7.1 is the Future
- Thread starter raghumailbox
- Start date
2 discrete channels can hold more than 4 matrixed channels. Stereo material encoded in Dolby Pro Logic II and SRS Circle Surround can contain 5 and 6 matrixed channels, respectively.
There is no content (none whatsoever) available to consumers that contains matrix encoded height channels.
Easy. All matrix decoders operate on intensity and phase, and all stereo recordings have content that varies in intensity and phase. The fact that you can apply matrix decoding to regular stereo recordings doesn't mean they are matrix encoded. More of a happy accident.
No, for two reasons: First, "Pro Logic" is a decoder (that logo only goes on hardware, not source material). Second, those CDs weren't matrix encoded (Dolby Surround or otherwise).
If that were true, then the mixing studio where those CDs came from would have the original 4-channel masters AND matrix encoding equipment. Except they don't. Call up those recording studios and ask them yourself.
Nothing so complicated. Each one of the height processing technologies (Audyssey DSX, Dolby PLIIz, DTS Neo:X) use different methods of extracting. I can detail them for you if you want, though it is of little importance to this discussion. What is important is that there isn't any consumer recordings with encoded height content. Pulling random ambience out of the recording and sending it to a pair of height speakers may yield pleasing results, but that doesn't mean those sounds were intended to be height information, let alone deliberately encoded as height channels.
Horizontal plane? Didn't you ask in your previous post about hearing those sounds "placed above your head"?
If you're already hearing sounds above you, what do you need height speakers for?
Last edited:
bhvm
Member
The Problem is they went on Increasing the sattelites from 2.1 to 4.1, 5.1 and 7.1 but the most important x.1 Component remains the same and get overloaded. Sure you can increase the wattage but effect is not nice as subs are not in proper proportion with Sats. I'd suggest if they go for 9 or 11 sattelites, 2 Subs must the Compulsory.
.1 is the low frequency and contains upto 120 Hz. Anything under 80 Hz is not localized, so that's the reason sub woofer can be anywhere in the room. Since the sound is not localizable, there is no need for multiple LFE channels. Although, that does not stop us from splitting the sub output and use multiple subs.
Although, having multiple sub outputs and managing/measuring/tweaking those independently in AVR has its own benefits.
Although, having multiple sub outputs and managing/measuring/tweaking those independently in AVR has its own benefits.
Multiple subs are a good idea, to help smoothen out frequency response and improve seat-to-seat consistency. But that has nothing to do with the number of satellites. Improved bass is just as helpful to someone using 2 satellites as it is to someone using 11 satellites.
exactly 13 years ago, i (my dad) bought 29" bpl tv for 29k, just 3000 extra for nicam stereo....
exactly 10 years back gave single cd player for single dvd, then 3 disc changer vcd player....
5 years back took 64 bit pc....
facts are;;;;;;;
nicam stereo never came to india.
vcd died very soon with quick launch of dvd
64 bit operating system came years after, with no office 64 bit and most software were not compatible... xp gone came vista then windows 7...
coming near to subject
mono became stereo- 2.1----4.0---4.1----5.1---6.1----6.2----7.1----7.2---9.1---9.2??????
who knows what and when changes occur... 7.1 at presents seems like owning 64 bit pc in 2005....have no support materials...
when people say 7.1 hdmi out ready for future....i just think of nicam stereo....
3d has grown too fast in video category...(3d tv released 2010.. now i too own one)...i doubt in the case of audio...
dont worry guys, i too own onkyo 7.1 receiver, reliance hd-dvr with 7.1 support, asus hd2 with true hd 7.1....but still have no good content for 7.1
except blurays and some demo audios..
i have sold bpl tv 8 years back... still nicam is mystery in my history...
never predict future,,, enjoy what u got today....cheers for 5.1 lovers..
exactly 10 years back gave single cd player for single dvd, then 3 disc changer vcd player....
5 years back took 64 bit pc....
facts are;;;;;;;
nicam stereo never came to india.
vcd died very soon with quick launch of dvd
64 bit operating system came years after, with no office 64 bit and most software were not compatible... xp gone came vista then windows 7...
coming near to subject
mono became stereo- 2.1----4.0---4.1----5.1---6.1----6.2----7.1----7.2---9.1---9.2??????
who knows what and when changes occur... 7.1 at presents seems like owning 64 bit pc in 2005....have no support materials...
when people say 7.1 hdmi out ready for future....i just think of nicam stereo....
