3.1 Hi-Fi Sound; How do I achieve it?

[Thompsonuxb]

As an added nicety to the Y-adapter system I tried above, you could try adding an attenuator to the feed to the power amp driving the 'third speaker', or even better a potentiometer allowing you to adjust its level (unless the amp feeding it has its own volume control). Whenever I've played with the whole 'three-speaker stereo' thing, I've found it useful to be able to reduce the level of the centre speaker a little relative to the left and right, so it reinforces the sense of soundstage solidity rather than dominating matters.

And just to respond to the naysayers, yes it's possible to get a good solid stereo image from the right speakers in the right positions in the right room, but most domestic listening rooms are far from ideal, so however much you faff with positioning it can be hard to achieve, not to mention that the stereo effect only tends to work in a fairly narrow 'sweet spot' listening position. The third speaker idea can firm up the stereo image, and also keeps it over a much wider listening area.

Yes, of course it's an illusion, and all about fooling your ears, but then so is stereo!

You tell em Norman.

 

[Thompsonuxb]

In my ignorance I googled the mix 'thing'. Its far more complex than your beginners lesson suggests. However, if it works for you then great. It doesn't work for me - I almost always choose the least possible processing - Pure Direct in my case gives by far the best sq. I have tried 3.1, 5.1 etc with several DSL options but they don't suit my amp, room, speakers, ears. They may well suit you and the OP.

Spiny Norman has nailed the OP's query.

But I'll say my HT and stereo are in separate rooms.

I use a Sat/sub system. I did once set my main speakers up to test them in HT.

In just stereo - they did not need a centre speaker or a sub. Dialog was locked to the screen and the bass was excellent (Predator was the film, the first time from the predators pov after the failed rescue the scene)

The centre is there to enhance the 'centre image' - original pro-logic used mono to the rears - which became stereo for DD, which is now an option/mix for 7.1 DD. Mono and stereo.

 

[RobinKidderminster]

Did Spiney nail it or just agree with you?

I have no idea about what your last comment is about but to the OP - suck it and see I say.

 

[Thompsonuxb]

Did Spiney nail it or just agree with you?

I have no idea about what your last comment is about but to the OP - suck it and see I say.

My last post, just tried to show you other ways that a 'centre' speaker is employed now to enhance.....

Oh, don't worry about it.

 

[RobinKidderminster]

Ah yes. A centre is used to lock the dialogue to the centre in a HT setup. Thanks

I do find in 3.1. 5.1 mode (stereo) I loose all focus and the soundsrage becomes muddy and confused. (These audio descriptions are so subjective and confusing I feel). The bass also seems diluted and looses solidity. But that's just me and my system with my music. There is no right answer here - just personal experience.

 

[steve_1979]

Now you're just being ignorant...... :-D

 

[steve_1979]

I believe Thompson to be mistaken.

 

[steve_1979]

... I use a Sat/sub system. I did once set my main speakers up to test them in HT.

In just stereo - they did not need a centre speaker or a sub. Dialog was locked to the screen and the bass was excellent (Predator was the film, the first time from the predators pov after the failed rescue the scene)

The centre is there to enhance the 'centre image' - original pro-logic used mono to the rears - which became stereo for DD, which is now an option/mix for 7.1 DD. Mono and stereo.

That's a movie with 5.1 audio which it totally different to music which is mixed to 2.0 audio.

 

[RobinKidderminster]

Grandma eggs teach suck to don't. For those who don't know the difference between 2ch music and 6+ch surround sound please read all of above. And for those not realizing that a centre is a loudspeaker placed above or below the viewing screen for movies etc so that sound and in particular dialogue appears to eminate from the screen - lots of good Ladybird books. Those wishing to understand the mixing of stereo music then Google is your friend. zzzzzzzzz

 

[steve_1979]

Can anyone think of any hifi manufacturer which makes a 3 separate speaker system that's designed for music?

 

[Infiniteloop]

Can anyone think of any hifi manufacturer which makes a 3 separate speaker system that's designed for music?

Surely that system format only makes sense if any music is recorded specifically for it?

 

[RobinKidderminster]

Steve - No. They have sense.

Infinite - Yes. I think we've tried (unsuccessfully) to explain that.

Brick banging wall head your like a on.

