posted by soundhound:

"For classical, jazz, and some other acoustic music, in all honesty, I can get pretty much the same effect by feeding my surrounds with a studio reverb fed off the stereo fronts."

I really agree with your preferences on surround and wondered is there a way for us mortals to get a "studio reverb" off the stereo fronts?

[This message has been edited by randyb (edited October 28, 2002).]

Some data conversions will be lossless and some not, of course.

kevin is right. every conversion = loss of some kind.

follow the signal in archiving an analog master to dsd vs pcm:

PCM: analog signal---> 1 bit ADC (note, all pcm begins life as 1 bit dsd) ---> decimator filter ---> PCM recorder ---> dlta/sigma modulator ---> digital interpolation filter ---> analog HF, low pass filter.

DSD: analog signal ---> 1 bit ADC ---> DSD recorder ---> analog low pass filter

dsd is the least conversion of a conversion. it divides evenly into any format. sony rigged the hardware so that you could compare a modded studer 2" open reel machine to the dsd copy of the master tape in real time, on the fly, with a switch. every industry pro they offered the test to said the loss in transfer was so minute that it was more than offset by the plus of digital convenience. the same test was offered comparing the best vinyl setup with the same results. that's enough for me.

once you are IN pcm, you cannot get OUT. you are stuck there. pcm will not reconvert to 1 bit. it can't even down convert to 44.1 without a toss-out of info (44.1 doesn't divide evenly into 96, etc., as kevin pointed out)

the evidence is in the sacd hybrid disc. it contains the redbook stereo cd version AND stereo or multichannel sacd (a real value @ $19, if you ask me). it's backward compatible. in fact, from 1 bit it will convert to any digital format with extremely little loss.

also, the sdif (sony digital interface) cable has 3 wires...clock, dr and dl, vs the coax cable that has all 3 into 1 wire (jitter).

sony is only behind in recording hardware, but catching up fast. sony/phillips is huge. and, they clearly have the better system.

look up anything you can find on ed meitner, emm labs. he designs all of the dsd hardware and is, i think, THE guy in recording hardware quality. if he says dsd is the clearly superior method, i don't tend to doubt it.

Any pro music store should have a selection of good digital reverbs. You can pay anywhere from a couple hundred dollars up to multi-thousands, but one that would be good enough for creating reverb to feed your surrounds can be had for about $250.00 or so. Digitech makes some good ones, but of course there are others. You just want to make sure that the reverb has _stereo_ inputs and outputs. Set the output 'mix' control of the reverb to 100% 'wet' or only reverb, and send this to your surrounds. Use a "Y" adapter to send your preamp's front signals to both the input of the reverb and your front speakers. Then, just select a 'program' on the reverb that sounds best to you, and for the music, adjust the level, and enjoy.



[This message has been edited by soundhound (edited October 28, 2002).]

Have to disagree soundhound. SACD was introduced as a 2 channel format and that is still how many SACD listeners prefer to hear their music.

That may work fine for you,and I'm glad you have access to what is probably a fairly sophisticated system, but that's using technology that was prevelent in the 70's and 80's isn't it?. Surely one can do better for a lot less money these days by using_ say_ Dolby ProLogic II-M? It's even included in the 950!

Huh? You obviously didn't read the part in the same paragraph that says that this procedure is being done TODAY, using _digital_ reverbs. This isn't technology from the 70's or 80's. Do you actually believe that all that beautiful reverb 'ambience' on your CDs/SACDs or whatever is all _natural_? Have you actually tried using reverb to create surround ambience yourself? I wouldn't dismiss something unless you have some first hand exposure, and can speak with some authority on the subject. I would bet that there are some DVDs of feature films in your collection right now where I used _exactly_ this technique to create the surrounds.

[This message has been edited by soundhound (edited October 28, 2002).]

I don't know much, but I do know using some form of studio reverb, digital or not, is not how _most_ movies or music are recorded and/or mixed.

Are you kidding?!?!? How do you 'know' this??

That is *very* incorrect.

some of them are mixed in a blender.