Stereo versus Surround Sound

[Eine Alpensinfonie]

Most of us listen to our music in stereo, but alternatives have been around since the 1970s - the brief period of quadraphonic LPs in the 70s springs to mind. Since then, we have been given DVD audio and SACD, both with surround sound, but neither has really captured the public imagination.

Yet people spend lavish sums on Home Cinema surround sound systems.

EMI's Pappano/Domingo recording of Wagner's Tristan & Isolde is supplied with 3 CDs (in stereo) and a DVD audio with surround sound. Sampling the DVD revealed an unnatural and aggressive "closeness" of Isolde which rapidly grew tiresome, but the CDs seemed much more natural. I don't know whether this was something to do with the way in which it was recorded, or whether it was the result of some mixing engineer who didn't really understand classical music, poking his nose in something he didn't understand. Or is it just that a simpler microphone setup is better?

[Mandryka]

Stereo for me.

My only experience of surround sound has been in cinemas - and one of the (many) reasons why I've come to dislike cinemagoing is the sensation you get of being 'beaten up' by the 'superior' PA systems there. It's actually quite a novelty to go to one of those old-fashioned cinemas (like Zeffirelli's in the Lake District), where surround sound doesn't apply.

Hst, I appreciated the DVD of Tristan, as I could listen to the whole thing without act breaks.

[Eine Alpensinfonie]

Yes, I appreciated the idea of the DVD, but what did you think of the sound balance?

On the question of cinema sound, those in charge generally turn it up to excessively high volume levels, which makes it painful, rather than impressive.

[Jasmine Bassett]

I haven't hear either the CD or DVD of Tristan but I would suspect both recordings come from the same source and the only difference is the way it is mixed. As with any recording, what we hear at home is only as good as the original input and whatever "creative" decisions are made at the time. I would normally expect the differences hear between the two media to be the other way round the the surround sound format giving a better feeling of space and openness, putting the voice in a much more natural perspective.

As for cinema sound, if the system is set up correctly what is heard in the cinema is exactly what the sound mixer wanted us to hear, whether we like what we hear is another question, natural sounds are not one of the strong points of most film soundtracks. As far as Zefirelli's is concerned I would be very surprised if the screens there are not equipped for surround sound - they are just set up correctly so that their contribution does not become overpowering.

[Eine Alpensinfonie]

I As far as Zefirelli's is concerned I would be very surprised if the screens there are not equipped for surround sound - they are just set up correctly so that their contribution does not become overpowering.

[Bryn]

There are many instances of fake surround reported on the Internet (the recent Blu-rays of Abbado's Mahler are severely criticized for this and other audio problems in several Amazon customer reviews). Surround can work well for music composed with aim of surrounding the audience with sound. However, when used for music where the role of surround sound is only to offer ambience, the results are frequently pretty unpleasant in my experience.

[Ferretfancy]

I don't have an SACD player, but I do have a Meridian system that handles DVD surround formats for films. When I bought it I wanted to be able to synthesise rear channel ambience on music and I chose Meridian because the company had been involved in developing ambisonics for a long time. Interestingly, Meridian do not recommend SACD, claiming that it is over engineered, but then of course they were backing rival systems.
The controller on my system offers the movie formats, but in addition it offers various forms of derived ambience from normal stereo recordings, and I find it convincing. All the signal processing is in the digital domain, and is only converted to analogue inside each of the five speakers. The effect is very good indeed on all but the driest recordings, and I find myself wondering how much better SACD would really be, after all in real life the performers are usually in front of you most of the time!
Films which offer lots of whizz bang wallop can be great fun in Dolby surround, providing the neighbours are out, but the real joy is in listening to stereo recordings where a simple mic set up was used, in these the sense of being in the hall or studio adds a great deal.

I should say that calibrating the speaker levels to get the best performance is absolutely crucial, particularly where the centre front speaker is concerned. It took me quite a while to do this, too little on the centre gives a bathroom acoustic, too much narrows the soundstage. The rear levels matter almost as much, as does the placing in the room. Many listeners could be excused for feeling that life can be too complicated !

[Alf-Prufrock]

Both SACD and DVD 5.1 surround sound can be spectacular when set up properly and when playing well-engineered discs. But the set-up is crucial. Most receivers have a system to help you do it : mine (a Yamaha) is a microphone which you place where you sit while the receiver sends out test tones for each speaker. The machine itself adjusts the levels. This is pretty reliable though I have a friend who adjusts the levels further to his own satisfaction.

There is often a host of personal tweaks that you can do. One I have done is to define all my speakers to SMALL and send all low-frequency signals (below 60 Hz) to the subwoofer (along with the LFE signal). I learned of this setting while browsing on the internet where it was said to be particularly suitable for classical music. I have certainly found it so. I was surprised at the improvement in clarity and impact made by this modification - I had expected subwoofers to be best when merely reinforcing the very low bass of the main speakers.

One point for film buffs. Some films are coming out now in 6.1 surround sound, and I find the improvement on 5.1 startling. The extra channel is a discrete back channel and if you have two back surround channels, as I have, the signal just simply goes through both. It really does solidify images all round.