Would it make it less or more incongruous?
Reality Technologies Surround Master - Owners Thread
- Thread starter JonUrban
- Start date
Help Support QuadraphonicQuad:
I have been listening to the SURROUND MASTER for almost two months, and I cannot stop! That really tells you everything from a general standpoint, but there are some minor negatives, and I shall deal with them at the end of this short
final review. Please refer to my initial ravings, which supports this one.
If you are in search of the perfect four channel synthesizer this is it! I don’t believe there is anything better! NEO X ….Audyssey Wide…..Dolby PL II XYZABC etc.…Meridian Tri Field….Lexicon Logic 7..they all fall before it. . You must have volume control over all channels, and if you do, this is the device for you! .
It creates a discrete soundfield from most two channel sources that is superior to any other unit or algorithm available that I have heard…You must vary the rear channel sound levels to achieve the kind of balance you want. There is too much information in the rears at times and too much in the center channel during 5.1 listening so you must be able to trim the outputs, but on the whole, it behaves much like my QSD-1 in the synth mode.
The promise that in the future, with a software upgrade and a modest investment, it will decode SQ makes this unit a remarkable deal for any multi-channel freak like me!
THE MASTER has three modes: a 2 channel wide mode…4.0…and 5.1.
The two Channel Surround is not my cup of tea! It produced a sort of “swimmy” sound….I admit that it brought the image farther around to the sides and was more pronounced than other systems designed to create a multi-channel sound field from two channels, such as SRS or SONIC HOLOGRAPHY. But for me, it was more irritating than satisfying. I would say the same for the other two mentioned systems. I listened for about six hours, to both classical as well as modern studio constructions and my impression became more negative as I listened.
The 4 and 5.1 modes are state of the art. That’s the end of that!
The most significant thing I heard listening in its surround modes, is its ability to image along the right and left side wall! The images are strong and solid…..I use side channel speakers and a separate processor to achieve this imaging….THE SURROUND MASTER unit does it, most of the time, without my side channel speakers engaged!
I have listened to most multi-channel extraction systems! The only one I believe that I have not heard in my own room is the TRI-FIELD developed by Meridian, but I have spent about four hours listening to it elsewhere with familiar material……I believe the SURROUND MASTER is superior.
This may be of no interest to many here at QQ, but I came late to understanding the importance of the center channel. I listened for years preferring a two channel front, but finally hearing a center channel that is clearly equal to the right and left was a game changer for me. I didn’t believe that it would make the difference it actually did until I achieved real three channel equivalence across the front….I will never go back!.....Hearing Nat King Cole’s LOVE IS THE THING SACD on a high quality center channel changed my philosophy forever. THE SUREROUND MASTER, in the five channel mode, extracts a center channel, if the information is there, and it sounds like the equivalent to many discrete recordings in its purity! Listen to THE BEST OFJOHN DENVER LIVE SACD which is a stereo recording along with Chesky’s WORLDS GREATEST AUDIOPHILE VOCAL RECORDINGS …..how’s that for hyperbole?…. I think you will hear extracted voices that are sensational on the SURROUND MASTER. This of course is a personal bias, but for me the issue has been resolved, and I am glad THE SURROUND MASTER has a center channel extraction. I liken these processors to lenses that can sharpen focus or bring an image a little closer. The great thing is that they give you a choice. …I know it is contrary, in some ways, to the direction of the company, however, if you have a dedicated center channel, this unit will extract that signal better and will delight you. Certainly better than any other that I have ever used…..Bravo!
Here are some of the negatives. It’s a bit on the small and clumsy side, and it does run a little hot!…..The heat worries me, but the company that produced this unit does not. I want it to succeed and I want it to give me more! I feel better about the future of delicious, delectable and clearly better sounding multi-channel with them in the mix!
Dwight
final review. Please refer to my initial ravings, which supports this one.
If you are in search of the perfect four channel synthesizer this is it! I don’t believe there is anything better! NEO X ….Audyssey Wide…..Dolby PL II XYZABC etc.…Meridian Tri Field….Lexicon Logic 7..they all fall before it. . You must have volume control over all channels, and if you do, this is the device for you! .
It creates a discrete soundfield from most two channel sources that is superior to any other unit or algorithm available that I have heard…You must vary the rear channel sound levels to achieve the kind of balance you want. There is too much information in the rears at times and too much in the center channel during 5.1 listening so you must be able to trim the outputs, but on the whole, it behaves much like my QSD-1 in the synth mode.
