Audio question. Stereo or Surround sound.

Collapse
This topic is closed.
X
X
 
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts
  • LinuxRandal
    Veteran Member
    • Feb 2005
    • 4889
    • Independence, MO, USA.
    • bt3100

    Audio question. Stereo or Surround sound.

    What do you have and why?

    I got into this discussion recently (want a receiver) with a friend of mine who has some commercial stereo receivers (not selling them, so that slant is off) and he said the ONLY reason you would want Surround, was for action movies (don't watch many) or maybe sporting events (not a sports fan )

    Thanks
    69
    Stereo
    23.19%
    16
    surround sound
    68.12%
    47
    don't have either
    1.45%
    1
    TV only
    7.25%
    5
    She couldn't tell the difference between the escape pod, and the bathroom. We had to go back for her.........................Twice.
  • pbui3057
    Established Member
    • Jul 2008
    • 114
    • Mather, CA
    • BT3000

    #2
    I have both, which should be an option. CDs and radio all transmit stereo sounds. If you want to buy a full 5.1 (or 7.1) setup to have that immersive sound, then get a good surround sound receiver. If you have a SA-CD or DVD-Audio player, then get a surround sound receiver.

    I personally listen to all of my music in Stereo. I don't like the way the receiver decodes my music.

    Comment

    • Knottscott
      Veteran Member
      • Dec 2004
      • 3815
      • Rochester, NY.
      • 2008 Shop Fox W1677

      #3
      Former audio purist here, with a goal of faithful reproduction of the original signal. My tube preamp doesn't even have an on/off switch....plugs into the wall and is on. We're trying to reproduce a music wave using multiple sources, which causes phase shift. Surround sound means several more speakers and several more sources of phase shift.
      Last edited by Knottscott; 10-06-2009, 01:03 PM.
      Happiness is sort of like wetting your pants....everyone can see it, but only you can feel the warmth.

      Comment

      • leehljp
        Just me
        • Dec 2002
        • 8429
        • Tunica, MS
        • BT3000/3100

        #4
        Both for me. I voted for Stereo as that is the way I prefer to listen to music.

        But I love surround sound on TV and movies. I have a projector and a 6 ft wide screen onto which LOML and I often watch DL'ed and DVD movies. Love the 5.1 surround sound there, although the system is almost 6 years old. I would like to know how much better they are today.
        Hank Lee

        Experience is what you get when you don't get what you wanted!

        Comment

        • Norm in Fujino
          Senior Member
          • Dec 2002
          • 534
          • Fujino-machi, Kanagawa-ken, Japan.
          • Ryobi BT-3000

          #5
          I have a traditional stereo with large speakers in the LR for listening to music, but I have a surround system in the family room for the wide-screen tv; it's not a very expensive system, but it provides more ambience for dvd movies.
          ==========
          ". . . and only the stump, or fishy part of him remained."
          Green Gables: A Contemplative Companion to Fujino Township

          Comment

          • LCHIEN
            Internet Fact Checker
            • Dec 2002
            • 20920
            • Katy, TX, USA.
            • BT3000 vintage 1999

            #6
            i have stereo for my music, but i have a 5.1 surround system with a substantial subwooofer for movies in my theater system. The family room TV just has stereo speakers. Like someone said, surround provides a totally enveloping sound for action movies. The scenes with big booms or huge surround fields are only 1% of the movies, but boy, it makes it worthwhile when they occur - priceless.
            Last edited by LCHIEN; 10-06-2009, 07:44 AM.
            Loring in Katy, TX USA
            If your only tool is a hammer, you tend to treat all problems as if they were nails.
            BT3 FAQ - https://www.sawdustzone.org/forum/di...sked-questions

            Comment

            • Pappy
              The Full Monte
              • Dec 2002
              • 10453
              • San Marcos, TX, USA.
              • BT3000 (x2)

              #7
              For music, I have a component streo with extra speakers in the bed room. TV's are all stand alone but I would like to add surround sound to the LR set.
              Don, aka Pappy,

              Wise men talk because they have something to say,
              Fools because they have to say something.
              Plato

              Comment

              • cgallery
                Veteran Member
                • Sep 2004
                • 4503
                • Milwaukee, WI
                • BT3K

                #8
                I just use the speakers built into the TV. The TV stand is in the corner. Adding surround sound would be problematic as a result.

                Comment

                • LarryG
                  The Full Monte
                  • May 2004
                  • 6693
                  • Off The Back
                  • Powermatic PM2000, BT3100-1

                  #9
                  I agree with '3057 that the poll should have included a "Both" choice. I guess I'll vote "Surround Sound" but my receiver -- like most modern receivers -- is also capable of plain-vanilla stereo*** in addition to 7.1 surround. (Due to space limitations, I have a 5.1 speaker setup that omits the two rear surround speakers of a 7.1 system.) Depending on which function I select with the receiver's remote, the appropriate inputs and output channels are activated automatically, even if two different inputs on the receiver are connected to the same physical outboard device. For example, I have an Oppo BDP-83 near-universal disc player. When I'm watching movies the receiver uses the Oppo's HDMI output, but for CD playback its analog stereo outputs are used. Best of both worlds, simply by pushing a different button.

                  (*** Technically I use a 2.1 system for stereo. The small size of the living room limited me to mid-sized bookshelf speakers, so some of the lower frequencies are sent to the surround system's subwoofer. I do have the crossover set pretty low, however, to keep the bass from getting overbearing.)