 

[steve_1979]

Can anyone think of any hifi manufacturer which makes a 3 separate speaker system that's designed for music?

Surely that system format only makes sense if any music is recorded specifically for it?

Exactly!

Can anyone think of any music which is recorded/mixed into 3 channels of audio rather than 2?

 

[spiny norman]

Can anyone think of any music which is recorded/mixed into 3 channels of audio rather than 2?

http://store.acousticsounds.com/s/27/RCA_Living_Stereo_Hybrid_SACDs

 

[RobinKidderminster]

Centre speakers are rarely the same as fronts. (Though its a maybe good idea). Hence in any 'split cable' idea there would be a tonal imbalance made worse since bass is often mono on one channel. Hence (and for other reasons mentioned) 3.0 is a no-no. An AV amp may allow a 3.1 configuration but with only 2 discrete channels to work with its always going to be a lottery in processing options. It will certainly destroy the intention of the mixer who will have used a wide range of tools such as volume, phase, delay and stereo/mono components. A processor will never reconstruct/interpret these attributes in the intended manner.

 

[Thompsonuxb]

Lol.... Honestly.

 

[RobinKidderminster]

LOL. Yup. Honestly. LOL

<retires to bed stage left>

 

[steve_1979]

Can anyone think of any music which is recorded/mixed into 3 channels of audio rather than 2?

http://store.acousticsounds.com/s/27/RCA_Living_Stereo_Hybrid_SACDs

SACD is 5.1 audio not 3.0. So the two questions still stand:

1. Does anyone know of any music which is recorded with 3 channels of audio rather than 2?

2. Does anyone know of any hifi manufactures that make a 3 speaker HiFi system designed for music?

 

[Undesirable]

What if I purchased a centre speaker designed such that it can also be laid on its side for use as main speakers as is the Chane A2rx-c?: http://www.chanemusiccinema.com/A2rx-c

Then I could also redirect some low freq to the subwoofer (with its built in 80Hz high-pass filter).

 

[Laurens_B]

But... what kind of splitter cable to use? XLR, RCA, smooth warm sounding, or bright sounding, OFC or silver, with or without fairy dust.....surely the type of cable used will determine if it will sound excellent or rubbish..... too many options.....

 

[Undesirable]

RCA all round, because the source is an ASUS Xonar Essence STX sound card, which has RCA outputs.

 

[Waxy]

I'm so old, all of my recordings are of the mono variety. I love to feel the music, so I have one centre speaker and 3 industrial-sized sub-woofing behemoths*

* may not be true

 

[RobinKidderminster]

@Undesirable.

A re-read of your first post is always a good thing since we ranters keep doin what we do best. Rant.

You are out to improve your near-field 'desk' setup. No interest in cinema sound - just stereo. Your first post indeed highlighted the problems with adding a centre which have been endorsed by many here. In general terms, a centre will not work in stereo. I don't know your amp but reviews suggest its a decent processor. Nothing wrong with your speakers either. I suggest the position of the speakers may be the problem but appreciate it may be impossible to move them much. There maybe a better speaker to perform in this position - some have been recommended in other posts but I don't have any experience.

It seems you are having trouble with soundstage or lack of a central image - a proper near-field monitor is then the solution. I presume your signal feeds the sub at line level so that you have a crossover around 80hz. That value is only a guide and experiment useful between 60-150.

In short - look into near-field monitors and forget the centre idea.

 

[spiny norman]

SACD is 5.1 audio not 3.0.

Total and utter twaddle!

SACD may have the capacity for up to six channels, but SACD releases are available variously in 2.0, 4.0, 5.0 and 5.1, not to mention the 3.0-channel format to which I referred you in that link.

Really, if you're not going to bother reading evidence presented in answer to your questions, is there any point in responding?

 

[RobinKidderminster]

SACD is 5.1 audio not 3.0.

Total and utter twaddle!

SACD may have the capacity for up to six channels, but SACD releases are available variously in 2.0, 4.0, 5.0 and 5.1, not to mention the 3.0-channel format to which I referred you in that link.

Really, if you're not going to bother reading evidence presented in answer to your questions, is there any point in responding?

Tut tut. Surely irrelevant here but nevertheless, these are mixed for that particular format. Discussion here is using a standard stereo source processed into 3.0 or 3.1

Suggest you read back to OP.