Using the 5.1 input on a receiver for quad sound.

[dumbchemist]

In working with my Lafayette LA-424 amp and SQ-L decoder, I wondered about something: Could the front and rear quad output of the SQ-L decoder be sent into a receiver's 5.1 input? Obviously, there would not be a center and sub-woofer signal from the decoder. The volume on the receiver would then be used to control all 4 speakers.

Has anyone tried this?

 

[timbre4]

Sounds reasonable to me; line outputs from decoder feed 4 of the 6 Ext Inputs on receiver. Did this with a Q8 deck once upon a time, same idea.

 

[0tto]

that's the best what you can do.

 

[dumbchemist]

Well, I set my receiver up with the SQ-L feeding its 4 channels into the 5.1 input and it does work with some restrictions. On my receiver, you cannot change the tone or db of any of the channels when using the 5.1 input. Those functions are not available. It is assumed that the source for the 5.1 is doing those functions which the SQ-L decoder cannot do. The sound is okay with the rear channels being slightly lower in volume. If I get a discrete quad source, I can plug the quad source into the SQ-L and use the SQ-L as a sort of switch for quad.

 

[0tto]

On my receiver, you cannot change the tone or db of any of the channels when using the 5.1 input. Those functions are not available. It is assumed that the source for the 5.1 is doing those functions which the SQ-L decoder cannot do. The sound is okay with the rear channels being slightly lower in volume. If I get a discrete quad source, I can plug the quad source into the SQ-L and use the SQ-L as a sort of switch for quad.

that's a default for all receivers with analog 5.1(7.1)
the signal through this interface does bypass any and all internal processing and goes directly to amplification's section.
the purpose (and wise one) is to let the listeners to hear the sound exactly as it meant by those, who recorded/mastered
this sound in studio. if you don't like, what you hear, it could be couple reasons:

*your speakers cannot reproduce fidelity of recorded sound

*recording/mastering was done by someone, who should be kicked from studio and ordered by court do not
approach any studio in radius about 5 miles for rest of their life.

*due to your habit to heard the music, heavily distorted by EQ

anyway, the level's balance of analog conection still active as it rely on amplification and can be adjusted manualy.

 

[donaldpatten]

In the early days of Stereo and later on Quad, we would connect a center speaker to the stereo power amp Left+ and Right+ terminals. My frist preamp , a HK Citation I kit I built in 1962, did the samething , only at line level. It had Left, Center, and Right outputs with a center channel volume control. Ten years later I added a second Citation I for my rear Quad channels.

Don

 

[timbre4]

Any of my Denon receivers have allowed individual channel volume changes with the EXT 6 Ch Input, all other signal path aspects (tone, surround modes) are bypassed.

 

[tcdriver]

Any of my Denon receivers have allowed individual channel volume changes with the EXT 6 Ch Input, all other signal path aspects (tone, surround modes) are bypassed.

I can change the Left and Right together, center, and individual surrounds on my Kenwood VR-410, VR-507 and VR-509 receivers. All other signal path aspects (tone, surround modes) are bypassed.

 

[quadsearcher]

My Sherwood and Onkyo receivers both have 5.1 direct mode and the individual channel levels are adjustable.

 

[dumbchemist]

I have a Sony SDP-E800 digital surround processor that has 5.1 analog outputs. For a time, I had them feeding into my 5.1 inputs on my Sony receiver. When I played a DVD with 5.1 sound through the SDP, the SDP did the surround sound processing. Later, I found out that the optical output of the SDP carries the 5.1 sound so I removed the analog 5.1 cables and connected the SDP to my receiver using a fiber-optic cable. Now my receiver does the surround sound processing. (This is so much nicer than having 6 audio cables connecting the receiver and the SDP).

When I was working with the SQ-L decoder, I remembered that the 5.1 inputs on the receiver were free which prompted this thread.

My receiver now can control the volumes of all 4 channels using the remote control when I am using the SQ-L decoder. Previously, I was having difficulty setting the front and back volumes when I had the LA-424 in the setup. Either the back was too high or too low. I could never seem to get the front and the back to the same volume level. Also, when you turned down the volume on the receiver, the back channels were now louder and necessitated a walk to the LA-424 to turn the back volume down. With the remote, I can turn up or down both front and rear volumes. I am too lazy. lol

 

[arnold_layne]

The main issue I have with using 5.1 inputs for quad is the lack of bass management. 5.1 inputs assume bass management done on the player side. So in my case, I'm using speakers who's bass is limited too around 40hz and the sub adds the rest. I cannot do that with a quad source connected to the 5.1 input. My receiver will do bass management with a 4.0 digital signal but not with analog 4.0.

A_L

 

[0tto]

The main issue I have with using 5.1 inputs for quad is the lack of bass management. 5.1 inputs assume bass management done on the player side. So in my case, I'm using speakers who's bass is limited too around 40hz and the sub adds the rest. I cannot do that with a quad source connected to the 5.1 input. My receiver will do bass management with a 4.0 digital signal but not with analog 4.0.

A_L

do not assume anything. it just works as power amp and amplifies the feed.
if you have enough room you may get passive subs and bi-wire them to main speakers.
it will improve the sound.

