? For SACD Type People

Are you listening to SACD in mutli or two channel? For those that listen in multi-channel what kind of equpment are you using? My speakers are Martin Logan Odysseys and I have no plans to buy three or four more to go munti-channel (couldn't afford it even if I wanted to). Are you sitting an equal distance from all of your speakers? Any insights would be helpful.

 

Andy,

For a number of reasons, I don't listen to multi-channel SACD. Perhaps the cost and logistics are the two most practical reasons, but I don't think that even if I had the money to spend on the equipment and speakers I needed to move to M-C that I would necessarily. Besides that, two of my local audiophile friends have M-C players, but I haven't been all that impressed with the few titles I've heard in the format.

To hear M-C absolutely correctly, it's been said that all five of your speakers have to be really close in sound quality and performance. My wife isn't happy with the two large speakers that dominate the room now, so I can just imagine what she would say about three more of them in there displacing the furniture and all.

Beside's who's making a high quality tube 5-channel preamp?

 

Ideally, all five speakers should be identical, placed equidistant from the sweet-spot, and have identical amplification. I have attained this setup with one concession: the center channel. If you have a mixed home theater/multi-channel hi-fi setup (like I do) the television monitor creates a problem when trying to match all five speakers. Invariably, you have to settle for a horizontal center channel.

If this is the case, you're going to want to try and get the center as close in timbre to your remaining speakers as possible. Getting a center channel whose tweeter exactly matches those found in the remaining speakers and positioning all five speakers so the tweeters are the same height from the floor can go a long way towards proper timbre matching. It won't be perfect (with a compromised center channel) but you can get pretty darn close.

Exact matching of the fronts to the rears is crucial. Too many folks are quick to dismiss multi-channel after hearing a setup where the fronts and rears do not match. That would be akin to dismissing stereo after hearing a setup with differing left and right channels (this is an apples to apples analogy – the relationship of the rears to the fronts in multi-channel is just as crucial as the relationship of the left to the right in stereo).

Yes, it is more difficult and obviously more expensive to properly set up a multi-channel system. All the variables for any given channel are just as important in multi-channel as they are in stereo. Multi-channel ain't for everyone, and I don't have a problem with folks who have given it a serious chance and still don't care for it. However, this is one of those things where you really have to experience it firsthand. Please give it a serious audition yourself and don't rely upon the opinions of others (no matter how authoritative they may sound) until you've experienced it (correctly) yourself!

 

Three more Martin Logan Odysseys and three more Bryston 7Bs are not in the budget.



vex

What kind of speakers and electronics are you using?

 

I'm interested in knowing that too. I have a friend that has Wilson Grand Slamms in the front, a Wilson Center Channel and Watt Puppies for the rears, and the giant Wilson sub-woofer. He's driving his $150K+ worth of speakers with another $150K worth of Krell amplifiers, and has the Levinson M-C control center. (This is one of the 2 M-C systems I was referring to). Are you using separates or an M-C receiver?

I don't doubt that you're getting great sound, vex, but, seeing as I have a preference for tubes (and not ARC tubes, at that), I would be curious to know what's creating all that incredible sound chez-vous.

 

Fudge Factors:

Many SACD players lack full or even any bass management. Thus two full range stereo speakers work well on Stereo material.

If you have a 5.1 system, depending upon the mix and the speakers the results can be fine or not so fine.

But unlike DVD-A or DTS, not all multi-channel SACD disks are 5.1. Many do not utilize the center speaker, thus making timber matching and bass redirection less of an issue.

I have two full range stereo speakers, (Dahlquist DQ-10's), a 12 inch Dahlquist powered sub, and Cambridge di/bi pole surrounds, and AR-5's as rear speakers for DTS/DD 7.1 presentaions (not usable for SACD or DVD-a).

Sometimes the multi-channel version sounds good, sometimes I much prefer to listen to the stereo track, especially for vintage material.

 

Well, for the price of a pair of Wilson Grand Slamms, you could probably buy my entire system. My system ain't no slouch, but it's not outrageously priced, either. You don't need to spend an arm-and-a-leg to get great multi-channel performance. In fact, you could get by with much less than I have invested in my system. Anyone considering multi-channel shouldn't think that only the highest end systems will suffice.

