Well, I had a chance to listen to the Frampton Comes Alive SACD some more last night and I discovered something that I found quite troubling. Here we are, in the middle of a debate about the center channel and what purpose it can and should serve, or whether the center channel is needed at all, and along comes a title that can be pointed to as the poster child for everything that is bad about the center channel. That's right, the application of the center channel in Frampton Comes Alive is a travesty.
The first thing I really noticed about this title is that it has a wonderful sense of space. However, upon extended listening, something about the front soundstage really started to bother me. It then became apparent that the center channel is being used to provide/enhance depth in the recording. It is a dedicated ambience channel. I've never heard the center channel used like this before.
The two front main speakers sound like they were mixed right off the sound board, with none to very little hall ambience. The stereo pair sounds clean, with exceptional imaging and presence. It sounds a lot like the classic stereo recording that became a mega-seller.
The center channel sounds like it was recorded off a microphone placed somewhere out in the concert hall. It is pure ambience, with muddy vocals, echoing instruments, and colliding sounds from all over the place. It does a lot to add a realistic sense of space to the recording, but as a dedicated element, it really becomes problematic.
The main problem is that this dedicated, muddy sounding, ambient track is placed right between a clean stereo pair. The center channel should enhance or support the front stereo image. This track does the exact opposite. It totally destroys the front image. It castrates the stereo pair. It is total oil and water. The two just don't mix.
Don't believe me? Try a couple of experiments. Sit down and listen to the disc for a while (any track, they're all treated equally). Now, disconnect your center speaker. Don't down-mix to four channels or anything (I'll talk about that in a minute) just disconnect the center speaker. Now see if you can notice a difference.
What I noticed when I did this is that the front image immediately snapped into place. Gone was the muddy, disjointed and inconsistent image I was hearing before. In its place was a nice, clean, spot-on stereo image with NOTHING missing. That's right, the center channel is completely redundant. You won't miss a thing, except there will be a lessened sense of space. However, a mutilated front soundstage is much too high a price to pay for an "enhanced" sense of space.
Alright, now here's another experiment to try. Most players allow you to down-mix the center channel to the front mains, so that people without a center channel won't miss anything. Listen to the disc in 5.1 for a while then down-mix to 4.1 and listen to the difference.
When I did this, I noticed that the soundstage immediately imploded into a muddy mess with no imaging at all. This was the absolute worst scenario.
For this recording to sound right, I totally insist that the center channel be eliminated. After doing this, I think the recording sounds absolutely brilliant in every conceivable way.
The dedicated "center channel for ambience" was an interesting but ultimately misguided notion. There is no way that the center channel should ever be employed in this manner! Maintaining the integrity of the front soundstage should be number one priority when addressing the center channel, and any application that deviates from this mandate should be nixed immediately!
Still, this channel of information is interesting, and I can see why they had a desire to do something with it. I'm really glad they didn't mix it in with the mains to spread the ambience across the front. That would have destroyed the brilliance inherent in the mains as they are. Rather than throw the channel in the middle, which is what they did, I wonder what this channel would sound like suspended overhead? This would ensure that it does not destroy the stereo image and would still provide for that enhanced sense of space. I'm not industrious enough to try it myself, but it is an intriguing thought, eh?