3d has grown too fast in video category...(3d tv released 2010.. now i too own one)...i doubt in the case of audio...
dont worry guys, i too own onkyo 7.1 receiver, reliance hd-dvr with 7.1 support, asus hd2 with true hd 7.1....but still have no good content for 7.1
except blurays and some demo audios..
i have sold bpl tv 8 years back... still nicam is mystery in my history...
never predict future,,, enjoy what u got today....cheers for 5.1 lovers..
Last edited:
baijuxavior
Well-Known Member
@drkavint. Please read Point no. 11 of Forum Rules - HiFiVision.com - India's Audio Video Hi-Fi Forum.
You're confusing the number of channels in the source material with the number of speakers used for playback. One has nothing to do with the other.
A 7.1-speaker layout doesn't require 7.1-channel content.
Consumer 7.1 pre-amps/processors have been around since 1986. 7.1 content didn't show up until 2006. That's a 20-year gap.
mr Sdurani reading your last post makes me feel like you just want to contradict each and every statement of mine,
This is an international forum and if i am posting something out here i would only do that if its a part of my experience and its true up to at least certain extent .I am just an audio enthusiast who likes experimenting and my HT has things ranging from stereo Tactile transducers , motion actuators , 11.7 channels of audio( .7 stands for 3 sub-woofers and 4 tactile transducers ),custom designed xovers and speakers all done by myself,sub-woofer management systems and custom designed sound steering circuits for my tactile transducers.
You have contradicted each and every statement of mine just to prove me wrong , but doing so you have posted things which don't make sense at all.
Before answering any of the things that you have pointed out i would once again like to clarify what i meant in the simplest form:
The height channels have been introduced to add depth , a spatial feeling and airiness to the soundstage, in other words it gives a sense of z axis or height to certain kind of sound elements, these sound elements when placed at a height through the height speakers make the sound stage much more vivid.This process includes identifying the spatial cues in low-level, uncorrelated information, such as ambiance and effects like rain, wind or flyovers, and directs it to the front height speakers.The height speakers do not require any new kind of source content Instead, the extensions are designed to effectively add depth and spaciousness to existing program material.
Its right that 2 discrete channels can hold more than 2 matrixed channels , the context on which i stated the number of channels as 2 was that as per the sound industry only a very good quality of stereo source which consists of 2 discrete L and R channels can hold up two matrix channels of an acceptable quality , you just cannot add extra channels without losing some quality.
You don't need any specially encoded material for height channels , the sound material on which these channels work is present in existing sources and the future ones too
If a source is not encoded with the proper dolby surround encoder rules then the prologic decoder will never be able to decode things properly a very good example of this are certain recordings in which the dialogue tends to leak into the surround channels.
I would love to see the details of Audyssey DSX, Dolby PLIIz, DTS Neo:X methods of extracting height elements and you forgot cinema dsp hd3 from yamaha here . Block diagrams at least if you cant get your hands on details.
Yes horizontal plane.
And Yes i asked you the question , not all the information in a surround channel is supposed to be placed over head , some times there are only certain sound elements which are supposed to be placed over head but when surround speakers are placed at a height both the overhead elements and the steered/panned elements are reproduced with a compromise , if a surround speaker is placed at height more than what is specified the panning effect between the left and the right surround gets degraded , because to get the maximum panning effect with the surround channels they have to be placed at ear level as the rule goes for the main LR and the center, vice versa if you place it at the height specified or at the ear level the height elements suffer . But if you have separate height speakers u can get the maximum enveloping surround effect.
Hearing just the rain falling from above in the movie perfect storm, Airplanes flying over head in pearl harbor, aliens hitting the rooftop in signs , just the sound of birds in avatar are not an example of Pulling random ambiance out of the recording and sending it to a pair of height speakers.
If you are still not convinced with what dts,dolby,audyssey and yamaha have done its your own view . There are a lot of people like me who are satisfied .
This is an international forum and if i am posting something out here i would only do that if its a part of my experience and its true up to at least certain extent .I am just an audio enthusiast who likes experimenting and my HT has things ranging from stereo Tactile transducers , motion actuators , 11.7 channels of audio( .7 stands for 3 sub-woofers and 4 tactile transducers ),custom designed xovers and speakers all done by myself,sub-woofer management systems and custom designed sound steering circuits for my tactile transducers.
