TV monitor analog input/outputs

[admin]

On page 123 of the manual to your Denon:

https://manuals.denon.com/AVRS660H/NA/E ... _NA_EN.pdf

o Loudness Mngmt
This sets whether to output as specified in “Dynamic Comp.” or output
directly without compressing the dynamic range of audio recorded in
the disc.
On
(Default):
Outputs are given based on enabling the
settings made in “Dynamic Comp.” and
Dialogue normalization function.
Off:
“Dynamic Comp.” settings and Dialogue
normalization are disabled, and the
signals on the disc are output as is.

So a little different than trying to keep perceived frequencies equal depending on volume adjustment.

[AnotherJohnson]

Yes, it is a leveling of levels rather than a contouring of levels to maintain sensitivity to frequencies.

I think the loudness concept based on the Fletcher Munson research is a casualty of the dynamic range.

In those days a dynamic range of 50 dB would have been huge. Probably 30 dB was more common.

There is neither method nor intent to maintain the original production’s subtleties. I doubt that they foresaw the digital age … or movie productions with special effects leading to explosions or earthquakes in juxtaposition to conversation.

David Wilson developed his subwoofer as a special project to show off his flagship speakers in a demo of (I think it was) Apollo Thirteen. He wanted the full body effect of the real rocket engines. The project was a success, and although it wasn’t his motivation, people wanted to buy them. He built them like a granite topped coffee table, and deep pockets aficionados ordered them. I think these were forerunners for his Thor’s Hammer bass modules offered today.

I can see/hear that HT is a different animal with different needs and expectations compared to two channel high end.

Meanwhile, I am sort of confused by people buying high end L/R speakers and a matching center speaker when the center appears to do much of the work.

As I understand it, there are seven channel, nine channel, and even more complex programs out there. Maybe it’s like 8k video where it’s available, but not yet the norm.

[admin]

The current standard is 5.1 for the simple reason that most of the content is presented in this setup. Most video these days is streamed and not on physical media so when you are watching your shows on Netflix, the audio is a 5.1 stream. But of course that is processed into whatever speaker setup the listener has at home, be it a 7.1 setup like mine, or a single soundbar sitting in front of the TV in somebody else's. And then lets not forget all the different "sound modes" these devices offer, and the the different range compression and voice amplification modes like we have been talking about. Somebody could have your exact equipment but yet have a completely different audio experience just based on what buttons he presses on the remote.

There have been some interesting advancements like Atmos which is not specific to channels but more of a locational encoding of audio so that varying speaker numbers and locations can process the information accurately. It's rather amazing what these inexpensive products can do these days.

As you mentioned, a very different beast than our 2 channel setups where we are trying to replicate the sound in its purest form.

[AnotherJohnson]

I think it is quite clever, if not as elegant as research into perception of music.

I can see why people are drawn to it.

We aren’t big TV or movie people. I could be sucked in. But I think my wife is immune to the bug.

I downloaded the manual the other night when I was setting it up. I think it is over 200 pages WITH NO INDEX as has become the custom. I guess “search” is the answer to an index.

I was surprised at how easy the set up went. Listening to the whooping sounds emanating from each speaker in its turn, it was easy to hear the boom of the back corner surround speakers. And the software did do a good job of taking the boom out.

Martin Logan has gone “all in” on the HT concept. It probably started before their deal with Best Buy / Magnolia. There’s a lot of HT sales volume.

I had a pretty cool two channel set up based around the PV5 for our first big screen TV. That was in the 4x5 format era and the TV was a HUGE box. Those giant TVs were the last made in the USA because, in those days, transportation costs to make them in Asia and ship them to the US made no economic sense. We had a big oak entertainment center to house it all.

I had to turn it on and off because it was too complex for the wife and kids.

It was impressive for those days. But I never went further with it. I did that about 25 years ago. The TV and oak cabinetry finally left the building (from the walkout basement where it had been relegated) just a few weeks ago. I could not even give them away in spite of the fact that they were still fully functional and cosmetically nice. They went to landfill.

[admin]

I really enjoy both. I really appreciate the purity and the extreme quality of 2 channel music. At the same time, I think hometheater is fun. My wife doesn't have any interest or patience for listening to a full album with the lights dimmed. But when Wonder Women starts beating up the bad guys and the theme music starts playing, she will literally start clapping while we are watching the movie. Big low end, bullet sounds whizzing by from speaker to speaker,... just silly fun. No realism or refinement,... it's not the intention. But I like the fact that we get to do it together. When the movie is over and it's getting late, she retreats to the bedroom for sleep time, I stay and listen to the 2 channel setup for a few hours extra.

