I use both stereo and multi-channel. I wish that Channel Classics would use the rear speakers for rather more than just ambience. I find the "aggressive" mixes as used by Tacet for example to be very much more satisfying.
I am trying to recreate the ambience of the hall, so by making the mixes more aggressive, this would not be natural at all. Actually most feedback has been very positive from all sides concerning the use of rear speakers. Just like listening during a live concert, one is not conscious of the reflections of the hall, but these reflections coming from above, the sides, and the back are what makes the hall have good or back accoustics. this is what I am trying to create. If one is 'hearing' the rear speakers, then in my opinion, they are too loud. Only if one turns them off are you noticing that one is missing them. Again there is no true answer because everyone has their own tastes. My taste is based on my philosophy of having the natural sound. How we achieve that is for everyone for themselves to decide.
I use surround sound for everything - most stereo discs and even BBC Radio 3 sound very good in surround via Dolby prologic IIx or DTS Neopro 6, but the best of all is real surround on SACD or DVDa. Regards AL London
I Use both stereo and multichannel. I must say I prefer the mixes op Channel classics, just the ambiance. Otherwise you'll get, in my opinion, an unnatural sound. Just keep up the good work, and stay on SACD multichannel!
I only have two speakers, so I listen to stereo exculsively at home. When I visit friens I may try the multichannel option, but I'd rather spend my money to two good channels than to five mediocre ones. Of cource if I could afford it, 5 good channels are better then 2!
Your tasteful use of the rear channels for ambience sets a high standard for the rest of the industry to emulate.
Now that I have the equipment to handle 5.1 I am happy to listen in multichannel whenever possible. No doubt, however, that stereo SACD is a nice step up from standard CDs.
Keep up the outstanding musicianship and production values
I love the idea of using surround creatively, instead of conservatively. The stage surround comes to mind. I am, however, not happy about the ambient surround most records companies apply, because what's the point of spending a lot of money for extra pairs of loudspeakers just for an ambient that barely noticable in many recordings. I would love to have all my speakers work equally. That's the fun thing listening in surround to have sound coming from all around you. Unless, I'd better save my money and just listen to normal CDs in stereo. Well, most consumers are not extremely rich like some influential high end journalists who have plenty of money to spend for an extra pairs of loudspeakers to use just for a soft ambient surround sound who insisted on conservative approach of surround recording. That's boring.
I have a 6.1 system and much prefer multi-channel SACD to stereo SACD/CD. I think using the rears for ambience only is the correct approach for the majority of classical music. Dumping different bits of the orchestra into all the channels, like a lot of old quad LPs did, just doesn't work well in my opinion.
An alternate technique that I've heard used once only on SACD but to good effect is wrapping the orchestra around a few degrees beyond the front speakers, this can be achieved 'naturally' by actually placing the orchestra in a wide arc. The effectiveness of this approach would depend on the piece being recorded though. In general best to stick to your current approach, quality beats gimmicks on repeated listening.
In response to Jeremy. 3 decent fronts + 2 smaller/cheaper surrounds work very well for classical. Plenty of speaker manufacturers make smaller 'surround' speakers to match their bigger speakers anyway. Plus the centre channel allows you to widen the front speakers beyond the recommended 60 degrees without the 'hole in the middle' effect if you so wish. (I have my front 3 in an 80 degree arc and the soundstage is great)
I use multi-channel exclusively now and I vehemently disagree with the approach used by Tacet and endorsed by oxenholme.
The five channels should be used in a way that puts me some distance in the hall from the stage. I should never "hear" the rear speakers, just be aware that something wonderful is missing if I turn them off.
I vote for natural sound that one would hear in a concert hall!!!
Multichannel for discrete MC discs, stereo for stereo recordings. I like ambience mixes for Orchestra, but have a soft spot for the Tacet surround approach in chamber music (one player per speaker). Also there are pieces that are composed to use spacial impressions, e.g. where several groups are distributed in the room (often used in modern works since World War II). I would like to hear something like that from Channel.
stereo only.prefer classical and none of the already released works.The greatest percentage of sacd buyers are stereo so I would object to items NOT being released because they are not surround sound..
stereo only.prefer classical and none of the already released works.The greatest percentage of sacd buyers are stereo so I would object to items NOT being released because they are not surround sound..
