How tall do you like your images?

When you said 9.3.6, i already know you fooked up with cramming too many quantity over quality speakers in a li’l room ( i have a 30 by 35 room and i refuse to go any higher than 5.2.4 for atmos music listening that will startle all 6.023*10^23 molecules that make up your soul, lol)....When you said Trinnov, i already have a feeling that you heavy handed everything with the room correction algorithms and all kinds of crap that made it sound clinical and digital ( you are indeed paying for that lifetime customer support from a dimdim who knows diddly about what’s going on inside that processor, however)....

@deep_333

when someone calls me out for being on the wrong track, i take them seriously. part of which includes trying to understand where they are coming from and see what i can learn. so i looked at your previous posting history and found this description of some of your systems.

https://forum.audiogon.com/discussions/spend-on-the-streamer-or-on-the-dac/post?postid=2062410#2062410

you seem to have very strongly expressed viewpoints. yet looking at this, i think that our viewpoints for what is high level performance are not aligned, our expectations for quality performance are not at the same level. yet if you are happy and enjoying your path then more power to you. i wish you the best.

i was a fan of SACD multi-channel myself back 20 years ago. i built a dedicated room for 5.1 SACD listening at the highest levels.

https://www.audiogon.com/systems/615

what i discovered was that my 2 channel smoked it. the media for 2 channel was so much better that the technical advantages of 5.1 could not surpass it. my 2 channel out ’multi-channeled’ the multi-channel. i still own 1000 SACD multi-channel discs.

part of it was vinyl verses digital. the vinyl was much better, even though i had state of the art digital. so i removed the rear channels and surround gear from my 2 channel room and re-tasked those funds to reel to reel tape decks. that was in 2008.

i always had a separate home theater room in my home with multi-channel surround supporting movies. over the years it was improved as technology advanced. now it’s fairly high level with the Trinnov, 9.3.6 Revel surround speakers and 3 Funk Audio subwoofers. i only do movies there. certainly music videos which take full advantage of Dolby Atmos can be entertaining, but my 2 channel is far superior for music only.

maybe also explain your logic of how the Trinnov is not a high level processor. that does not sound right to me.

@mikelavigne , While I appreciate the research you did on some streamer/dac i had 3 years ago, my digital end has gotten upgraded just a bit since then. I still don't believe in spending an arm and a leg on a streamer/dac, but, whatever, we'll save that for a different discussion. I also don't believe in sitting around with 1 pair of stereo speakers thinking i've got it made either. Hence, i own more than one.

Here's my current list of gear and i could put it up against whatever you've got. My multichannel gear runs circles around (in execution) over all my 2 channel gear, which costs way more. I have a pretty good feeling that it will run circles around whatever 2 channel gear you've got as well. It is just a limitation of your 90 year old fossilized stereo/channel based audio, which you may understand after you figure out how to execute multichannel/3D object based audio better.

2 channel, Room 1

Speaker#1: TAD-E1TX
Speaker#2: Von Schweikert VR-55
Speaker#3: GR Research NX Studio Kit/DIY
Subwoofer: GR Research openbaffle servo kit DIY, quantity = 2
DAC: Denafrips Venus
DDC: Denafrips Hermes
Amp 1 : Luxman C900u+M900u
Amp 2: Yamaha C5000+M5000
Amp 3: Technics SU-R1000
Processor: Theoretica Applied Physics BACCH
Source 1: TAD-D1000TX 
Source 2: Technics SL-G700 
Source 3: Custom audio optimized PC with custom software
Treatments: Combination of DIY, Acoustic Fields ACDA & GIK
Power Conditioning: Keces IQRP-3600, Audioquest Niagara
Cables: Audioquest & Chinese Hifi Cables

Multichannel Atmos, Room 2

Multichannel 5.4.4:
Fronts: Andrew Jones Elac Adante AF 61
Surrounds: Elac Adante AS-61
Center: Elac Adante AC61
Heights: Elac Unifi Reference UBR62
Subwoofer: Rythmik F12G w/ GR research driver, Quantity = 4
Preamp Processor: Yamaha CX-A5200
Amp 1: Yamaha MX-A5200 
Amp 2: Shiit Tyr Monos, front stage (currently)
Amp 3: Jungson/Zhongshen JA99 
Treatments: Combination of DIY, Acoustic Fields ACDA & GIK
Power Conditioning: Keces IQRP-3600, Audioquest PQ3

If you want a more objective discussion, start here with this discussion from audioholics...It may give you a better idea.

