I’ve recently experimented with multi-channel but have reverted to Stereo for film-watching. With a well set up 2 channel system - “Amused To Death” helps here - you can get something approaching surround sound with just 2 speakers.
“Saving Private Ryan” is a great test of this. Skip beyond the much-played initial landing scene to around 30 minutes in, where Vin Diesel’s character hands a Nazi dagger to a traumatised comrade. The artillery booms from the back of the mix push forward and to your far left and right, almost on a plane with your seating position. It’s more than enough realism for me.
3 Likes
I find with my large Klipsch floor standing horns the sound is in fact very enveloping. They produce a very immediate expressive and expansive sort of sound with very deep bass.
Although they obviously can’t produce the illusion of sounds coming from behind you they do produce a room filling sound so that one feels totally enveloped in the action. Good enough for my wife and I to thoroughly enjoy movies.
2 Likes
I think Amused to death has some ‘holophonic’ effects, making some sounds appear to come well forward of the speakers, which AFAIK aren’t incorporated in the stereo sound track of movies, or are they?
This reminds me of a funny experience.
I walked into my dealer about a year ago and had this discussion.
Me: I’ve got $5k budget and want to build an ATMOS system. I already have an amp so I’m looking for 7.1.4 speakers.
Dealer: Hmmm I can’t recommend that. For the same money you could do these other speakers that are much higher end. It’s 5.1 but will sound far better than 7.1.4 at the same price.
Me: I really had my heart set on ATMOS. So how about if my budget stretches to $10k for the speakers and I do the higher end ones as 7.1.4?
Dealer: Hmmm I can’t recommend that. For the same money you could do these other speakers that are much higher end. It’s 5.1 but will sound far better than 7.1.4 at the same price.
Me: So how about if my budget stretches to $20k for the speakers and I do the higher end ones as 7.1.4?
Dealer: Hmmm I can’t recommend that. For the same money you could do these other speakers that are much higher end. It’s 5.1 but will sound far better than 7.1.4 at the same price.
Me: Hang on. At what point is it worth getting off the 5.1 road and going to ATMOS then? There will always be a better speaker than the one I’m looking at. Do you just not like ATMOS? You have 3 ATMOS systems set up in here for heaven’s sake!
Dealer: [silence for 60 seconds at least] Well I think you should be buying the best 5.1 with your budget, not diluting it.
Me: Agree to disagree. I’m going to spend $15k on 7.1.4 ATMOS. I’m buying these speakers and you’re going to sell them to me.
Dealer: [grumpy] Okay.
2 Likes
Sounds about right. Hi-fi dealers can be a very strange and even intimidating bunch. Whenever I set foot in a dealer’s, which is rare nowadays, I know exactly what I want and I have enough knowledge and experience of hi-fi, going back around 50 years, to know when I am being bulls****ed.
A dealer fairly recently told me that all AV amps from the likes of Sony or Marantz were basically a waste of money and I might as well just by a soundbar unless I was prepared to spend several thousand pounds on something like an Arcam AV amp. I rapidly made my excuses and left.
1 Like
Sounds like you and PJL both went to poor dealers to me, ive never had poor service and advice from dealers like that, most are only too pleased to help you as much as possible and thus also help you spend as much money as possible.
1 Like
A few years ago I went into a dealer while in London with a full afternoon unexpectedly free, thinking maybe that was my chance to hear a Naim amp, as I am very rarely in the vicinity of a Naim dealer with any time. To be meaningful it would have had to be through full range speakers I know, so PMC Twenty/Twentyfive-26 as a minimum, preferably Fact 12, IB2 or MB2. I appeared to be the only customer. There were PMC speakers in the showroom, but looking around the highest one they had visible was IIRC the 23. When the two sales people eventually stopped chatting to each other and asked if they could help, by which time I’d been standing waiting for several minutes, I asked if they had higher level PMC speakers available for demo. They told me I didn’t need such speakers, pointing to the 23 saying that would do everything I wanted (not having asked anything about my room, current system, musical requirements etc). I left, and let them get back to their chat.