The promise that in the future, with a software upgrade and a modest investment, it will decode SQ makes this unit a remarkable deal for any multi-channel freak like me!
THE MASTER has three modes: a 2 channel wide mode…4.0…and 5.1.
The two Channel Surround is not my cup of tea! It produced a sort of “swimmy” sound….I admit that it brought the image farther around to the sides and was more pronounced than other systems designed to create a multi-channel sound field from two channels, such as SRS or SONIC HOLOGRAPHY. But for me, it was more irritating than satisfying. I would say the same for the other two mentioned systems. I listened for about six hours, to both classical as well as modern studio constructions and my impression became more negative as I listened.
The 4 and 5.1 modes are state of the art. That’s the end of that!
The most significant thing I heard listening in its surround modes, is its ability to image along the right and left side wall! The images are strong and solid…..I use side channel speakers and a separate processor to achieve this imaging….THE SURROUND MASTER unit does it, most of the time, without my side channel speakers engaged!
I have listened to most multi-channel extraction systems! The only one I believe that I have not heard in my own room is the TRI-FIELD developed by Meridian, but I have spent about four hours listening to it elsewhere with familiar material……I believe the SURROUND MASTER is superior.
This may be of no interest to many here at QQ, but I came late to understanding the importance of the center channel. I listened for years preferring a two channel front, but finally hearing a center channel that is clearly equal to the right and left was a game changer for me. I didn’t believe that it would make the difference it actually did until I achieved real three channel equivalence across the front….I will never go back!.....Hearing Nat King Cole’s LOVE IS THE THING SACD on a high quality center channel changed my philosophy forever. THE SUREROUND MASTER, in the five channel mode, extracts a center channel, if the information is there, and it sounds like the equivalent to many discrete recordings in its purity! Listen to THE BEST OFJOHN DENVER LIVE SACD which is a stereo recording along with Chesky’s WORLDS GREATEST AUDIOPHILE VOCAL RECORDINGS …..how’s that for hyperbole?…. I think you will hear extracted voices that are sensational on the SURROUND MASTER. This of course is a personal bias, but for me the issue has been resolved, and I am glad THE SURROUND MASTER has a center channel extraction. I liken these processors to lenses that can sharpen focus or bring an image a little closer. The great thing is that they give you a choice. …I know it is contrary, in some ways, to the direction of the company, however, if you have a dedicated center channel, this unit will extract that signal better and will delight you. Certainly better than any other that I have ever used…..Bravo!
Here are some of the negatives. It’s a bit on the small and clumsy side, and it does run a little hot!…..The heat worries me, but the company that produced this unit does not. I want it to succeed and I want it to give me more! I feel better about the future of delicious, delectable and clearly better sounding multi-channel with them in the mix!
Dwight
- Joined
- Jan 19, 2006
- Messages
- 221
First, this is the owner's thread. Not that you can't or shouldn't ask questions, but the fact is you haven't heard it and seem fairly intent on being negative without any first hand knowledge. This, in my opinion, delegitimizes you offerings here to some extent.
Second, where did you get the idea that this device is redigitizing anything? This is an analog in/analog out device. It alters the signal but not the format. Even if the high-end tops out at 20MHz, that doesn't make it a digitally altered signal.
Oh.
Are you sure?
Maybe the manufacturer should step in and clarify.
- Joined
- Jan 19, 2006
- Messages
- 221
This sounds so technical it's beyond my comprehension.
Not being an owner myself, but inbetween the analog inputs and the analog outputs there's a DSP working. (Or even two of them, I cannot remember anymore.) The DSP first digitize the signals, and then processing them to get wonderful surround sound. After that the six channels were converted back to analog.
If these A/D conversions and D/A conversions were made with 16bit/44.1kHz or maybe 24bit/96kHz (or anything inbetween or beyond) I cannot say.
-Kristian
LizardKing
2K Club - QQ Super Nova
This shows that there is stuff above 20kHz:
FYI - The source was a DVD-A of a Surround Master decode of Jim Croce - Photographs & Memories
FYI - The source was a DVD-A of a Surround Master decode of Jim Croce - Photographs & Memories
- Joined
- Apr 9, 2012
- Messages
- 2,704
Hi All
Krkier is correct we do re digitize at 24 bit 48 kHz with 256 times oversampling. Like ANY electronic device inserted in the audio chain distortion of some type will occur (yes even a simple resistor). The real issue is weather or not the listener can detect the change. This is where things get really controversial with people claiming they can hear 0.0001% distortion in an amplifier of speaker cable.