Are 2 channels enough???

Slightly above ear level seems ideal to me, and usually happens without me trying much. I can’t think of a time where the sound seemed to be coming from lower than my ears, even when the speakers were. I have some binaural recordings which are meant for headphones, but the height effects work incredibly well on regular speakers. Recordings of airplanes flying over seem to be way up above me. Birds up in the trees too. For regular music I’ve got little use for that effect, but it proves to me that height channels are not necessarily required for vertical special effects.

@deep_333

thank you for updating your system info. certainly some big steps up from what i had been able to find looking back at your posting. congrats on your well thought out systems.

i might recommend doing an Audiogon system page so other readers of your strongly made posts can see where you are coming from.

which does not change my basic points, which is that ultimate 2 channel surpasses multi-channel music. and i feel that dsp, however neatly applied, does not compete at the highest levels to a pure analog signal path fully executed room and system for music only. but at less than an all out effort, dsp does enter into high level performance for music. ultimately dsp is a band aid for problems. which are not always existing.

just my 2 cents, YMMV. lots of blood has been spilled discussing that question. like religion, no one ever changes their mind. if you are ever in the Seattle area, you are welcome to visit and listen for your self. i hope it happens.

Trinnov verses BACCH? i’d need to do more research about it. Trinnov is targeted at Movie Soundtracks with object based Atmos mixes primarily. it’s not ideal for tricking up conventional 2 channel music content. hard to say how that might go. i don’t ask my Trinnov to do that. but BACCH verses my conventional (analog and digital) 2 channel sources and signal path.....it’s not at that level.

and i own 12,000 records, 300 reel to reel master dubs, do lots of streaming high rez and own 20tb of 2 channel files. there is so little interesting multi-channel music content it’s hard to base my system building efforts on it.

@mikelavigne , My post was not aimed at dissing anyone’s gear. As you may have noted, i am dissing all my higher end stereo gear as well because i experience all the limitations of stereo gear in execution. When you deploy the BACCH, it is no longer considered purist stereo. imo. But, I haven’t seen anyone going BACCH-less after they have experienced it. On the same note, who gets to draw the line on what is purist stereo or otherwise? Even any stereo DAC (high end or not), and especially if FPGA based makes the rig ’impurist stereo’ at that point. Hence, I’ll go as impure as it needs to be in pursuit of audio nirvana.

There are many brilliant guys who got together at Dolby, DTS, Auro and more recently Sony ( w/ 360 reality audio), Yamaha, etc to deliver immersive/3d object based audio. Their efforts were not in vain, they are not all a bunch of dummies and the 90 year old stereo is still not the looming overlord for high fidelity. The issue is that the same ethos that a hifi enthusiast applies to a hifi stereo rig never gets applied to a multichannel rig (for music listening) and then it gets dismissed as some lame technology for movies. It sure isn’t. Even with a larger room like mine, I can only optimally place the bare minimum for 3D object based audio, i.e., 5 bed layer and 4 heights. I even drop that to 2 heights many times. Sure, I could stuff 6 crappy in-ceiling speakers for heights and keep adding bedlayer speakers if i wanted to (would be good enough for movies!). But, the sound degrades in a hifi multichannel application when optimal placement is compromised (no matter what compensation is done with dsp) and the sweet count for #of bed layer speakers, etc is exceeded. Further, there is such a thing as specific directivity requirements for height channels in 3D object based sound, not to mention that they need to be very closely matched in frequency, powerhandling, etc with the bed layer. When one applies the same ethos for physical room treatments in a multichannel application (as they would for analog stereo), the heavy handedness of these processors (RSC filters, etc can be nullified). Further, one shouldn’t be accepting results of any auto-cal as is, at all (no matter how great the processor, it is still dumb). The latter is for movie usage by the entry level user.

I live about 30 minutes from one of the best acoustic halls in the US Midwest where I experience many an orchestra, wind ensemble, string quartet etc on a fairly regular basis (no lousy PA involved). When I am seated at the nirvana spot (booked well in advance), it sounds nothing like stereo, I repeat, ’nothing like stereo’ and sounds a whole lot like 3d object based audio w.r.t how the soundfield is produced (very much akin to sound objects materializing inside a 3d dome). In fact, at the last wind ensemble i experienced, I was constantly looking behind me for the first 10 minutes to see if there were surrounds and back heights somewhere. This is all a bit hard to articulate, unnecessarily wordy on a thread like this and must be experienced instead.