Recently I was listening to the Eagles -'Hell Freezes Over' DVD. My center channel is sub-par so I use 'phantom' mode 99% of the time for playing DVD's.

This audio DVD has always perplexed me because the instrumentals are so crisp and live, but the vocals lack presence. Henly in particular sounds like he singing in a closet offstage somewhere (maybe I'm exaggerating a little).

So - as an experiment - I changed the speaker setup on the 1050 to 'no center' (regular 'surround' mode instead of 'phantom') - and BIG improvement. The vocalist suddenly took his place back at the center of the soundstage. So now I am a little confused as to what exactly the 'phantom' mode was doing with this signal.

Does anyone know exactly what the difference is between what happens when the 1050 is in 'phantom' mode vs. 'surround' mode with center channel set to off?

Curtis

Unfortunately, I would expect the phantom mode to essentially duplicate the "no center" mode, so I can't explain. With a DD source, the "phantom" mode should use the DD processing just as it is in "surround" with the center disabled. Sorry...

------------------
gonk -- Saloon Links | Pre/Pro Comparison Chart | 950 Review

That's pretty much how I had assumed it should be working so it's good to know that at least I am not alone in this state of confusion.

Anyway I will make sure that the DVD is using the 5.1 DTS signal without phantom mode and keep on listening this way for now.

Thanks for the feedback.

Curtis

FWIW, I had great success with Phantom Center Channel (until I got a real center). However, I always had the 1050 configured to with no-center at the same time. I cannot imagine what requirement, would prompt you to run in Phantom mode with a center channel speaker present.

This sounds a lot like the problems with Harry Potter on the rear channels, where turning off the rear surround speaker but running in 6.1 mode causes a loss of speaker volume.

This basically goes back to the fact that I started building my surround system with a variety of speakers that I had accumulated over time. The mains and the surrounds were fine, but the speaker I was trying to make work for the center channel is right on the threshold of being acceptable (or not). I would have taken it out of the system, but there are a few situtations where it's presence does add to the overall sound quality. Primarily it helps out when listening to TV or movies at low to moderate volume levels. In those cases, the extra speaker provides a more even soundstage without drawing attention to it's own deficiencies.

Part of the issue here is that the only audio DVD I own is the Eagles, so virtually all of my music listening (which comprises 90% of the system's use) is CD based using stereo mode on the 1050. So the center channel is kind of irrelevant to most of my listening needs. I had always found the phantom mode to work acceptably during movie viewing - the introduction of an audio DVD into the mix stirred things up - maybe because I am a little more critical about music and pay more attention to the details, or maybe there really is a problem (a la Harry Potter).

In the end, (especially if I get more audio DVD's) I know that getting a quality center channel is inevitable, but getting the spouse to understand what this means dollar-wise is the current challenge.

Curtis

Curtis:

My apologies for any criticism of what you were doing.

My experience, fwiw, is that when I used phantom center with no center for home theater and regular tv viewing was fine (even at moderate listening levels). Imaging of mono sound sources like newscaster talking heads was dead on. I did not use DVD Audio. When I listened to a CD, I experimented between leaving on processing and using stereo mode and found that my listening experience varied based upon the recording. In some cases I preferred stereo in others I liked the processed signal.

I did notice that when I switched to regular surround mode without a center channel speaker, that I lost a significant amount of the signal. Vocals seemed unfocused.

No apology necessary - I just thought I would give a little background on my system and how I got there...

FWIW - Actually, I also find the DSP modes enigmatic. They seem to reveal the fact that making something sound 'different' can also make it sound better. At times, switching from stereo to one of the processed modes sounds great ('natural' seems to sound best most of the time), but then after listening to that mode for awhile, I find switching back to stereo mode now sounds better again. There seems to be a trade off that happens between the three dimensional spatial character of the processed mode versus the clarity and detail that usually comes through best in stereo. Has anyone observed this same phenomenon in their experimentation?