Hometheater is always going to sell way more units that 2 channel. TV's are getting really big and inexpensive. People can now replicate a movie theater experience in their living room with a very modest budget without the annoyance of other people's phones ringing in the middle of the movie and the $8 popcorn. Streaming video quality is now actually pretty good so even the content is on relative par with a theater experience.

There is room for both hobbies.

[AnotherJohnson]

Yes, there is certainly room.

Speaking of PV5s, look what just turned up on the Music Room inventory.

https://tmraudio.com/vintage/preamps/co ... -mm-phono/

[AnotherJohnson]

Here’s an 11.2.

https://tmraudio.com/components/home-th ... uetooth-2/

How much program material is available?

[admin]

Here’s an 11.2.

https://tmraudio.com/components/home-th ... uetooth-2/

How much program material is available?

Absolutely nothing. You can argue that Atmos can be accurately assigned to 11 speakers, but it's not encoded specifically to that. And the dual subs is just a single nonlocalized channel.

[AnotherJohnson]

Here’s an 11.2.

https://tmraudio.com/components/home-th ... uetooth-2/

How much program material is available?

Absolutely nothing. You can argue that Atmos can be accurately assigned to 11 speakers, but it's not encoded specifically to that. And the dual subs is just a single nonlocalized channel.

Yes, it looks like a lot of the “channels” are baked in out of the data of the actual channels. I suppose in a long room, it could make sense to avoid creation of a limited sweet spot.

My HT experiment room is definitely too small for a true HT experience. I could run an HT set up in parallel with my two channel in the current “listening room.” But I probably will leave the geography as it stands.

With my very dull and improbable HT components, it is clear that the sound has a 3D image, and that you are sitting in it. But it’s also clear that the things we seek in a first class two channel system aren’t there. There is a sense of plasticized realism, but no sense of reality. I think you would have to throw quite a bit of money at the HT to really wake it up. But this is true for two channel too.

[Joe Appierto]

11.2 Dolby Atmos seems to be a movie and not music set-up. There are hundreds of Atmos-encoded films available but how many are baked out of fewer channels I have no idea. I'd guess there is a mixture of specifically encoded 11.2 movies and older films that have been rejiggered to fit the format.

[AnotherJohnson]

Yes, all above 5.1 look like they don’t have much to do with plain ol’ music programs. Atmos looks like it’s on steroids.

The software tweaking is another playground. I wonder if human subjectively driven mixing ever goes beyond 5.1.

[admin]

For music DVD/Blu-rays, a lot of times they actually include a 2 channel PCM track as often this is superior in quality to the fancy surround track encoding (which is usually a lossy format to begin with).

[AnotherJohnson]

[AnotherJohnson]

Admin, and the rest of you already knew this.

But it appears that two channel programs do use L and R in the normal way.

So the idea of using the Sabrinas for L and R is only a waste when listening to the 5.1 audio track on video or special mix audio programs.

I’ve been playing further, hooking up an old Mini DV and VHS copying VCR, and an SACD player. These, plus Internet Radio, are all true two channel at most. They sound delightful through the Sonus Faber monitors.

This Denon AVR, as cheap as it was, is great for non obsessive listening. The manual says it will do 5 x 100 wpc. The speaker taps have adjustable impedance to be set to match the lowest impedance among the speakers.

The Sabrinas could be L and R. The Sonus Faber Center can stay there. The Sonus Faber monitors can become the surround L and R. And the PSB Alpha AVs can go back to the shelf.

I will have to run the Audyssey room correction/speaker set up program again, but that’s not a big deal.

Even though the room is really too small for a legitimate HT, his might turn out to be a second listening room for video editing and such. One of my retirement projects heretofore unrequited, is to deal with a lot of film, including 8 mm, supr 8, 16 mm, and VHS, mini DV, and SD card video, some dating back to the 1930’s. I’ve actually got video content of my great grandparents from “the old country.”

It’s already giving me an appreciation for inexpensive sources, interconnects, cables, and the like. It looks like the old definition of fun.