You have contradicted each and every statement of mine just to prove me wrong , but doing so you have posted things which don't make sense at all.
Before answering any of the things that you have pointed out i would once again like to clarify what i meant in the simplest form:
The height channels have been introduced to add depth , a spatial feeling and airiness to the soundstage, in other words it gives a sense of z axis or height to certain kind of sound elements, these sound elements when placed at a height through the height speakers make the sound stage much more vivid.This process includes identifying the spatial cues in low-level, uncorrelated information, such as ambiance and effects like rain, wind or flyovers, and directs it to the front height speakers.The height speakers do not require any new kind of source content Instead, the extensions are designed to effectively add depth and spaciousness to existing program material.
Its right that 2 discrete channels can hold more than 2 matrixed channels , the context on which i stated the number of channels as 2 was that as per the sound industry only a very good quality of stereo source which consists of 2 discrete L and R channels can hold up two matrix channels of an acceptable quality , you just cannot add extra channels without losing some quality.
You don't need any specially encoded material for height channels , the sound material on which these channels work is present in existing sources and the future ones too
If a source is not encoded with the proper dolby surround encoder rules then the prologic decoder will never be able to decode things properly a very good example of this are certain recordings in which the dialogue tends to leak into the surround channels.
I would love to see the details of Audyssey DSX, Dolby PLIIz, DTS Neo:X methods of extracting height elements and you forgot cinema dsp hd3 from yamaha here . Block diagrams at least if you cant get your hands on details.
Yes horizontal plane.
And Yes i asked you the question , not all the information in a surround channel is supposed to be placed over head , some times there are only certain sound elements which are supposed to be placed over head but when surround speakers are placed at a height both the overhead elements and the steered/panned elements are reproduced with a compromise , if a surround speaker is placed at height more than what is specified the panning effect between the left and the right surround gets degraded , because to get the maximum panning effect with the surround channels they have to be placed at ear level as the rule goes for the main LR and the center, vice versa if you place it at the height specified or at the ear level the height elements suffer . But if you have separate height speakers u can get the maximum enveloping surround effect.
Hearing just the rain falling from above in the movie perfect storm, Airplanes flying over head in pearl harbor, aliens hitting the rooftop in signs , just the sound of birds in avatar are not an example of Pulling random ambiance out of the recording and sending it to a pair of height speakers.
If you are still not convinced with what dts,dolby,audyssey and yamaha have done its your own view . There are a lot of people like me who are satisfied .
If I have contradicted some of your statements, it is not to prove you wrong but instead to correct misinformation. This isn't about you; it's about the facts.
No. Height speakers have been introduced to add height, not "spatial feeling". Wide speakers were introduced to do what you are describing. The sense of spaciousness comes from lateral reflections, which can be simulated using speakers placed between +/-60 degrees to +/-90 degrees. This is why Audyssey DSX and DTS Neo:X both introduced height and wide speakers. But let's not confuse the purpose of those speakers. Height speakers weren't introduced to add spatial feeling any more than wide speakers were introduced to add overhead imaging.
Height speaker processing can't identify rain, wind of flyovers. It has no idea what content is in the soundtracks.
Look, I don't mean this as a slight, but it is pretty obvious that you aren't commenting from experience, otherwise you wouldn't be making the comments above. If you had heard TV shows or movie soundtracks encoded using PLII, Circle Surround or LOGIC7, then you would know that 5 or 6 channels can be matrixed into 2 channels without loss of quality.
Rather than take my word for it, readers can demonstrate this for themselves: try chapter 16 from the 'Blade 2' DVD, play the 2-channel track using PLIIx on a 7.1 set-up. You'll hear distinct surround information at your left side, right side and behind you. Three channels in the surround field, in addition to the three channels up front, all from a 2-channel track. If you then play back the same chapter with the DTS 6.1 track, you'll notice the surround information (left, right, back) matches perfectly.
Again, simply not true. Plenty of unencoded music decodes fine using matrix decoders.
What do you mean "supposed to be"? There are no soundtracks on home video with any sounds that were deliberately mixed and intended to image overhead. If know of any soundtracks where the mixer explicitly mentions height information (sounds that are "supposed to be" above you) then please post the name of those movies.
This isn't about being satisfied. I know a lot of people who are satisfied with a Bose clock radio, but that doesn't make it high fidelity. Likewise, you may be satisfied with whatever sounds get sent to the height speakers, but that doesn't make it encoded (or intended) height information. Blurring that distinction serves no useful purpose.
wtaylorbasil
New Member
I have no intention of upgrading my 5.1 system to 6.1 or 7.1 ....