Your observation about the differences being dependent on the various recordings is also dead-on. I am constantly amazed and frustrated by the huge discrepancies that show up in the quality of recordings. I remember (back in the day) when my older brother bought a Soundcraftsman equalizer for his system and they provided templates so you could keep a record of the proper settings for all of your individual recordings. I always thought - 'who would ever take the time to tweak the EQ every time you changed the source?'. Yet I now find myself frequently wishing I had this capability. ...meanwhile my wife thinks I'm nuts... (if she only knew).

Curtis

I would be curious how your system sounds if you configured it like I did mine (no center speaker and phantom mode). Do vocalists still drop off?

Strangely enough, I had a Soundcraftman PE2217, a preamp/equalizer combo, but I didn't use the templates. I just equalized the room once and recorded the settings. My recollection was that Absolute Audio gave it a top rating (for all of 1 issue).



[This message has been edited by 73Bruin (edited July 22, 2003).]

I'll try to check this out tonight and keep you posted.

Curtis

OK - this is based on listening to one CD, but what I found was.

With no center - the 1050 toggles through stereo, natural, hall, stadium, jazz and phantom. 'surround' is not available (I guess it knows that no center means phantom is the only surround version available?)

Vocals sound fine in phantom mode.

Just for laughs - I ran through all the surround modes with the center turned back on. Phantom sounds exactly the same as it did with center off - but now vocals fall way off in 'surround' (compared to stereo and all other DSP modes). Go figure.

FWIW - Bottom line with my setup is that for music listening (based on this one CD; Annie Lennox - Bare) leaving the center off makes all DSP modes sound better than they do with the center on. Phantom and stereo sound the same either way (as one assumes they should).

Curtis

Glad to find out you were able to duplicate my experience. FWIW, when I replaced my DQ-10's with a pair of NHT's VT 1.4's and their matching VS1.4 center I found that Home Theater really took on a new life. Whether it was the just the addition of a real center channel or the fact that the speakers were matched (both tweeters and mids), it was a bigger add then I anticipated.

I am not recommending the NHT's per se. While they sound OK, my choice was driven primarily by space considerations forced by the acquistion of a HDTV and the NHTs are ony 5 & 1/4" wide. For music the DQ-10's were clearly superior with better imaging, clarity and overall "musicality". Not bad for an almost 30 year old set of speakers

Whoa - it's deja vu all over again. Although I have never owned them - I had the good fortune to live with some DQ-10's for four years in college. A current friend in town also has a 30+/- year old pair that serve as his main L/R's, and I get to listen to them occasionally.

You're right, I don't think I have heard any speakers that have the sheer presence, imaging, ... as them. (although my parents have a seriously underutilized pair of Maggies that I would love to put in the same room as the Dalquist's just to do a little A/B testing).

I am curious if you were driving your DQ's with the 1050 - or were you using the pre-outs on the 1050 to a dedicated power amp? Both systems I have seen with DQ-10's were using hefty power amps (Phase Linear 200w/ch, and a Crown 250w/ch). It would be a testament to the power amp section in the 1050 if it could push those speakers to any respectable level.

Actually, I never tried to run the DQ-10's off of the 1050. But you are correct that they need a lot of power.

My original system had a Quatre power amp (100 W per channel). Given the tiny size of my original condo, this was adequate. Later when we moved I added a subwoofer, which reduced the power demand substantially. Finally, I acquired a Parasound 1200 (205 wpc) that I am still using to power my NHT fronts today.

I only use the 1050 for my center and rears. I am looking to add a used NHT VS1.2 as a rear center channel for 6.1 mode which means that I will be asking the 1050 to power 4 speakers. Despite the testimonials, I have always been suspect of the 1050's power capabilities for HT, so this will be a good test as to how well it works as I can easily forsee situations where all of the rears and the front center are playing at the same time.

If anyone reading this is interested, I still have the DQ-10s and am getting ready to put them on the market.