                  Surround is definitely great for action flicks, but it can actually add a lot of subtle but nice nuances to ANY movie ... leaves rustling, water burbling, an airplane flying overhead, footsteps as someone leaves the room, etc.
                  Last edited by LarryG; 10-06-2009, 08:44 AM. Reason: clarity
                  Larry

                  Comment

                  • jziegler
                    Veteran Member
                    • Aug 2005
                    • 1149
                    • Salem, NJ, USA.
                    • Ryobi BT3100

                    #10
                    Stereo is better for music, surround is better for all movies. Even if there isn't much in the surrounds, they add ambiance. Also, the center channel puts dialog in a better position than stereo speakers far from the screen.

                    Comment

                    • cabinetman
                      Gone but not Forgotten RIP
                      • Jun 2006
                      • 15218
                      • So. Florida
                      • Delta

                      #11
                      You've been around a while when you can say you remember when "Hi-Fi" came about. Stereo sure changed how music sounded. I haven't gone to surround sound yet. I did a wall system a few years back that incorporated a surround system. The client said to sit in a certain part of the sofa, and played the movie Top Gun. Well, it sounded like the jets were flying right through the middle of the room. Made ya feel like ducking.

                      We have a good stereo system and I have the TV audio patched through our stereo system. With very large speakers made up with a large woofer, midrange and some tweeters, it sounds great for movies, and for regular music. I doubt we will be changing anytime soon.
                      .

                      Comment

                      • jschen
                        Forum Newbie
                        • May 2007
                        • 32
                        • Aurora, IL

                        #12
                        It really depends on the recording. Most music is recorded for stereo because they want to recreate a concert setting, you wouldn't be hearing sounds from behind or next to you in a concert. However, there are a few artists that have been experimenting with more sources/channels (Nine Inch Nails) to create a different experience.

                        Most movies are filmed for surround sound for the immersion of the movie. It's great feeling like the character and the sounds coming from all around.

                        I think most modern recievers can switch between surround and stereo anyway.

                        Of course this is my opinion, but makes sense to me.

                        Comment

                        • vaking
                          Veteran Member
                          • Apr 2005
                          • 1428
                          • Montclair, NJ, USA.
                          • Ryobi BT3100-1

                          #13
                          I would also vote for both. From the theory perpspective - stereo produces all sound through 2 high quality speakers. Good stereo speaker contains inside a woofer 8" diameter minimum for base sounds, midrange and a tweeter for high-frequency sounds. Because of this composition stereo speaker can handle all frequencies.
                          Surround sound was introduced specifically to support sound effects in movies. The technology is based on a supposition that human ear can tell the direction for high-frequency sound but not for low frequency base. Following this assumption surround sound uses a single large woofer to produce base sounds and numerous satellite tweeters to distribute high frequency sound around the listener. The result is the sound that is realistic for sound effect (planes flying thru the room) but quality overall is inferior to stereo.

                          Putting together a system that can play both stereo and surround is actually easy. I have a large screen TV as well as several music sources connected to a surround sound receiver. Every sound goes thru that receiver. 2 good large stereo speakers are installed on the sides of a TV - they are the front right and left speakers in the system. Because stereo speakers have 10" woofers in them - there is no need for a subwoofer. 2 rear speakers are typical satelites - small and unimpressive. I tried with and without central channel speaker - 2 large front speakers do an excellent job imitating it. The receiver automatically recognizes the type of sound source. Stereo sound is played thru front speakers only. Surround sound is distributed to all 4 speakers. Receiver is configured that front speakers are also woofers and central channel.
                          Alex V

                          Comment

                          • JSUPreston
                            Veteran Member
                            • Dec 2005
                            • 1189
                            • Montgomery, AL.
                            • Delta 36-979 w/Biesemyere fence kit making it a 36-982. Previous saw was BT3100-1.

                            #14
                            Originally posted by jschen
                            It really depends on the recording. Most music is recorded for stereo because they want to recreate a concert setting, you wouldn't be hearing sounds from behind or next to you in a concert.
                            I take it you never saw Maynard Ferguson live. I went to one concert, and towards the end the band actually surrounded the concert hall and played while Maynard remained on stage. Very cool effect.

                            I've seen videos on Youtube from the 70's when they did it as well. Of course, this is an exception to the rule, and really wouldn't matter unless the album was recorded in concert.
                            "It's a dog eat dog world out there, and I'm wearing Milk-Bone underwear."- Norm (from Cheers)

                            Eat beef-because the west wasn't won on salad.

                            Comment

                            • stocktr8er
                              Forum Newbie
                              • Jan 2007
                              • 63
                              • Midland, TX
                              • BT3000

                              #15
                              My first job was in a theater and I got bit by the movie bug. I love a good surround system. A couple problems go hand in hand with surround. First is that you need a place you can turn the volume up to truely get the feel of a theater. With small kids and no dedicated sound proof room, my surround system might as well be put away.

                              The second problem as I see it is that a surround system is almost as bad as a workshop. You always have to have something bigger or better which then leads to other things needing to be "upgraded". You get better surround speakers, then the fronts aren't good enough, then you need a better sub to balance the system, the you need "more power". And then they change the playing field and move to a 7.1 system from a 5.1 and the whole process starts again.

                              As with everything else, find a simple well done sound system that fits your listening preferrences. A solid stereo for music and a balanced surround for movies and sports.
                              Curtis

                              Comment

                              Working...