My understanding is that 7.1 or any other above 5.1, when played through the 5.1 Receiver/Amp will downsample to 5.1 without losing any audio content. Is this correct? Or there is more to it than this?
William
Last edited:
Easier to put this part of my reply into a separate post rather than bury it in the previous one.
DTS Neo:X extracts decorrelated or non-coherent sounds from all the channels of a soundtrack and sends them to the height speakers. To prevent sounds from imaging up there, it attempts to cut off anything coherent. If you listen to just the height speakers, you'll sometimes hear quick "pst" transients (like the very begining of a drum whack or bullet shot). But when all speakers are playing, the artifacts are completely masked by sounds from the other speakers (like the actual drum whack or bullet shot), so it's not a problem. The height info is the same mono signal sent to both speakers. To prevent forming a phantom centre image between the height speakers, the signal is decorrelated (phase shifted).
Dolby PLIIz works similarly, but with a few of small differences. With 2-channel material it is a little more jumpy than Neo, and doesn't do as good a job of suppressing coherent sounds from the height speakers, so you'll sometimes hear non-ambient content from the front channels leak up there. With 5.1 material it easily avoids coherent sounds by only extracting decorrelated information from the surround channels, thereby avoiding the transient artifacts of Neo. However, Neo sounds a little more full, since it is drawing from all (up to 7) channels. If you have a 9.1 set-up (5.1+backs+heights), then the surround-back channels will be stereo but the height channels will be decorrelated mono. If you have 7.1 set-up (5.1+heights, no backs), then the heights will be stereo.
Audyssey DSX generates early reflections that weren't in the original soundtrack. It copies the contents of the L/R front channels and smears the sound, adding a bit of delay. The smearing is tightly packed reverb (you can't make out individual echos). So if you play a test disc with a click track, the sharp "click" sounds will appear as "bzzzt" sounds from the height (and wide) speakers. In order to emphasize the new speakers, DSX lowers the level of the main L/R speakers by 3dB. It also lowers all the surrounds by 3dB and decorrelates them (say goodbye to localization in the surround field). DSX can't be applied to 2-channel material, because the effect of stretching out the soundstage (vertically and horizontally) would be distracting on vocals/dialogue. So you first have to upmix the stereo signal to multi-channel, using PLII or Neo:6, which removes vocals from the main L/R channels. You can then apply DSX. Of course this isn't a problem with discrete multi-channel sources, which typically have the dialogue in the centre channel. However, if you play a soundtrack with steered dialogue (any Pixar movie), you'll hear the voices become huge (voice of god effect) when the dialogue pans to the left or right channel.
Yamaha CinemaDSP, like DSX, is intended to give the impression of being in a larger space. Unlike DSX, it doesn't use any height channels. Let me underscore that last point: those "presence" speakers placed high and wide up front (and behind) are not height speakers. CinemaDSP is intended for room simulation, generating reverb and early reflections, played back from the presence speakers. Depending on the DSP mode chosen, the reverb can sometimes be heard as distinct echos. Yamaha went through the effort and expense of sampling the impulse response of actual venues, hence the names of some of the modes (Roxy, Palladium, etc).
BTW, I'm going to repeat what I said in my previous post: rather than take my word for it, anyone who has access to these processing modes can verify the above information for themselves. The Onkyo TX-NR1009 has PLIIz, Neo:X and DSX. So you can compare all three height processes on one A/V receiver. The comparison will be as fair as it gets, since all other variables will stay exactly the same, only the processing modes will change.
Surround processing breaks down into two groups: ambience extraction and ambience generation. PLIIz and Neo:X are examples of the former while DSX and CinemaDSP are examples of the latter.
DTS Neo:X extracts decorrelated or non-coherent sounds from all the channels of a soundtrack and sends them to the height speakers. To prevent sounds from imaging up there, it attempts to cut off anything coherent. If you listen to just the height speakers, you'll sometimes hear quick "pst" transients (like the very begining of a drum whack or bullet shot). But when all speakers are playing, the artifacts are completely masked by sounds from the other speakers (like the actual drum whack or bullet shot), so it's not a problem. The height info is the same mono signal sent to both speakers. To prevent forming a phantom centre image between the height speakers, the signal is decorrelated (phase shifted).