[AnotherJohnson]

FWIW, I’ve got projectors for 8, Super 8, and 16 mm.

FWIW #2, the AVR’s phono input is a legitimate MM phono preamp.

The AVR will control so many speakers and sources, it may tax the P12. I haven’t tried it yet. I’m still running a Niagara 1200 in that system.

[admin]

This Denon AVR, as cheap as it was, is great for non obsessive listening. The manual says it will do 5 x 100 wpc. The speaker taps have adjustable impedance to be set to match the lowest impedance among the speakers.

Be aware that in the audiophile world, these power ratings are pretty accurate/conservative but in the Hometheater realm they are typically exaggerated. That does not mean they won't be able to drive the speakers, just that I would not do direct comparisons to the output ratings of your ARC amp for example.

The AVR will control so many speakers and sources, it may tax the P12. I haven’t tried it yet. I’m still running a Niagara 1200 in that system.

I think the P12 will do fine with these loads (and probably overkill for this system). I would be surprised if it had any issues.

At the end of the day, I think the speakers in that system are not going to be the issue with any audible deficiencies. If anything, they are outclassing everything else in the chain (which includes the source material which will most likely be in a lossy format or the denon). These are good problems to have!

[AnotherJohnson]

Be aware that in the audiophile world, these power ratings are pretty accurate/conservative but in the Hometheater realm they are typically exaggerated. That does not mean they won't be able to drive the speakers, just that I would not do direct comparisons to the output ratings of your ARC amp for example.

Of course not. There is no danger of mistaking any of these AVRs for high end audio.

Nevertheless, historically Denon has been able to meet its continuous steady state specs. But JGH and AP won the argument that such specs do not extrapolate to the sound of music.

When you are listening to movies, there’s no real basis for comparison or evaluation other than whether or not you liked it.

[AnotherJohnson]

FWIW, this very inexpensive Denon AVR was made in Viet Nam.

[AnotherJohnson]

I had intended to use the Martin Logan BF210 subwoofer as part of the HT.

I really liked the BF210. It was an EXCELLENT match to extend the bass in my system with vertically biamped Krells driving Martin Logan Theos.

When I sold the Theos, I used it when I first bought Revel F228Bes. Later, after they’d broken in, the sub didn’t fit in, and so I sold it. But later still I bought another one to extend the bass of some stand mounted monitors.

I was never satisfied, so I went back to full range floor standers and sold the BF210 again.

As I’ve been playing with the 5.2 capable receiver, I’ve wondered what was missing by not running the sub track. I recently noticed that there was a used Revel B112 V2 in walnut on the used inventory of one of the guys I like to trade with. It is not as versatile as the ML BF 210, but it weighs 30 pounds less, making it more manageable.

We worked a trade and it arrived yesterday. From the specs, I don’t think it would be a good unit to extend bass in an audiophile system. But was a means of playing the sub track on movies with s 5.2 receiver, it is floating my boat.

It has had a huge impact on the sound track of the few movies (Blu Ray) I’ve tested. I was naiive to think that no sub wouldn’t be a big deal.

FWIW, it’s a 12” cone with a very long throw, driven by a 1000 Watt amplifier.

Its weight is low enough that I can manipulate it alone. (60s instead of 90s). The walnut matches my other Revel speakers perfectly. The AVR room correction software worked beautifully. It took about 15 minutes to do the 5.1 calibration.

I know there are many steps up from here. But I feel like my foray into HT has finally entered a new stage.

[AnotherJohnson]

My modest, low cost, undersized HT project has taken another step forward.

I had a workman here today to stub in some gas lines and run some 120V AC. Since he was under the house anyway, I had him run the subwoofer interconnect and the surround speaker wires under the floor. It’s a much nicer aesthetic compared to a mass of spaghetti across the floor.

I got rid of the 16 gauge too. Used 12 gauge. I’ve now got the speakers closer to their ideal positions as well.

Several people have heard it now, on Blu-Ray disks of Tolkien’s work, and Star Wars, Avatar, James Franco version of Wizard of Oz, etc. The consensus of these folks who are as uninformed about the video HT hobby as I am, is that “it’s actually like being in a theater.”

It’s not really … but it’s quite impressive for what it is.

I had wondered aloud about whether you could do HT in an 11.5x14 room.

I think the answer is YES if you don’t mind having a three seat capacity.