sound is much clearer. The speakers themselves were usually more than a RPT tv.

Then i watched on this other t.v. in a made to look like living rooom, room..
It had lord of the rings, it had a subwoofer, and two speakers.. each speaker had two that went into a different way, or maybe it was just for design..
The sound was just perfect, it sounded clear loud, had huGEEE virations all over the room and it made the couch shake..

So my conclusion is.. surround sound aint that great,, owning just 2 GOOOD speakers located near the tv would work just as good.

 

[Alan Bealby]

I wouldn't make any conclusions from just listening to two sets of speakers without carefully considering the quality of each of the sets of speakers, the environment in which they are placed, the amplifier driving the speakers, proper speaker setup and the sound source. If you have many of these factors varied as you did you can't conclude anything. A better quality pair of speakers with a sub-woofer vs a lesser quality surround 5.1 set will definitely sound better while you will lose the proper surround effect.

An example of what DD5.1 can do are the movies, Cabin Fever and Chicago, on MC HD recently. I didn't watch Cabin Fever through to end because I don't enjoy blood and guts in movies. However, near the start of the movie there is a scene with flies flying around. It is quite disconcerting to hear those flies buzzing all around your head. You won't get that effect with a pair of front speakers and a sub-woofer.

Chicago was terrific as the sound envelopes you. I doubt very much that a non-surround speaker system would give that effect.

 

[57]

...especially at a Bo$e store... (not rated highly by any audiophiles to say the least and to be kind)

Listen to a good DD5.1/6.1/7.1 demonstration at a "real" audio store. There is a HUGE difference on good DD5.1 material.

 

[[email protected]]

well the room was completely set up for the bose speakers with its best speakers i suppose, why would they put their only room with a huge projecter with crappy speakers? , wasnt that great.

Boss I thought is the best, they have their own stores and are supper pricy.

where can i go see surround sound in action ??

 

[johnp'in'bc]

......... where can I go see surround sound in action? a/v dealers usually have at least one 'room', or 'space' devoted to a decent surround sound setup. Even the "big-box" stores usually have dedicated setup's -- though the latter may not provide the most 'ideal' listening and/or viewing conditions. Smaller independents often have better setups.

 

[Wayne]

So my conclusion is.. surround sound aint that great,, owning just 2 GOOOD speakers located near the tv would work just as good.

I can't say I disagree with you. I upgraded from two speakers with an old stereo received to a DD receiver and added rear speakers, a centre front speaker and a subwoofer. I bought decent speakers (Mirage) to match my existing speakers and an Onkyo receiver.

On some movies it really makes a difference. On most TV shows and most movies it makes very little difference at all. IMHO the money is better spent on getting a bigger TV and sticking with a two channel setup.

 

[JesseJ]

You will change your mind when you watch Master & Commander, and can hear the ship creaking all around you, without all the canon fire, just in the quiet scenes....or Spider-Man 2, where every web sling is placed in the rear surround.

 

[JohnnyG]

I would rather start a system with 2 good speakers, slowly adding to that as I can, instead of starting with a 'cheap' 5.1 setup.

But with that said, there is simply NO comparison! Come over to my place and I'll switch my system from 2-channel to 5.1 channel mode. You will be immediately convinced of the benefits!

 

[Bent]

You will change your mind when you watch Master & Commander, and can hear the ship creaking all around you

Kin' you are correct sir.
M&C's opening, with the camera shots through the hold made me wonder if my house was settling, I think it was the best use of ambient sounds yet.
(Then the cannons started...)

Now I'm building a new subwoofer, 'cause my little 130 watt PSB subsonic 6 didn't quite do it. I'm doing up a bix box, 'bout 7 ft^3, ported with a 6" front port and the very last of the 6" aeroport port flares left on the continent.
I bought a 15" Blueprint driver and an ADA 1200 (1200 watt RMS) plate amp.

OOPs, in my enthusiasm, I realized I hijacked this thread... sorry TA32x.
(I'll drag it to the home theater forum when I'm done building it.)

 

[Wayne]

Kin' you are correct sir.
M&C's opening, with the camera shots through the hold made me wonder if my house was settling, I think it was the best use of ambient sounds yet.
(Then the cannons started...)

In some movies it makes a big difference, in the latest James Bond movie there was a gun shot from behind that made me drop my drink, but in a lot of movies and in pretty much all TV the surround sound is not used that much. In fact the most impressive use of suround sound is those little THX cartoons that are at the start of some DVDs.

There has been very little in sports in DD 5.1 - some football games are in surround but it doesn't add all that much other than hearing crowd noises and stadium announcements from behind you.

I am not saying that there is no benefit in surround sound, but for the money spent on quality components, which was about $1200-1500 for me when you add up receiver, sub-woofer, centre channel speaker and 2 rear speakers, I think you can get a bigger bang for your buck. For that amount of money you could buy another HDTV for the bedroom (like the 48" JVC at FS for $1499). You would notice the benefit on 100% of your viewing rather than a small minority.

 

[filper]

A flick isn't a flick without surround sound.

It adds a dimension to the presentation.

Unless of course you watch only 'chick' flicks...

There are some truly stunning surround tracks out there (even on modest movies).

 

[RNAChemist]

So my conclusion is.. surround sound aint that great,, owning just 2 GOOOD speakers located near the tv would work just as good.

\
I couldnt disagree more.

I watch my standard tv in dolby pro-logic and it mainly comes out of the twto fronts, sounds ok.

But throw on LOTR or any thing else in dd5.1 or dts5.1 and the house rocks. It is amazing. For a test, listen to 5.1 and then remove the 0.1 (sub). That difference alone is enough to convince me on the benefit.

Saying soround sound aint that great is like saying "Mumms" champaign from France isnt that good! I wish I had Mumms over the German wannabe stuff I had last night! Cheers!

 

[johnp'in'bc]

"A flick isn't a flick without surround sound". Maybe. But I do understand and can appreciate where you're coming from with this statement. We watch and listen to movies & other videos both via my surround setup, and via my lady-friend's 2-channel setup. IMO, a decent 2-channel setup is perfectly fine for many movies, and is more than adequate for most 'tv-via-dvd' viewings and the like. But for the "big movie stuff" though, there's no comparison -- surround is the way to go, if you really want to "experience" what these movies have to offer.

And heh, I wish I had Mumms over the wannabe stuff I had last night too!!!

 

[Darkman]

Movies with good (i.e. not BO$E) 5.1 or 6.1/7.1 are to 2.0 as Colt 45 is to a fine 10 or 12 year Single Malt, but if all you've ever had is Budwiser, then don't bother trying to convince me to give up my Laphoraig or Talisker!

Q.E.D.

 

[RNAChemist]

Hmmm, two references to alcohol as an analogy for audio. I wonder what we all do while we listen to music/watch movies!