We have done a lot of internal research into distortion and indeed "what makes a good speaker sound bad and a bad speaker sound good". Our findings (in an over 70 page document) was that the conventional parameters of distortion, frequency response, tone burst, decay response etc had little to do with "perceived" preference. In fact if you really want me top get controversial (I can see the poo flying now) a colleague of mine once said "when you can see distortion visually on a sine wave via a CRO- then you can just hear it!
Our tests have shown this (to our tin ears) is correct (its 1%).
If people are interested we can elaborate but perhaps in a different section of this forum.
We have published full distortion analysis of the Surround Master (its actually much better now) and we would claim the sonic effects of the Surround Master in separating sound sources out weighs any digital effects. Oh Nyquist was correct!
Now queue in an orderly manner for abuse, ridicule and persecution.
regards
Chucky
Krkier is correct we do re digitize at 24 bit 48 kHz with 256 times oversampling. Like ANY electronic device inserted in the audio chain distortion of some type will occur (yes even a simple resistor). The real issue is weather or not the listener can detect the change. This is where things get really controversial with people claiming they can hear 0.0001% distortion in an amplifier of speaker cable.
We have done a lot of internal research into distortion and indeed "what makes a good speaker sound bad and a bad speaker sound good". Our findings (in an over 70 page document) was that the conventional parameters of distortion, frequency response, tone burst, decay response etc had little to do with "perceived" preference. In fact if you really want me top get controversial (I can see the poo flying now) a colleague of mine once said "when you can see distortion visually on a sine wave via a CRO- then you can just hear it!
Our tests have shown this (to our tin ears) is correct (its 1%).
If people are interested we can elaborate but perhaps in a different section of this forum.
We have published full distortion analysis of the Surround Master (its actually much better now) and we would claim the sonic effects of the Surround Master in separating sound sources out weighs any digital effects. Oh Nyquist was correct!
Now queue in an orderly manner for abuse, ridicule and persecution.
regards
Chucky
- Joined
- Jan 19, 2006
- Messages
- 221
Thanks for clearing that up Chucky.
- Joined
- Apr 9, 2012
- Messages
- 2,704
Hi All
Please note some reviews have started to appear on other forums, below are the ones I now of but more is to come.
http://audaud.com/2013/05/surround-master-processor/
http://www.audiokarma.org/forums/showthread.php?t=510808
http://www.audiokarma.org/forums/showthread.php?t=513475
http://www.stereo.net.au/forums/ind...d-master-stereo-to-surround-sound-conversion/
If any qq members are also member of these and other forums it would be great if you can spread the word!......hopefully good.
Audioholics are currently treating us like lepers. hopefully someone there will actually decide to listen to the thing.
Regards
Chucky
Please note some reviews have started to appear on other forums, below are the ones I now of but more is to come.
http://audaud.com/2013/05/surround-master-processor/
http://www.audiokarma.org/forums/showthread.php?t=510808
http://www.audiokarma.org/forums/showthread.php?t=513475
http://www.stereo.net.au/forums/ind...d-master-stereo-to-surround-sound-conversion/
If any qq members are also member of these and other forums it would be great if you can spread the word!......hopefully good.
Audioholics are currently treating us like lepers. hopefully someone there will actually decide to listen to the thing.
Regards
Chucky
I see that John Sunier over at Audiophile Audition is waiting for a version of the unit that would fit into a 5.1 setup.
Yet another product edition for Involve...... !
- Joined
- Apr 9, 2012
- Messages
- 2,704
Hi all
I promise to give you a "warts and all" sample of reviews, well here is an interesting one:
First unhappy customer - wanting a return and then changing his mind!
CUSTOMER WROTE:
Hi, I purchased the Surround Master and it was shipped on May 16. Whilst there aren't any problems with the unit it doesn't suit my system or style of listening, can you advise on 30 day return policy.
WE REPLIED
Hi there Peter,
Sorry to hear the product wasn't for you. However, you do get the honour of being our first ever return.
If you don't mind, are you able to be more specific about why it didn't suit you / your system? Whether it was a connection problem, or you didn't get the type of sound you were expecting, or something
else. For example, we know some people had trouble with the fact that the 5.1 front outputs had the centre content removed, and people without centre channels were using those front outputs by mistake instead of the 4 channel fronts.
This isn't for any return purposes mind you, but it helps us greatly to know where we might have gone wrong or what we can do to improve the product / our products in the future.
The policy / process is fairly straight forward - pop it in the post and your payment will be refunded as soon as we receive it.
