Do I need 5.1 for music DVDs?

[bigburner]

I'm really into music, using Rotel and B&W gear set up in a 2.1 configuration (floorstanding speakers plus a sub). However I also enjoy music DVDs and am planning to upgrade my system in that department.

My question is this: do I need to upgrade my music system to 5.1 / 7.1 in order to take full advantage of music DVDs, or will 2.1 give me superior sound?

Recently I was watching a music DVD at a friend's place and I could hear a guitar coming from a rear speaker. I've never experienced that at a concert! I've therefore assumed that 5.1 / 7.1 is designed for movies, not music DVDs.

Am I missing something here?

[saurabh]

Only few Music DVD are encoded in 5.1 sound, for those you need an upgrade to a 5.1 system, but for the most of them, your existing systems will work just fine.

[David Meek]

Bigburner, welcome to the great divide between 2-channel and 5/7-channel audio!

Being a bit of a purist, I've had trouble with multi-channel audio mixes that have the instruments/vocals coming from every available speaker. I've been to many live performances of music and none of them had the musicians anywhere but in front of me. That's how I learned to appreciate music and how I've listened to it for almost all of my life. It just seems unnatural to have a guitar solo come from behind my right shoulder.

That doesn't mean that multi-channel is wrong. There are lots of people that like it and appreciate it more than stereo, and good for them. One thing I do like about some multi-channel mixes is that they will carry only the ambient sounds of the recorded session - like crowd noises. That actually adds to the realism as far as I'm concerned, at least for live recordings.

[Shane Martin]

My question is this: do I need to upgrade my music system to 5.1 / 7.1 in order to take full advantage of music DVDs, or will 2.1 give me superior sound?

For the very few mixes that sound better in 5.1, NO you don't need to upgrade.

[aud19]

Need to? No. Will it be benneficial, especially as more and more good 5.1 mixes become available? Yes.

In other words if your tight on money, you don't have to do it immediately and you can take some time saving up for quality components. If you've got the money, just go for it! At least YOU can chooses when to listen in 2.1 or 5.1 instead of your system choosing for you

[Pieter]

At least YOU can chooses when to listen in 2.1 or 5.1 instead of your system choosing for you

Now that's a sensible approach!

[Clive]

I agree. It doesn't hurt to have a multi channel system to listen to multi-channel recording/DVD or CDs of course you will take full advantage of the format but again like the others have mentioned you really don't have to spend the money to enjoy your music. It is just an advanced way to listen to another style of recorded music. :T

[bigburner]

Thanks for the useful comments guys.

I did notice something nice when watching/listening to a music DVD at a friend's place last Saturday night. I could hear the crowd noise behind me so I felt like I was in the middle of a big audience. No guitar behind me this time!

[JetFlyGuy]

As I have gained experience in HT, I have become much more critical of recordings, in particular, I used to love Hell Freezes Over (And still love the eagles), but that drum kit that sounds like it is being played from the concession stand behind me gets annoying now!

[misterdoggy]

Bigburner,

I have a 5.1 system and a DVD + SACD player and a HDCD-CD player. I originally had the idea of going DVD video 5.1 and SACD but then obstacles started to appear. First one was SACD had to come in to my C1 Parasound through 6 individual analogue interconnects as it didn't recognize the digital cable that DVD signal send. This is DVD-A. Many players are this way. So in order to listen to sacd I had to not play DVD but switch to 7.1 to listen to sacd (hassle) Then finding sacds of things you like limited your selection. Im not saying there isn't a selection but its more limited. The sound of sacd is "slightly" better than hdcd. However, a true sacd surround system should have equal speakers on all sides. Not like HT where you have less effects on the surrounds, you really should have Fronts and surrounds the same as they divide up the sound differently than HT.

In the end I decided to drop sacd and just go with top quality speakers BW 802D's and listen in Stereo. With good quality Fronts Stereo in HDCD can sound ubelieveable and you won't be limited on selection of Cd's available. When you have a good cd player and system Stereo sounds like surround sound.

[bigburner]

Since starting this thread I've brought my old speakers and amp out of storage, and integrated them into my system on a trial basis (the details are in my Public Profile). I'm really enjoying the big soundstage of my 4.1 system, even if it isn't quite as technically advanced as your system misterdoggy. 802D's eh? Very nice. One day perhaps....

I've just posted some pictures in the B&W club.

[Burke Strickland]

While having identical speakers all around may be "ideal" for multichannel music,
typically when listening to music, we are seated facing forward regardless of where a particular instrument is coming from in the sound field at a given moment in the program. Even if all the speakers were identical all the way around, they still would not sound identical in most listening environments. So we can "get away" with less expensive speakers at the center, sides and/or rear as long as they are voiced to be compatible with the mains.

When Richard Vandersteen assembled and demonstrated his demo "dream" system in cooperation with Telarc at one of our local HT dealers a few months ago, the front mains were a pair of his Vandersteen 5As, while the center was his specially designed model for that position and the surrounds were a couple of smaller wall mounted speakers.

Each channel other than the front L/R mains had a separate subwoofer. (Needless to say, all of these speakers were also Vandersteen designs.) :>) Of course the 5As each have their own built in subwoofer as well as room correction circuitry to overcome the placement anomalies usually associated with "built in" subs in tower speakers.

Bottom line, on multichannel SACD, the system was sensational, whether the musical material was using the rears for ambience only, or had the performers arrayed all around. It demonstrated quite well that an effective surround system need not have identical speakers all around.

Getting back to the original question, even having a full surround system is not absolutely necessary to get full enjoyment listening to music. In many cases, the stereo track is more listenable than the multichannel track, and of course on Redbook (standard) CDs, there are only two channels anyway. So having spent most of your money on surround instead of acquiring really outstanding front left and right speakers would not necessarily be the best investment.

[aud19]

Also, DVD-A does NOT pass through the digital cable either as misterdoggy mentioned. Just like SACD, DVD-A must be connected via 5.1 analog cables other than the very few compatible players/receivers with mostly proprietary digital cables. The audio on a "regular" DVD-Video disc (DD, DTS etc) will however pass over a digital coax or optical cable.

I agree that 5 identical speakers can offer great sound and in a lot of cases will offer the best sound reproduction, however a different centre/surround speaker setup can also offer very high fidelity, as Burke mentioned, while working better with space/layout constraints. Also, while the titles available in high-res on both DVD-A and SACD aren't as numerous as CD, there are quite a few out there between the two of them. Most also carry a 2-ch high-res and/or high quality re-mastered CD track that will almost definitely sound better than the older CD versions even if you do still want to listen to 2-ch