ClassicalSurroundFan
Well-known Member
Once upon a time we would all be subscribers to a physical magazine that would’ve given us a consumer report of the differences. Alas - onward and upward…
Schiit Audio has a surround synthesizer gadget.
- Thread starter gene_stl
- Start date
Help Support QuadraphonicQuad:
The SYN lacks the circuitry to accurately decode matrix-encoded quad recordings. While you might get something of a Surround effect, the rear sounds would be impossible to locate properly. The SM can not only decode SQ, and RM-based (QS, QX, EV-4, QM, etc.) with high separation, it can apply that same technique to stereo recordings, extracting the out-of-phase information from stereo and creating, depending on the recording, a very realistic wrap-around from those recordings. I know the SM costs more, but it's really worth the difference in price.
ClassicalSurroundFan
Well-known Member
Yep, covered that. The next question was to which was the better upmixer. The Schiit could have less noise, for example.
TuliaNonTroppo
Active Member
I appreciate your explanation of the SM v3.
My biggest draw to either of these devices is how it works with non-matrixed stereo recordings and most specifically, how they would differ from what DPLII can do, and this is the technology that most of us already have in our homes, as they all work off the differences in phased frequencies, right? Stoddard stated somewhere that the Syn doesn’t do any steering, but isn’t that sort of steering a benefit of DPLII, and I assume, the SM v3?
Have you heard the Syn yet?
Compared to the Surround Master, DPLII Music sucks. Look at my post #9, among others, in this thread:
https://www.quadraphonicquad.com/forums/threads/surround-master-v2-thoughts-and-impressions.26644/
TuliaNonTroppo
Active Member
Hehe, I love your post #9.
TuliaNonTroppo
Active Member
There is a thread on superbestaudiofriends.org with a guy who purchased a Syn and is providing feedback. He states the Syn really is mono for both rears…and this sounds like it would most emulate Dolby Pro Logic and not DPLII.
I personally don’t think I am interested in this product anymore, as I have DPLII and discrete multichannel in my AVR. I hope Schiit is successful with their target market…
…and I am going to save up and order a Surround Master v3 once they are shipping again.
I personally don’t think I am interested in this product anymore, as I have DPLII and discrete multichannel in my AVR. I hope Schiit is successful with their target market…
…and I am going to save up and order a Surround Master v3 once they are shipping again.
You can build or buy a Quadapter (Hafler speaker matrix fake surround sound creator):
https://community.klipsch.com/index.php?/topic/145727-quadapter-back-yay/
https://www.ebay.com/itm/266197132190
Kirk Bayne
https://community.klipsch.com/index.php?/topic/145727-quadapter-back-yay/
https://www.ebay.com/itm/266197132190
Kirk Bayne
A wise choice. I've never heard anyone regretting spending the $$ on a Surround Master.
I liked poking around that website. I've never heard of it before. I'm sure I will revisit. The SYN content was interesting, it answered a few questions. But except for the Presence control there was no testing or charts to show what the Width control does or if the Surround adjustment is only for level or does it control the L-R matrixing?
Those controls are what makes the SYN's decoding performance so hard to pin down. The Surround Master is based on Sansui QS & is quite predictable with QS or stereo input. Using the latter in a 4 speaker set up, any common mode signal (frequently solo voice, drums, bass) will come out of only the front speakers. Any ambient reverby opposite phase signals come out only the rear speakers. A left only (right only) input will come equally and only out of the left (or right) side speakers. Put it all together & you have full soundfield with very precise directionality and the three band steering means no audible artifacts.
If all the Schitt does is basically act like a Dyna Quad unit, I would recommend that people pick up a soldering iron and build the circuit that I described in the Akai SS-1 thread. The active circuit blows away the simple speaker connection and is fully adjustable. I was a bit surprised at just how good it sounded! Much cheaper than the Schitt! You don't get the ultra discrete sounding effects like you do with Sansui QS or Involve but it can be yours for only a few bucks and a little work! Fantastic with quad headphones!