The return address is
Involve Audio
Attention: David
33-35 Malcolm Road
Braeside, Victoria
Australia 3195
Many Thanks
~David Alexandrou
THE CUSTOMER REPLIED:
Hi David,
Thanks for your reply and for the chance to have the dubious honor of being the first to return a Surround Master. I'd emailed a couple of times (not via the site but to the email address that had notified me when the unit was sent) but had no reply.
After getting your response I sat down again for a protracted listening session again. Initially I'd heard a harshness and sound from the rears was just too obvious. Compared to discrete surround the system just didn't gel. I'm using a pair of REL subs and thought they were the problem.
Turns out the pricey surge protector I was using with a NAD M51 was at fault. Replacing that with a cheap unit today made all the difference. All the Surround Master did was make those faults all the more apparent and with the DAC sounding better I can appreciate what the Surround Master can do.
I've still got some tweaking to do but can confidently state I won't be returning the unit after all. Thanks again for your response and info re the 4/5.1 channel fronts.
Regards, Peter
AND ANOTHER REVIEW (Checkout his blog site too: http://stevem1960.blogspot.com.au/ )
The Involve Surround Master is the best movie decoder I have had in my home! Fantastic movie sound effects and better separation of the five channels than I have heard from the standard Dolby Prologic II and Neo: 6 DSP algorithms built into most home theatre receivers. Dolby sounds blurred in comparison, especially with vocals.
I just wish that the Surround Master encoding technology was adopted by the big players in the industry so that it becomes a part of our purchase with off the shelf HT receivers from Yamaha, Sony, Denon and the like ...
Cheers,
Steve.
Regards
Chucky
I promise to give you a "warts and all" sample of reviews, well here is an interesting one:
First unhappy customer - wanting a return and then changing his mind!
CUSTOMER WROTE:
Hi, I purchased the Surround Master and it was shipped on May 16. Whilst there aren't any problems with the unit it doesn't suit my system or style of listening, can you advise on 30 day return policy.
WE REPLIED
Hi there Peter,
Sorry to hear the product wasn't for you. However, you do get the honour of being our first ever return.
If you don't mind, are you able to be more specific about why it didn't suit you / your system? Whether it was a connection problem, or you didn't get the type of sound you were expecting, or something
else. For example, we know some people had trouble with the fact that the 5.1 front outputs had the centre content removed, and people without centre channels were using those front outputs by mistake instead of the 4 channel fronts.
This isn't for any return purposes mind you, but it helps us greatly to know where we might have gone wrong or what we can do to improve the product / our products in the future.
The policy / process is fairly straight forward - pop it in the post and your payment will be refunded as soon as we receive it.
The return address is
Involve Audio
Attention: David
33-35 Malcolm Road
Braeside, Victoria
Australia 3195
Many Thanks
~David Alexandrou
THE CUSTOMER REPLIED:
Hi David,
Thanks for your reply and for the chance to have the dubious honor of being the first to return a Surround Master. I'd emailed a couple of times (not via the site but to the email address that had notified me when the unit was sent) but had no reply.
After getting your response I sat down again for a protracted listening session again. Initially I'd heard a harshness and sound from the rears was just too obvious. Compared to discrete surround the system just didn't gel. I'm using a pair of REL subs and thought they were the problem.
Turns out the pricey surge protector I was using with a NAD M51 was at fault. Replacing that with a cheap unit today made all the difference. All the Surround Master did was make those faults all the more apparent and with the DAC sounding better I can appreciate what the Surround Master can do.
I've still got some tweaking to do but can confidently state I won't be returning the unit after all. Thanks again for your response and info re the 4/5.1 channel fronts.
Regards, Peter
AND ANOTHER REVIEW (Checkout his blog site too: http://stevem1960.blogspot.com.au/ )
The Involve Surround Master is the best movie decoder I have had in my home! Fantastic movie sound effects and better separation of the five channels than I have heard from the standard Dolby Prologic II and Neo: 6 DSP algorithms built into most home theatre receivers. Dolby sounds blurred in comparison, especially with vocals.
I just wish that the Surround Master encoding technology was adopted by the big players in the industry so that it becomes a part of our purchase with off the shelf HT receivers from Yamaha, Sony, Denon and the like ...
Cheers,
Steve.
Regards
Chucky
Very impressive Chucky - especially if that's as negative as the reviews get! 
One question: does Involve have any plans to make a product out of your "Vectorscope" 4 Channel Audio Scope used in the lab?