Dolby PLIIz works similarly, but with a few of small differences. With 2-channel material it is a little more jumpy than Neo, and doesn't do as good a job of suppressing coherent sounds from the height speakers, so you'll sometimes hear non-ambient content from the front channels leak up there. With 5.1 material it easily avoids coherent sounds by only extracting decorrelated information from the surround channels, thereby avoiding the transient artifacts of Neo. However, Neo sounds a little more full, since it is drawing from all (up to 7) channels. If you have a 9.1 set-up (5.1+backs+heights), then the surround-back channels will be stereo but the height channels will be decorrelated mono. If you have 7.1 set-up (5.1+heights, no backs), then the heights will be stereo.
Audyssey DSX generates early reflections that weren't in the original soundtrack. It copies the contents of the L/R front channels and smears the sound, adding a bit of delay. The smearing is tightly packed reverb (you can't make out individual echos). So if you play a test disc with a click track, the sharp "click" sounds will appear as "bzzzt" sounds from the height (and wide) speakers. In order to emphasize the new speakers, DSX lowers the level of the main L/R speakers by 3dB. It also lowers all the surrounds by 3dB and decorrelates them (say goodbye to localization in the surround field). DSX can't be applied to 2-channel material, because the effect of stretching out the soundstage (vertically and horizontally) would be distracting on vocals/dialogue. So you first have to upmix the stereo signal to multi-channel, using PLII or Neo:6, which removes vocals from the main L/R channels. You can then apply DSX. Of course this isn't a problem with discrete multi-channel sources, which typically have the dialogue in the centre channel. However, if you play a soundtrack with steered dialogue (any Pixar movie), you'll hear the voices become huge (voice of god effect) when the dialogue pans to the left or right channel.
Yamaha CinemaDSP, like DSX, is intended to give the impression of being in a larger space. Unlike DSX, it doesn't use any height channels. Let me underscore that last point: those "presence" speakers placed high and wide up front (and behind) are not height speakers. CinemaDSP is intended for room simulation, generating reverb and early reflections, played back from the presence speakers. Depending on the DSP mode chosen, the reverb can sometimes be heard as distinct echos. Yamaha went through the effort and expense of sampling the impulse response of actual venues, hence the names of some of the modes (Roxy, Palladium, etc).
BTW, I'm going to repeat what I said in my previous post: rather than take my word for it, anyone who has access to these processing modes can verify the above information for themselves. The Onkyo TX-NR1009 has PLIIz, Neo:X and DSX. So you can compare all three height processes on one A/V receiver. The comparison will be as fair as it gets, since all other variables will stay exactly the same, only the processing modes will change.
Absolutely. Modern receivers, like your Onkyo, can scale the number of incoming channels to the number of speakers in your layout. So, 2-channel material can be upmixed to 5.1 speakers while 6.1/7.1-channel material will be downmixed to 5.1 speakers. You never have to worry about any content or additional channels being thrown out. You'll hear everything, just with fewer speakers.
in my onkyo il ove neo mode and heights mode.. it does make a lot of difference when 2 channel converted to 7.1,, since i dont have 7.1 heights material,, just wondering how nice it would be if true 7.1 hz source material available..
rana_kirti
Active Member
@ sdurani,
So you mentioned and explained above how DSX, IIz, Neo X and Yamaha Presence work in different ways from each other.
Can u give us as examples of how the above mentioned technologies will sound different from each other in respect to "Front Height speaker effect" with a few scenes from different movies ?
One example can be the rain scene in First 5 minutes of Ratatouille which has a lot of "Rain & Thunder". How will this particular scene sound different on each of the above technologies ?
Let assume that it's a 5.1 setup with "Front Heights". The AVR for DSX, IIz and Neo X is the Onkyo 1009 and for the Presence it's the Yamaha RX A3000. And the speakers are same for both tests.
Understanding this with a few examples will help a lot of us who can't understand the technical terms like "decorrelated or non-coherent, ambience extraction, ambience generation, early reflections, reverberations" etc. very well.
Regards,
Rana
So you mentioned and explained above how DSX, IIz, Neo X and Yamaha Presence work in different ways from each other.
Can u give us as examples of how the above mentioned technologies will sound different from each other in respect to "Front Height speaker effect" with a few scenes from different movies ?
One example can be the rain scene in First 5 minutes of Ratatouille which has a lot of "Rain & Thunder". How will this particular scene sound different on each of the above technologies ?
