Surround Processor / Pre Amp / 3D Sound Field


A couple of years ago I purchased a Marantz AV8801 surround preamp but I was never happy with it. It hasn’t gotten much use and since then I haven't put too much effort and attention into surround sound. Sure it was able to decode the latest formats but the sound field was boring, lacked impact, and the 3D sound field it created was mediocre. I remember back in the days I had a Sony STR-DE series of receivers that had an enhance/exaggerate function where for each sound field, one could increase the effect of the field. This created excitement while watching movies and a huge dynamic range. I also remember even before this receiver when Dolby Digital was first coming out Yamaha had an external DD decoder DDP-1 to add this capability to their receivers. Well I still remember that the DDP-1 had the best 3D sound field that I have experienced. All 5 speakers were working with each other to precisely place the sound where it belongs and was simply not just noise coming from multiple speakers. It sounded truly 3Dish and the sound moved around in open air. I really miss those days.

I am not getting this with my Marantz in a 5.1 setup (I have no desire to goto Atmos at this time). There is nothing to enhance the 3D field to exaggerate the effect. It has been calibrated multiple times with it’s built in Audyssey. I wanted to know if there were any current surround preamps / processors that would provide a better 3d field or have this as a feature to adjust the effect?
audioman2015
I use a Bryston SP3 that I think is very good both for stereo and surround.  The front LR are passed through a Parasound JC 2 BP, but I think that's entirely unnecessary -- I had the JC 2 before the SP3, so I use it.

db
I would recommend Meridian, specifically the 861 processor. I've been using the 565 for a number of years with no complaints. Frankly, it still out performs the receiver market and the 861 performs better than the 565, with greater flexibility. Yes, they're older models, but Meridian got it right.

Side note: I recall Cambridge Audio making a pretty good surround receiver a few years back. Performed nicely as well as a receiver, but the Meridian processors are superior.

Calibration (that's for another thread) and room correction is essential, regardless of which you choose. I agree; when all speakers operate together, it makes for an amazing experience.


@audioman,

I think that based what you are describing, the issue has less to do with needing better DSP modes such as "3D" and more to do with one of the following: the class and output of your amplifiers, how you might have the processor set up, and/or the Audyssey room correction software that you are using. To start with, check to make sure that you have your channel levels, speaker types / distances and subwoofer crossover correctly set to ensure that your system is properly configured, and if that doesn't correct the issue then it's likely down to either your amplifiers or the Audyssey calibration software - have you tried turning it off to compare the before and after effects?

If the issue turns out to be with Audyssey, you'll need to either leave it off and just accept the way your speakers and room sound on their own or look at purchasing a new processor or AVR with a better room correction platform. While not a bad product by any means, the problem with Audyssey is that is uses a very flat frequency response curve, which despite popular belief is not the ideal model to utilize for the majority of room layouts and equipment configurations; it tends to be too soft on bass and too strong on treble, creating a very hollow and tinny sound that can be quite harsh at higher SPL levels. The other issue with Audyssey is that is only corrects frequency response and does nothing with time (impulse response) or phase, which are just as important, if not more so.

If you are comfortable increasing your budget beyond what you would have likely paid for the Marantz, there are two options on the market that offer superior room correction software: Anthem's ARC, which is excellent, and Dirac Live, which is easily the most advanced platform on the market right now and is currently offered by a handful of companies such as Arcam (full version on all current AVR's and processor) Emotiva (LE version on processor, which is a scaled-back version), DataSat, and Theta Digital (full version on processors, but way beyond the price range you are likely shopping in). Since preamp processors tend to be more expensive than AVR's, especially those mentioned above (with the exception of Emotiva), I'd recommend that you look at an AVR instead, which you can use as either a preamp processor with your existing amplifier setup or on it's own as a turn-key solution.

Let me know if you have any other questions of if there is anything else I can do to help and I'll be glad to assist in any way I can.

Take care,

David





@savdllc Isn’t the intended purpose of Audyssey’s very flat frequency response to tame the room’s frequency response so it’s also very flat? Is the room really being corrected or is the signal being modified so the in room response reads flat? What’s the advantage vs room treatment?

My point is its more optimal to remove room coloration than modify the signal. Particularly if you say a very flat frequency response is less than ideal due to "too soft of bass and strong on treble" etc. A flat response across the system reveals the subtlies of the recording without coloration from the room or equipment.

As for surround processors, you can buy one piece that does 4 things - to include what want it to do - pretty well, or you can buy a piece that's designed to do exactly what you want it to do very well; even then to varied degrees. IMO, that’s the comparison between AVR, prepro and dedicated processors.