Now, if you already have a ton of dough invested in your stereo setup, it may very well be cheaper to buy an entirely new system for multi-channel. I realize this isn't terribly realistic, but for those with a spare room lying around, what the hey? I sure wouldn't mind having a dedicated stereo and a dedicated multi-channel system, but that just ain't gonna happen.

Anyway, "tacking on" some cheaper components in an effort to migrate a stereo system to multi-channel is certainly an attractive option, and it is what most people end up doing. Then they complain when they don't like the result. You can count me in that group. Eventually, I "saw the light" and broke down and bought the components necessary to set up a "proper" multi-channel system. I still complain about that dang center channel, but what can I do? I don't have a spare room lying around...

Yes, it's all a pain in the ass, expensive, forces you to make concessions, blah, blah, blah. On top of that, you may not even like it! Some people simply do not like multi-channel, and that's fine. You do owe it to yourself to give it a chance, but don't go through the bother and expense yourself just to reach that decision. Find a dealer or a friend who has a proper multi-channel system and give it a whirl. Keep an open mind, though. I think some people don't WANT to like it just cuz they know they're going to have to actually consider it, after they've gone through all this trouble to set up a killer stereo system. It's easier (and much cheaper) to simply dismiss multi-channel out-of-hand. Ignorance is bliss!

With that said, here is what I am using for multi-channel. It ain't the best and it ain't the worst, but it is more than adequate for most, and I love it. As with any system, it ain't over by a long shot, so things will change over time, but for now...

Rotel RSP-985 pre-amp
Rotel RMB-1095 5x200 watt power amp
Pinnacle Classic Gold Aerogel speakers (front and rear)
Pinnacle Classic Gold center speaker
Toshiba SD-9200 DVD-A
Sony XA777ES SACD

 

Hey Vex,

What's your impression on the sound of your Sony SACD player vs. your Toshiba DVD-A player?

 

A lot of "stereophiles" frown heavily on multi-channel mixes that place you in the band, preferring to remain in the audience. If these folks admit to liking any multi-channel mixes at all, it's generally those that use the rears for ambience only. The Chesky multi-channel SACD's are generally of the ambient variety, and are exceptionally well recorded. My favorite is "David Johansen and the Harry Smiths" that was recorded in a church. It is an entirely realistic multi-channel mix, and you really get a sense of "being there". The stereo mix is stunning as well, but even stereo diehards are sure to enjoy this one on multi-channel.

It's all a matter of preference, for sure, but personally, I enjoy being placed in the band. I read an interesting article with Micky Hart (drummer for the Grateful Dead) saying he remixed the Grateful Dead's "American Beauty" for multi-channel from his perspective. When you listen to the disc, you do get a sense of being in the drummer's seat. I think this is very cool! As a listener, I like being placed in the band! It really gives you a unique opportunity to appreciate the music in a whole new light. I know there are those who don't want to "alter history" or whatever. Fine. They don't need to listen to the new multi-channel mixes, but don't rain on my parade, man!

As for SACD vs. DVD-A, well there's a can of worms if ever there was one... but hey, I enjoy both formats. Without going into a lot of detail, I just want to say that overall, I prefer DVD-A over SACD. Regarding my players, they are both EXCEPTIONAL players for their primary formats. Also, they are both incredible for regular CD's, although I do prefer the Sony for this job. I just wish the Sony did HDCD. Not much of a problem, though, since the Toshiba does HDCD and it sounds stunning. I know the Sony is a bit pricy, but I wholeheartedly recommend the Toshiba SD-9200 for anyone considering DVD-A. It is an exceptional value and sounds incredible for DVD-A/HDCD/CD. As an added bonus, it does DVD-V as well with component video. Die-hard home theater guys will nit-pick about its video performance, but I don't have any complaints with this aspect either. One feature I really like is the Toshiba's "direct audio" mode that disconnects the unit from all video circuitry. I've found this has a major benefit on the resolution of any audio media played with it.