Sony is offering a portable home theater system (HT-AX7) that accepts only stereo in. Using DSP, the stereo is upmixed to an immersive mix that the tiny sound bar and its two disk-like satellites use to create an immersive bubble surrounding the listener. It is meant to be used by one or two people using a phone or iPad to watch video or listen to music. It is intended to be moved around the house wherever one wishes to be while enjoying the synthesized surround. The main unit is set in front of the listener and the satellites are to be set at arms length to the left and right at shoulder level forming a triangle with the main unit. The intent is that it is moved off to a shelf or counter for charging when it is not in use. The two satellites rest on top of the main unit when not in use. Battery powered, Bluetooth only, zero cables when in use. It was demoed to the press in London recently. Tom’s Guide was there. And What Hi-Fi? was there, too. It is a completely different implementation, but similar to Surround Master and Schiit Syn in that it accepts only stereo input to create a surround-ish output. It would be good for those who want a bit of surround added to their music, but need to avoid a permanent quad or 5.1 speaker set up in their house. It is a compromise, but it might find niche acceptance.
How does the Sony unit know it is only stereo? As opposed to QS/SQ/EV etc that also was carried on a stereo compatible signal?
Immersive bubble, eh? Since the earliest days of stereo or quad or more modern surround, there are always goofy pics of sound fields that bear no resemblance to reality.
Tom's guide is wonderful resource for much computer but I don't think "Tom" is an audiophile. Heck he doesn't even own the website any more. "What Hi-Fi" has been nothing more than a page to page advertising medium since the early 80"s.
Hmmm... completely different implementation to the Surround Master but similar? I'd like to hear more. The Schitt Syn has been dismissed without any member offering first hand credibility.
Good closer , Alex. But even the Involve Two Speaker Surround I would expect to out perform this Sony unit. And any real surround sound set up to exceed that.
Last edited:
Dear Sonik,
I like your post & questions. I don’t know whether Sony’s system can recognize or properly decipher a matrix encoding. One thing that caught my attention is the focus on simple, two channel input and surround-ish output. Seems like Schiit and Sony read Charles’ FAQ on the Involve Web site and agree that giving consumers an additional way to render their stereo music is worth trying out. They are following Involve’s lead it seems to me.
You mentioned immersive bubble illustrations and indeed Sony has provided theirs for the HT-AX7 (it is fun to see artists’ renditions of unseeable experience):
That was wrong of me to write “completely different implementation.” What struck me is that Sony’s is a portable speaker system whereas Surround Master and Schiit are inserted into existing systems that are four-or-more—channel-capable. I do not know how Sony’s processing works different or similar to Schiit or Involve. And you are right that Tom’s Guide and What Hi-Fi? aren’t providing high-caliber independent review…they just showed up at Sony’s presser in the U.K.
Undoubtedly, Surround Master is providing a better output. It is interesting that Sony is trying to see whether a $500 all-in-one approach will gain acceptance with the less-is-more crowd who want more “juice” when they listen or watch solo or with one other in front of a tablet or phone.
I like your post & questions. I don’t know whether Sony’s system can recognize or properly decipher a matrix encoding. One thing that caught my attention is the focus on simple, two channel input and surround-ish output. Seems like Schiit and Sony read Charles’ FAQ on the Involve Web site and agree that giving consumers an additional way to render their stereo music is worth trying out. They are following Involve’s lead it seems to me.
You mentioned immersive bubble illustrations and indeed Sony has provided theirs for the HT-AX7 (it is fun to see artists’ renditions of unseeable experience):
That was wrong of me to write “completely different implementation.” What struck me is that Sony’s is a portable speaker system whereas Surround Master and Schiit are inserted into existing systems that are four-or-more—channel-capable. I do not know how Sony’s processing works different or similar to Schiit or Involve. And you are right that Tom’s Guide and What Hi-Fi? aren’t providing high-caliber independent review…they just showed up at Sony’s presser in the U.K.
Undoubtedly, Surround Master is providing a better output. It is interesting that Sony is trying to see whether a $500 all-in-one approach will gain acceptance with the less-is-more crowd who want more “juice” when they listen or watch solo or with one other in front of a tablet or phone.
Last edited:
That “bubble” reminds me of the Gene Barry movie The War of the Worlds. The Martians had these blue bubbles for protection, including from nukes.
It doesn't have to resemble reality. In my limited experience, just to have side ambiance (or better expressed, not-empty-sides) makes for a great difference. I'm sure my Lexicon doesn't sound like any real venue, but it doesn't have to.
Good point....there's been no member feedback with a good reference point on the Schitt?
@Sonik Wiz, were you referring to the reality of sound as perceived from our actual listening position or the "reality" of a surround / quad system in relation to the idea of sitting at an actual performance?
@proufo your absolutely right & I totally agree with you. I failed to make myself clear.
@LB-V : Neither.
What I was trying to say is what illustrations show is happening to the sound is unrealistic to what you actually hear. I figure engineers & product development come up with something new, go to their ad agency, & before you know there's some goofy illustrations made for marketing that tries to convey to a potential customer how it's going to sound.