Let assume that it's a 5.1 setup with "Front Heights". The AVR for DSX, IIz and Neo X is the Onkyo 1009 and for the Presence it's the Yamaha RX A3000. And the speakers are same for both tests.
Understanding this with a few examples will help a lot of us who can't understand the technical terms like "decorrelated or non-coherent, ambience extraction, ambience generation, early reflections, reverberations" etc. very well.
Regards,
Rana
Last edited:
Rana,
I no longer have access to the receiver so I can't take requests to test particular scenes from specific movies. If you're having trouble understanding certain terms, then let me know which ones and I will do my best to explain what they mean.
I no longer have access to the receiver so I can't take requests to test particular scenes from specific movies. If you're having trouble understanding certain terms, then let me know which ones and I will do my best to explain what they mean.
rana_kirti
Active Member
Sanjay,
to be honest i don't understand any of the above terms clearly like... "decorrelated or non-coherent, ambience extraction, ambience generation, early reflections, reverberations".
I don't know if you'd be able to briefly explain all of them or could guide to a link which explains them.
However although you dont have the equipment to test the same and i can understand that. Though i do believe you in theory understand how DSX, IIz, Neo X and Yamaha Presence work in different ways from each other.
So keeping that in mind can u tell us how the "Rain scene in First 5 minutes of Ratatouille which has a lot of "Rain & Thunder" will sound different via different each of the above methods ?
Thanks,
Rana
to be honest i don't understand any of the above terms clearly like... "decorrelated or non-coherent, ambience extraction, ambience generation, early reflections, reverberations".
I don't know if you'd be able to briefly explain all of them or could guide to a link which explains them.
However although you dont have the equipment to test the same and i can understand that. Though i do believe you in theory understand how DSX, IIz, Neo X and Yamaha Presence work in different ways from each other.
So keeping that in mind can u tell us how the "Rain scene in First 5 minutes of Ratatouille which has a lot of "Rain & Thunder" will sound different via different each of the above methods ?
Thanks,
Rana
@ sdurani,
Thanks for the technical details on Neo:X, DSX, IIz etc.
My receiver supports only DSX and IIz for heights.
I would like to use a mode which won't disturb/alter the sound going to the 5.1 speakers much, at the same time send special effects (rain, helicopter etc) to the heights. After reading your post I think IIz will be better for me.
Since my setup is 7.1, hope I will get stereo heights
Thanks for the technical details on Neo:X, DSX, IIz etc.
My receiver supports only DSX and IIz for heights.
I would like to use a mode which won't disturb/alter the sound going to the 5.1 speakers much, at the same time send special effects (rain, helicopter etc) to the heights. After reading your post I think IIz will be better for me.
Since my setup is 7.1, hope I will get stereo heights
When sounds are decorrelated that means they are out of phase and don't form a phantom image. To hear the difference, play a song with strong vocals using only 2 speakers. Notice that the vocals form a coherent phantom image at the centre of the soundstage. Now wire one of the speakers out of phase (swap the red and black connections on the back of one speaker). Now you will hear what it sounds like when decorrelated. You won't be able to localize any specific imaging.
Extract means to pull out. Technologies like PLII, Circle Surround, Neural, DTS Neo, Logic7, pull out information from the recording itself and move those sounds to other speakers. For example, out of phase information (sounds that don't image in the front soundstage), will be moved to the surround speakers. Generate means to create. Technologies like DSX and CinemaDSP create ambience by adding echos that weren't in the recording originally. This gives the impression that you're in a bigger room. Reverberation = multiple echos.
When you play a sound in a room, it reflects off all the walls and keeps bouncing around the room, losing energy (getting softer) with each bounce. The first couple of reflections are the loudest and easiest to hear. Those early reflections let us know how big a room we are in. So if it takes a long time to hear the echos after the original sound, then you know you're in a cave or concert hall. If the echos come so closely after the original sound that you can't separate them, then you know that you're in a small room. Creating fake echos is one way of doing room simulation (making your room sound like a concert hall).
You want me to fantasize in my imagination what it will sound like to listen to the first 5 minutes of 'Ratatouille' using different height processing and then tell you what happened in my fantasy? That would be a complete fabrication. What purpose would that serve? (I mean, besides finding out how active my imagination is.)
Purchase the Audiolab 6000A Integrated Amplifier at a special offer price.