Stereo - too much expense at present to add another power amp and three speakers. I've been very impressed by a few demonstrations of surround sound heard in the past year.
Please retain your natural philosophy with respect to the rear channels. I have both stereo and multichannel SACD capability. Listening in stereo only is to miss a dimension.
Ever since a "went" multichannel a few years ago, I much prefer listening in that format than stereo.Anything that helps make the recording more realistic should be used in my opinion.I don't mind a more aggresive use of the surrounds if the music calls for it,ie the recent Verdi requiem: otherwise ambience is more appropiate.
I will certainly want to record works that ask more of the full use of all Channels. In the meantime, as I have written before, there is no book one can open to say how it is suppose to be, but for me to get the full emotional impact of the music and all the harmonics which I am trying to capture, I like the discreet use of the rear speakers the best. Of course I could record as a 'gimmick' like a string quartet with the listener sitting in the middle. Though it is just that - a gimmick, which would tire very quickly.
Go with your instinct to record in a way that the disc delivers what a listener seated in a concert hall would hear. Sure if the composer called for it (Verdi Requiem etc.) then we want some "action" from the rear speakers. But that is exactly what the concert goer would have heard! no gimmicks!!!
Thanks for the wonderful work you have done so far!
I have 2 4:0 setup with B&W 804S front speakers and Acoustic Energy rear speakers. I am not in favour of using a centre speaker for music since it does not help to create depth in the reproduced sound. It also does not fit in my living room setup.
The most important thing for me is a recreation of the atmosphere in a good concert hall. I know this is not completely possible in a normal living room since early reflections determine the perceived size of the room and unless you make the room completely dead, the early reflections of the living room will always determine the perceived size.
Another thing that is of prime imporance for me is that when I am in a concert hall I can hear where the sound is coming from. So I want to hear a cello to stand on one place and not wandering around as function of the note played (as is the case with typical A-B microphone recordings). I also want to hear a piano which is located somewhere and does not fill the complete room between the loudspeakers. Such an effect is completely unnatural and never happens in a good concert hall, so it should also not happen at home. Being an amateur recording technician in my free time, I personally prefer ORTF , crossed 8's or similar recording techniques or a Jecklin disc since in my experience only these types of recordings can combine a good imaging with sufficient spaciousness.
Channel Classics say they don't use the subwoofer channel for SACD. I understand their comment about artificial movie effects etc. BUT, more often than not, surround systems has 4 to 5 small speakers with most bass comng from the sub. Surely your SACD's won't sound good here.
About .1 channel : in case of small speakers with subwoofer present, low freqs must be redirected by users hardware "bass management", not in the studio with fixed crossover setting.
I am totally impressed with quality of Channel Classics recordings, but i must admit about rear channels : they are simply unhearable and can be turned off without any regrets. Most of the imaging, stage information comes from fronts. Maximum level stereo recordings.
I do not agree with your comments about being able to turn off the surround channels without regret. During the final mixing, I spend hours turning on and off the surrounds until I get the level that I feel is correct in adding the ambience of the hall. So my mix means that at home one does not have to change any levels on the speakers. I might be on the conservative side in that I don't want the surrounds to feel like they are being used as a gimmick, but I don’t feel that they have been too soft that their added value is not heard. What I cannot control is the settings that people use in their homes. Not that your settings would be changed in this case, but I have been in houses (and audio showrooms, ) where people had the levels of the surrounds already less as a standard setting without even knowing it. A question of taste.
In response to the correspondent who thinks that people with subwoofers and small speakers won't be able to hear channel (and other labels) efforts properly because of no lfe channel, those folks only have to hook the subwoofer up as part of the front left and right channels like in a cd based stereo system and the bass will be there for them as it should. The .1 channel is completely unnecessary!
I like Surround sound. I think Channel Classics should find a suitable time to release pure SACD----dual disc----with out CD layer.Then we can have about 160min instead 80 only!