1 Like
Well I certainly don’t deal with that specific chap anymore but the far more helpful old geezer who runs the show for the past 40 years instead who even went out to meet with my builders before agreeing I’d chosen the right speakers for the job.
My main point though was the comparison with the “Good stereo is better than mediocre surround” crowd. It’s true but the mantra has been doggedly repeated for 30 years without any acknowledgement of how much better lower cost surround options are. My 282/250 PMC Twenty5.23s are great, but for watching TV, my Bose soundbar is better. But that soundbar is better (not “clearer” but overall better on several factors) than the hybrid Linn Keilidh Mission 5.1 system I had in the mid 90s.
There will always be better stereo preamps and speakers than most surround packages by a significant margin. Will they do as good a job for movies and TV? Decades of experience tells me that hasn’t been true for a while.
1 Like
Yes, it’s a process called Q Sound.
I’ve no idea if film sound people use it. I just use the album to set up my speakers for best “holographic effect”.
I’ve never heard your system or soundbar but I find that very hard to believe. Not saying that I don’t believe you and clearly you know better than I do, having listened to it. It’s just that knowing the sort of quality one get’s from a 282/250 and decent speakers I struggle to understand how a Bose soundbar could possibly be better. It will create the impression of surround sound presumably, but in every other respect, ie. clarity, dynamics, tonal accuracy, speed, detail etc. my expectation is that it would be very significantly inferior.
But you say it is better. How so?
1 Like
Would never in my life venture into the surround quagmire, multi-channel sound should be enjoyed in the cinema or not at all IMO 
And for those with a home cinema that means somewhere at home!
2 Likes
The quality of sound in home cinema is vastly superior to a cinema often. Every time I go to the cinema or IMAX it’s just so deafening loud that it’s a big smear of sound. When dialogue starts of as loud as an explosion you know there are issues. Honestly the cinema is physically painful to me.
5 Likes
I love your question because the description is true. The Naim/PMC stereo is an order of magnitude clearer and more dynamic and responsive than a crummy Bose soundbar.
But! When it comes to movies and television the centre locked dialogue for everyone in the room and the ambience overrides that. The overal intent of the two are exact opposites. Stereo’s goal is to put a performance in your room. Surround’s goal is to delete the room. Not even talking about special effects here. Just ambient nuances like the reverb on voices in a corridoor or spot location voices in a audio backdrop of hilltop wind etc. It really goes further for marrying up the clues on screen with what you hear than pure clarity and dynamic range alone. At least to me.
So yes, my soundbar is preferrable to the stereo for viewing. And my actual AV amp and surround speakers even better than that.
Thanks for your description. I think I see what you are getting at, ie. it’s not absolute quality that’s so important when watching movies but rather the spatial clues provide greater realism and involvement. I can understand that. I would love to try a soundbar at home compared to my stereo and see what I think.
Same thing there, would never in life invest in home theater. Can never match the experience you get in a real movie theater, so what’s the point? Support the local cinema instead and see the films there.
Sad that you have those cinema experiences. In contrast, I have to say that the cinemas in Sweden’s larger cities are top class when it comes to both sound and image, so trying to reach that level in a home theater would cost a fortune…
What about in Sweden’s smaller cities and towns ?
I’m pretty sure that most big city cinemas in the UK also get the sound right. But if, like me, you support your local small town cinema, then it won’t be state of the art. Or it might just be badly set up - I’ll have a word next time I’m there !!!
1 Like
Personal choice. Nothing more. It’s rather like saying that there’s no point in investing in a high quality hi-fi since it can never hope to match the experience of a live concert. Some people do take that view and would rather spend their money attending live events. Think how many concerts you could attend for the price of some of the systems here!
Personally I now have no interest in attending live concerts or going to the cinema - too much hassle and expense. Last concert my wife and I attended was at the Albert Hall, many years ago now. Problems with the trains, hotel, taxis etc. etc. marred the whole experience. Just a freakin’ nightmare!
So I want the best experience I can get at home.
1 Like
