Multichannel Test Files (FLAC) with various channels/sample rates

[SeeMoreDigital]

Only my personal experience but I've never heard anyone refer to them as "sides", only "rears" or "surrounds" (referring to 5.1 configs only).

Yep... Back in the day before 7.1 configurations and when life was simple, the 'rears' (or even 'backs') were in the 'rear' or more accurately behind your ears. Then came Dolby Digital EX and DTS-ES which added one or two more speakers further behind you.

But in a 7.1 configuration the audio from those original 5.1 'rears' have now come out of the 'sides'

 

[HomerJAU]

5.1 was originally a side implementation, but ‘sides’ were often positioned as ‘rears’. In any case they are usually known as front and rears in 5,1 but sides is correct.

 

[himey]

Yep... Back in the day before 7.1 configurations and when life was simple, the 'rears' (or even 'backs') were in the 'rear'. But in a 7.1 configuration the audio from those 'rears' now come out of the 'sides'

Are you sure about that?

 

[SeeMoreDigital]

Play any 'discretely' encoded 5.1 audio on a 7.1 system and you shouldn't be able to hear any audio coming out of the rear speakers. If you do then the AVR is performing some matrixing...

 

[dobyblue]

Don't know what to tell you other than do a simple google search for images of 5.1 side speaker's configurations. Like this.

Don’t know what to tell you other than take a look at those results you’ve linked for me, such as:

https://www.lifewire.com/positioning-loudspeakers-and-subwoofer-1846808
“Surround speakers may be positioned to the side, back, and above the listener”

They’re referring to them as “surround speakers” which supports my claim that I’ve only heard them referred to as surrounds or rears in a 5.1 system

 

[HomerJAU]

They’re referring to them as “surround speakers” which supports my claim that I’ve only heard them referred to as surrounds or rears in a 5.1 system

No one is claiming you’ve never heard of 5.1 side speakers.

This is a pointless conversation now. Post deletions incoming.

 

[riskylogic]

I think you meant that the 7.1 side and rear chans were combined to the respective rear (surrounds), as 5.1 array does not have "side" channels. But anyway, I hope my 5.1 reads 7.1 (and plays) material the same.

Thanks for the files, very helpful, especially if we sense things are not quite right.

OK, I'm going to derail this thread a bit cuz I don't want to start a new one. What is the official definition of 5.1; fronts plus rears or fronts plus sides? I started out assuming the former then migrated to the latter when face with space constraints. Now I've got both and it seems my new 11 channel receiver thinks 5.1 means front+ sides.

 

[riskylogic]

5.1 was originally a side implementation, but ‘sides’ were often positioned as ‘rears’. In any case they are usually known as front and rears in 5,1 but sides is correct.

OK that answers my question

 

[riskylogic]

Are you sure about that?

Yep, that's what my new Denon does. It's comforting to know my 5.2.2 system isn't out of spec.

 

[dobyblue]

Odd thread.

 

[AYanguas]

But in a 7.1 configuration the audio from those original 5.1 'rears' have now come out of the 'sides'

This does not always happen.

At least with my Denon (5.1 surrounds are called SURROUNDS) (7.1 rears are called SURROUND BACKS)

With DTS, the 5.1 surround channels outputs both to the SURROUNDS (side surrounds) and SURROUND BACKS (rear surrounds).
This is to image the sound between sides and rears, and get something similar to the spec location angles of 5.1 recommendation. Even it adapts (reduce) the matrixing levels to avoid bigger level with the double of speakers, I think. (I consider this a feature, not a bug). I don't know if this is a general implementation of DTS for all AVRs.

Playing Multichannel 5.1 PCM or Dolby AC3 in the AVR, outputs only to the SURROUNDS (side surrounds).

Odd thread.

This always happen because we do not have or assume any 'standard' for naming the channels/speakers.

 

[riskylogic]

With DTS, the 5.1 surround channels outputs both to the SURROUNDS (side surrounds) and SURROUND BACKS (rear surrounds).

Interesting. So what happens if you rip 5.1 Flacs from a DTS source? Does it play in both the sides and the rears or just the sides?

 

[AYanguas]

Interesting. So what happens if you rip 5.1 Flacs from a DTS source? Does it play in both the sides and the rears or just the sides?

5.1 FLACS will be input to the AVR as Multichannel 5.1 PCM Input, so only the sides will play. The same as with Dolby AC3 and Dolby TrueHD 5.1

The matrixing to sides and rears, in 7.1 config, occurs only when the AVR decodes DTS and DTS-HD MA 5.1 channels only. Not with DTS 7.1 that would have all discrete channels, obviuosly without any matrixing.

Also there is a matrixing to both rears when the input is DTS ES 6.1, for the central rear channel. But this is more obvious that it should be this way.

Edited: All this, of course, Without selecting any upmixer. Just the input signal.

 

[JediJoker]

This always happen because we do not have or assume any 'standard' for naming the channels/speakers.

There is the SMPTE standard using initials: L, R, C, Lfe, Ls, Rs, Lrs, Rrs, etc. Perhaps we should encourage adherence to this standard so as to avoid confusion.

 

[panamac]

Don't know what to tell you other than do a simple google search for images of 5.1 side speaker's configurations. Like this.

I have a 7.1.2 set up, and right or wrong, I refer to them as side surrounds and rear surrounds if for no other reason than whoever I'm speaking to instantly knows which pair i'm referring too....

 

[riskylogic]

I have a 7.1.2 set up, and right or wrong, I refer to them as side surrounds and rear surrounds if for no other reason than whoever I'm speaking to instantly knows which pair i'm referring too....

"Side surrounds" is unambiguous but "rear surrounds" often means "side surrounds" in a 5.x.x setup

 

[triple_vee]

Yes. All played perfectly including 7.1 (nothing missing).

Apologies for the thread revivial, but I'm curious...you got 7.1 to play correctly in your car's system? No downmixing to stereo? I never heard of a multichannel car audio system, but it would seem to be the perfect place to pre-equalize and tune the entire system to the cabin. We spend so much time in our cars listening to music...why isn't this more of a thing?

 

[HomerJAU]

Apologies for the thread revivial, but I'm curious...you got 7.1 to play correctly in your car's system? No downmixing to stereo? I never heard of a multichannel car audio system

Automotive Surround Discussions:
https://www.quadraphonicquad.com/forums/forums/automotive-surround.5/
7.1 FLAC is downmixed to 5.1 if the audio system has only 5.1 speakers, it appears this is a feature of the FLAC decoder. Although some players just refuse to recognise an 8 channel FLAC file or play anything > 2 channel as stereo (rear music is missing, not remixed into front two speakers.

 

[SeeMoreDigital]

Although some players just refuse to recognise an 8 channel FLAC file...

You're not wrong there...

Although my OPPO BDP-103 is able to play 8Ch flac (along with 8Ch AAC) files just fine, my newer OPPO UDP-203 can't. By contrast both can play 8Ch LPCM files.

 

[panamac]

Apologies for the thread revivial, but I'm curious...you got 7.1 to play correctly in your car's system? No downmixing to stereo? I never heard of a multichannel car audio system, but it would seem to be the perfect place to pre-equalize and tune the entire system to the cabin. We spend so much time in our cars listening to music...why isn't this more of a thing?

One of the first multichannel car audio systems was done by no other than Elliott Scheiner for the Acura RDX. I bought one around 2010 and the sound system was super; played DVD-A beautifully and came with a demo DVD-A complete with interview of Elliott and some great mixes.