 

[fredblue]

do not assume anything. it just works as power amp and amplifies the feed.
if you have enough room you may get passive subs and bi-wire them to main speakers.
it will improve the sound.

or you can wire your subwoofers in with your main L & R speaker connections, if you're terminating in bare wire rather than banana plugs.

for example my (old now!) REL Sub has the option to go from a Neutrik Speakon connection to a cable with 3 bare wires that you just connect across the Front L & R, as well as the usual phono/RCA line in.

as the Neutrik Speakon is a high level speaker connection (rather than a line level/phono one, as usually processed/managed by your receiver/processor) this solution avoids the need for any bass management, in your situation your mains are going down to 40hz and the sub will do whatever lower stuff is in the full-range signal being fed to your gear.

 

[vinylguy4]

The main issue I have with using 5.1 inputs for quad is the lack of bass management. 5.1 inputs assume bass management done on the player side. So in my case, I'm using speakers who's bass is limited too around 40hz and the sub adds the rest. I cannot do that with a quad source connected to the 5.1 input. My receiver will do bass management with a 4.0 digital signal but not with analog 4.0.

A_L

To get bass management and tone controls, etc, I send the 4.0 analog signal to a dts-610 dts encoder and then send the dts digital stream to the receiver digital input.

vinylguy4

 

[arnold_layne]

To get bass management and tone controls, etc, I send the 4.0 analog signal to a dts-610 dts encoder and then send the dts digital stream to the receiver digital input.

vinylguy4

I'm sure that works, but it's lossy. Not a complaint, just an observation. Since the few quad titles I own I've now digitized to lossless FLAC 4.0 and DVD-A discs, I can now use my receiver's bass management to send low bass to the sub.

A_L

 

[Wagonmaster_91]

Quote Originally Posted by dumbchemist
On my receiver, you cannot change the tone or db of any of the channels when using the 5.1 input. Those functions are not available. It is assumed that the source for the 5.1 is doing those functions which the SQ-L decoder cannot do. The sound is okay with the rear channels being slightly lower in volume. If I get a discrete quad source, I can plug the quad source into the SQ-L and use the SQ-L as a sort of switch for quad.

Quote Originally Posted by0tto
that's a default for all receivers with analog 5.1(7.1)
the signal through this interface does bypass any and all internal processing and goes directly to amplification's section.
the purpose (and wise one) is to let the listeners to hear the sound exactly as it meant by those, who recorded/mastered
this sound in studio.

I disagree with that thinking. I would prefer a switch that would let you choose whether or not to bypass tone controls. The artist/recorder/master(er) has no idea what player, amp or speakers a person will be using or the room acoustics the music will be played in. If I am the purchaser of the product, I should be able to play it however I wish with the tonal tweaks I prefer or require. If the artist wants to dictate how I must listen to it, then he should pay for my sound system and listening room. Unless you want to pay for my steak, I will put ketchup on it if that is the way I prefer it to taste.

 

[0tto]

I disagree with that thinking. I would prefer a switch that would let you choose whether or not to bypass tone controls.

oh well, everyone to their own but can assure you, if you have (not super puper) just decent speakers and any modern,
just a bit above of cheap models, an amplification and grab a "Moonlight Acoustica" from AIX Records, BD-A of Parson's
version of DSOTM, "Aqualung", "Grace For Drowning", "Storm Corrosion" by SW or even not so much HiRez selftitled DVDA
"Renee Fleming" - you wouldn't be in need of tweaks to get it sound right.
sure, there also lots of crappy sounding releases, which somehow got into category HiRez, but their bad sound aren't the
fault of playback gears but, (perhaps never cleaned up), ears of mixing/mastering engineers.

 

[ArmyOfQuad]

No two discs are created equal, the ability to fine tune the sound on a system is a must. Just my opinion, though.


I too am highly disappointed in the inability to tweak the sound on the multichannel inputs of modern receivers. I have no use for a multichannel in without this ability. Although, I'm not exactly thrilled with the quality of EQ on modern receivers either, so....whatever....

 

[Wagonmaster_91]

Otto, I agree that if a given disc has been expertly recorded, perfectly mixed with channels balanced and correctly mastered, little (if any) tweaking is needed. I own hundreds of hi-rez titles and the majority of those do not IMHO fall into the 'perfect sound' category.

Also, I have many great sounding multichannel upmixes and transfers by DKA, AoQ, Holland123, Sansdancer, Floydflush, XTC343, Juande, Romanotrax and others. Each of these engineers approach the channel balances in their own way - some with very aggressive rear channels, others with pronounced or suppressed center channel, and we all know that no two people agree on what should be going on in the LFE. I feed all my multi-channel sources into a central Sony 5.1/7.1 preamp/amp that then feeds separate stereo amps for my front and rear channels and a stereo power amp for the subwoofers. The Sony amp powers the center and overhead (channels 6&7) speakers. Once I have the channel balance set to my liking on the F,R&SW amps, I can control the volume of the entire system using the Sony amp's control. I love the flexibility this set-up affords me.

 

[0tto]

No two discs are created equal, the ability to fine tune the sound on a system is a must. Just my opinion, though.

you're right. of course there aren't created equal discs as objectives in most cases are different.
but fidelity of the sound still a fidelity of the sound. doesn't matter what genre, format is used.
sure, it's pretty rare that 50-40 years old recording and mastering were done as good that still enjoyable
for listening even today and that's need to be very gifted ones who did this with mainly primitive equipment.
so should be very obvious that spoiled by the newest advanced technology, one shouldn't expect same sound
from 40 y.o. recording.
and also you ignore the fact that modern gears mainly directed toward usage of modern recordings. no one from
manufacturers will give damn thought about handful of fanatically dedicated to obsolete quad format. analog 5.1(7.1)
interface were designed with purpose to fed through an reference quality audiophile sound for which obviously neither
Q8 or LP can't pretend.