Really? Many? Can you point out which ones you are refering to?

Which, IMO, is the way it should be. LFE-- Low Frequency Effects-- channel.

a lot of players have the same global LFE LP, too. my sony dvp ns900v has this fixed, 120 hz filter. it's not defeatable. then think of all of the sub manufacturers who say, 'if your pre or receiver has BM, turn your sub's filter all the way up, to avoid cascading filters'. if 'all the way up' is 120 hz... what a mess. to avoid cascading filters, you have to limit the LFE to 80 hz or less, externally. this is impossible to do successfully when the redirected bass is affected by an 80 hz LP filter in the pre or receiver (since LFE and RB are summed). when i mentioned this to a certain sub manufacturer, one of the owners basically said i was an idiot and that i should start my own company (pretty cool sales pitch).

i have roughly a dozen multi-channel discs. they all have LFE content. the discs have no label information concerning what is mixed into the LFE channel. this also is stupid.

the only reason it took so long to discover the 950's 'no LFE in dts-es bug', is because LFE and RB are summed.

there should be a separate RB output and a separate, discrete LFE output. there should be a switch that sums the 2 signals for those who prefer this flawed type of config. all internal LP filters should be bypassable.

There is a trend in multi-channel music mixing to mix in 5.0. Several recording industry magazines have recommended doing this.

After all, the whole concept of a mono LFE channel is a movie thing. When it was created, absolutely no thought was given to it's use in a purely music mixing context.

The prevailing thinking is that the low bass be put into the 5 channels as needed, and those with 5 full range speakers will get nice spatial information all the way down into the low bass region. Those with small speakers and a sub will be using bass management, and the bass from the various speakers will get routed to the sub.

They are reasoning that the content of the sub in these systems with small satellites can be determined by the user as they set up their bass management, for their particular room. This is preferrable to a "one size fits all" crossover into the LFE channel below a certain frequency done by the person who mixes the music. In other words, this transfers control of the content of the sub to the user, verses the mixing engineer.

When I have mixed music soundtracks in multi-channel, I always use 5.0. Determining just what to put into a dedicated LFE channel is very messy, as you never know where the sub will be relative to the mains, what the low pass will be and what the polarity will be relative to the other speakers. If I low pass the bass from a particular instrument and put it into the LFE track, my low pass might not coincide with the low pass in the end user's system. There will either be a bass hole or more likely a bass hump because of an overlap from the user's bass management. I can see why the LFE is an "odd man out" in a music context.

[This message has been edited by soundhound (edited April 11, 2003).]

Exactly.
IF your MC player has this capability (some do- using 120Hz as the cutoff point). And this is why I like the MC analog bass management feature on the 950-- the 80 Hz cut point is much better than 120Hz- for me anyway. IMO, bottom line is-- as long as we have to do this in the analog domain we will not see the perfect solution.

Hopefully more players will incorporate a good implementation of bass management. If the industry ever gets around settling the copyright issues and allows a digital interconnect to the pre/pro, our problems will will be solved - hopefully.......

SH:
1. Mickey Hart has done the 5.1 mixes of the Grateful Dead albums 'American Beauty' and 'Workingman's Dead'. Have you seen his video clip on the production (on the disk) of these albums, and if so, what do you think? He is a confessed 5.1 junkie.

2. Do you think this is a strong argument for buying low cost, quality pre-pros, while the technology and the legislation are in such a dynamic condition? And do you think this will stabilize in the not too distant future?

3. And to all... if my tone towards someone in another thread offended you, please accept my apology. Although it does not reflect well on me, I have to admit that this certain someone's comments and actions were really getting to me. ARGGG.


[This message has been edited by AGAssarsson (edited April 11, 2003).]

I haven't heard these mixes....

I have no idea when the copyright mess will be sorted out. I'm certainly going to hold on to my pocketbook until at least they come up with something workable. The record companies would want to completely stamp out copying if they could get away with it.

I know that Fleetwood Mac: Rumors and Toy Matinee have high frequencies in the subwoofer channel. I'm pretty sure that other DVD-As I have are similar but I obtained them after I got the 950.
The Barenboim collection of Beethoven Symphonies is 5.0.

If you want to chase this, plug the subwoofer output of your DVD player directly into your subwoofer. For the full effect, your sub needs a switch to disengage any crossover in the sub itself and a volume control. If you have the crossover switch, just turn it on and off and you'll hear that there's more material than a subwoofer should be asked to handle. I took it a step further and plugged my DVD player's output into an amp driving a full range bass guitar cabinet. On Rumors (Don't Stop, I think), you can clearly hear early reflections of the vocals and snare drum. On Toy Matinee's first "cut" (Can we use that term anymore? ), you'll hear the bass guitar in full range.

Now, the 950's BM for the 6-channel direct works perfectly for me. The loss of the high frequency stuff in the sub channel is hardly noticeable and the other 5 speakers aren't trying to play bass. Still, the mixing engineers need to come up with a standard or, at least, a labeling system, as Bossbass suggests, so the user knows what he or she is dealing with.

this is a simple way to allow for correct playback. 1 step further would be to include a reference calibration number and recommended LP point for the dedicated LFE channel, among other important info, under a 'producer's notes' section on the disc's 'sleeve' notes. if i were a multi-channel audio producer, you bet i would insist that my notes were included with all the other credits, etc., to insure that my labors were not in vain.

BTW, DB...you need to get the 'celebrating the music of weather report' multi sacd disc when you get a player. check it out:
bass players, partial list...john patitucci, will lee, victor baily, marcus miller...smokin' great bass playing.

Yes, some sort of standard is desperately needed in the labelling of the LFE. Putting full range information there is in my opinion just plain silly. Do they expect people to tear into their speaker setup to accommodate their mixing whims for a single disc?

I sincerely hope that the recommendations are heeded that music producers and mixers simply ignore the LFE track, and let the user's bass management take care of things. Like I said before, the whole reason for the being of an LFE track was from the movie industry, not the music one. Using it for music is just a can of worms in my opinion.