Now that the Technics SH-3433 Quad Scope is no longer available, I bet that a 4.0 and 5.1 Vectorscope product would be a popular item among Home Theater and Surround fans !
One question: does Involve have any plans to make a product out of your "Vectorscope" 4 Channel Audio Scope used in the lab?
Now that the Technics SH-3433 Quad Scope is no longer available, I bet that a 4.0 and 5.1 Vectorscope product would be a popular item among Home Theater and Surround fans !
- Joined
- Apr 9, 2012
- Messages
- 2,704
Hi bmoura
No, but I would be happy to find the article where we found the circuit (was in qq somewhere)
Regards
Chucky
No, but I would be happy to find the article where we found the circuit (was in qq somewhere)
Regards
Chucky
Very impressive Chucky - especially if that's as negative as the reviews get!
One question: does Involve have any plans to make a product out of your "Vectorscope" 4 Channel Audio Scope used in the lab?
Now that the Technics SH-3433 Quad Scope is no longer available, I bet that a 4.0 and 5.1 Vectorscope product would be a popular item among Home Theater and Surround fans !
I think you're looking for this thread
https://www.quadraphonicquad.com/fo...Technics-SH-3433-AUDIOSCOPE&highlight=SH-3433
- Joined
- Apr 9, 2012
- Messages
- 2,704
- Joined
- Apr 9, 2012
- Messages
- 2,704
And now our "unhappy" customer has been kind enough to write a mini review in "stereonet"
"Cheers, I was on the verge of sending it back. There was a harshness to the sound and the whole thing didn't gel. I'd been having problems with the NAD M51 DAC I'm using sounding consistently good and what I figured eventually was that the SM just magnified the problem and made it startlingly obvious something was wrong. Changed the power board I was using and what a difference! I'm sitting here listening with the cat sitting beside me and its driving her nuts - really is astonishing how much directional info is pulled out of that stereo signal. I'm trying hard to hear some sort of sound degradation caused by adding the SM to the chain but for the life of me can't. I don't know whether that's because it's easier to listen critically to 2 speakers rather than 4 or more but frankly don't care.
Never thought I'd say it but really does give a lot of the dedicated surround albums I've got a run for their money. "
Regards
Chucky
"Cheers, I was on the verge of sending it back. There was a harshness to the sound and the whole thing didn't gel. I'd been having problems with the NAD M51 DAC I'm using sounding consistently good and what I figured eventually was that the SM just magnified the problem and made it startlingly obvious something was wrong. Changed the power board I was using and what a difference! I'm sitting here listening with the cat sitting beside me and its driving her nuts - really is astonishing how much directional info is pulled out of that stereo signal. I'm trying hard to hear some sort of sound degradation caused by adding the SM to the chain but for the life of me can't. I don't know whether that's because it's easier to listen critically to 2 speakers rather than 4 or more but frankly don't care.
Never thought I'd say it but really does give a lot of the dedicated surround albums I've got a run for their money. "
Regards
Chucky
- Joined
- Oct 23, 2011
- Messages
- 67
G'day, Chucky: Have you made any progress on the 2Ch mode to full-logic SQ conversion? Since I wasn't too keen on the costly shipping charges and customs horrors needed to ship the unit back down under, you mentioned in passing that Involve Audio is pondering a stand-alone SQ unit. Now that we're in the second half of 2013, where do things currently stand on SQ?
- Joined
- Apr 9, 2012
- Messages
- 2,704
Hi Aging quadie
We lied regarding the final date as the damned thing has been much harder to pin down as expected. We have had a working version for a few weeks but it pumps and has all the bugs and deficiencies of the old logic SQ encoders. As of last Friday we made significant improvements and started integrating the SQ matrix and logic with our INVOLVE software and the result was a vast improvement. We are fine tuning this week and hope to get a sample unit to Rustyandie this week for initial opinions. We will not release just another "me to" SQ decoder it must sound like it belongs with INVOLVE.
See Dave's summary in the "SQ is coming" thread.
Regards
Chucky
We lied regarding the final date as the damned thing has been much harder to pin down as expected. We have had a working version for a few weeks but it pumps and has all the bugs and deficiencies of the old logic SQ encoders. As of last Friday we made significant improvements and started integrating the SQ matrix and logic with our INVOLVE software and the result was a vast improvement. We are fine tuning this week and hope to get a sample unit to Rustyandie this week for initial opinions. We will not release just another "me to" SQ decoder it must sound like it belongs with INVOLVE.
See Dave's summary in the "SQ is coming" thread.
Regards
Chucky
Similar threads