Sound waves don't really emanate in orderly curved lines marching forward to the listener
In this pic we have not just conical spirals (wha?) but nice directed sound shooting straight up to the ceiling to be reflected back. It just doesn't work like that. Sound from a speaker is not that focused. I consider these ATMOS illustrations the most offensive because these upward firing speakers will have most of the sound diffuse & bounce around the room before ever reflecting back from the ceiling.
So when I see a $500 product creating a blue CG image like that... gimme a break. I'm 99.44% sure nobody is going to sit with that thing on their bed and think: "Wow! It really does create an immersive bubble of sound!"
This why a long time ago I became enamored of doing patent research on 'tronics I was interested in. It gets to honest operating info with out all the advertising nonsense.
Last edited:
johnnyangel
Member
I'd like to see Kal Rubinson pitch in with a review of the Syn somewhere (I know "Monophile" all too rarely lets him review surround product.)
I purchased a Syn and have been pretty happy with it. I own multiple monoblock amps, an Oppo 105D, and a Parasound P-7 preamp (very nice unit with 7:1 I/O but no digital processing). I use the Oppo for discrete surround sources but have missed being able to apply surround effect to casual (Spotify, Internet radio, etc.) two-channel sources.
I've cycled various pre-pros and surround receivers into the system (connecting them via the P-7's home theater bypass) but they were just too large and unnecessarily complicated for me -- and in the case of the receivers I didn't like the idea of their amps consuming any juice when I was never going to have speakers connected to them. And while the Yamaha receivers in particular have interesting tricks for emulating acoustical spaces, I got over playing with those years ago when I owned their DSP-1 (actually I still have it in a closet!).
At its price, the Syn appealed to me more than the Surround Master (though I'm sure that's a great unit) and for my "background music surround" purpose I don't particularly care if its decoding is theoretically correct. It sounds good in surround and when you want to switch it to stereo-only mode, it's pretty transparent. I guess my only beef with it is that I'd like it to have a level control for the front L and R speakers, in addition to the ones for rear and center that it does have.
I don't use its "width" or "presence" controls, or even the headphone jack (other than to verify it sounds fine) but I'm sure many of their target customers will.
Oh, guess I should mention that I haven't used the Syn's DAC much either. I mostly use it with a Denafrips Ares II outputting into its analog inputs.
I purchased a Syn and have been pretty happy with it. I own multiple monoblock amps, an Oppo 105D, and a Parasound P-7 preamp (very nice unit with 7:1 I/O but no digital processing). I use the Oppo for discrete surround sources but have missed being able to apply surround effect to casual (Spotify, Internet radio, etc.) two-channel sources.
I've cycled various pre-pros and surround receivers into the system (connecting them via the P-7's home theater bypass) but they were just too large and unnecessarily complicated for me -- and in the case of the receivers I didn't like the idea of their amps consuming any juice when I was never going to have speakers connected to them. And while the Yamaha receivers in particular have interesting tricks for emulating acoustical spaces, I got over playing with those years ago when I owned their DSP-1 (actually I still have it in a closet!).
At its price, the Syn appealed to me more than the Surround Master (though I'm sure that's a great unit) and for my "background music surround" purpose I don't particularly care if its decoding is theoretically correct. It sounds good in surround and when you want to switch it to stereo-only mode, it's pretty transparent. I guess my only beef with it is that I'd like it to have a level control for the front L and R speakers, in addition to the ones for rear and center that it does have.
I don't use its "width" or "presence" controls, or even the headphone jack (other than to verify it sounds fine) but I'm sure many of their target customers will.
Oh, guess I should mention that I haven't used the Syn's DAC much either. I mostly use it with a Denafrips Ares II outputting into its analog inputs.
Tell us about the DSP-1.
johnnyangel
Member
Since there's DSP-1 info on WIkipedia, Vinyl Engine, etc. I won't detail it much here except to say that this pioneering device was my first experience with surround, and I remember that fondly. It takes a two-channel input and synthesizes six-channels (plus mono jacks for a center or sub) in its many DSP modes, or just four in Dolby Surround mode.
You've made me reflect that if I really wanted to save money I could have dusted the DSP-1 off and used it in a similar way to how I'm using the Syn. However, I was looking to reduce complication, not add it!!
You've made me reflect that if I really wanted to save money I could have dusted the DSP-1 off and used it in a similar way to how I'm using the Syn. However, I was looking to reduce complication, not add it!!
Similar threads
- Poll