I realize that you would like to have double the amount of music on the disc, but would you be willing to pay double the amount. Because what you are asking is doubling the time to record which involves musicians, hall rental, production costs etc. Our margin is already been halved because of the cost of pressing SACD so adding more music would not be in our best interest if we want to stay in business!
I think you've got the balance spot on! Thank you. I don't want to be able to "hear" the rear channels, but they do add a sense of spaciousness to the listening experience, opening out the sound, and curiously, in my set-up at least, giving a greater bass response, even though the rears are small in comparison to the main speakers. So, yes, I prefer the multichannel option, though stereo is fine too. I think your discs are some of the best recorded I have in my collection. Buxtehude next! Keep up the excellent work.
Nice site design. Okay, I need your help. So, I wanna make online-shop, and I am looking for site template. Can you advice some online catalog or other resource where I can find many site templates?
It would be better if it will be free:) I think many of us have personal sites, do you design it yourself?
To those who want the total surround experience I suggest multi-channel mixes like Goodbye Yellow Brick Road or Tommy. But for Classical music I want that realistic 10th row seat--I don't want to sit in the middle of the orchestra! I greatly appreciate your care in achieving concert hall ambiance with the rear speakers. From your numerous accolades for sound it obviously pays off.
As a former surround enthusiast nowadays I play only stereo.It seems to me that surround enthusiasts are in the minority and are getting a better deal from most record companies.There are no doubt many stereo only recordings that could be released and stereo only listeners are missing out..probably big time... There are a number of processes that can be used to create the ambience rear channels.So why restrict all releases to genuine multi channel discs.?
I prefer SACD in multichannel. I think the quality leap is bigger from sacd stereo to multi than from cd to sacd stero. But a multichannel setup for listening properly to sacd is expensive and needs carefully setting, especially the position/delay of the center channel, which can ruin stage focus if badly set, if only for some 10 cm... I do like channel classics use of sacd, and don't like to hear "recreations" of rear sound. Also prefer full dsd recordings. There has been a record though where I liked a different use of rear channels: it was a recording from biber in harmonia mundi, where there were chorus in the back and front, because the performance was in a large church or cathedral, and there were supposed to be 4 chorus, one at each corner of the cathedral for the event biber wrote that work for. BTW, your microphones and amps seem excellent and your recordings are among the clearer ones I've heard on sacd. A tip for stero fans: how about downloads in WMA at 24/96 at mastertape quality? I've tried some and the result is amazing.
I would also love to do a recording where the composer wanted the use of all multichannel speakers to be used as main speakers instead of just the ambience of the hall. Actually in one of my records just coming out on my Channel of China series. One of the pieces is with 20 pipa players in a circle. This works great because of the hard attack of the instruments. We will be releasing this the end of April. I know about Linn Records downloading in 24/96. They are asking a good deal of money and of course don't forget the time it takes to download. Why not just by the real thing in multichannel SACD!
I listen stereo, and enjoy it very much. Related, I think Channel Classic's recording of Membra Jesu Nostri (24006) is the most beautifully recorded SACD I own. Bravo!
If the disc is multichannel then I play it multichannel. Nearly all my purchasing is now of multichannel classical recordings. I do have a huge archive of CD and LP which is, of course, stereo (except when it is mono!)
Hi - I have already sent a detailed email to Jared about this, but has anyone noticed the pressing fault that I have on my copy of the Beethoven cello sonatas with Wispelwey? Intermittent (but always in the same places) buz/hum in the right channel. It is present in all three layers and makes the CDs un-litenable. And no, it i NOT in my syste, but definately on the recording: checked this first!
William, Sorry for the delay. the office has been closed and I had a taken my vacation during this period.
The Beethoven production has had some interesting problems that we have not been able to solve. We used a prototype AD converter for this recording and it would appear that there are a small number of players that have had problems with this. There is also a man in Korea who said he was getting a kind of DC offset - noise out of his tweeters which was intermittent. DC offset is low frequency so how this can come out of his tweeters is a real puzzle. We did tests here and also at the factory and could not reproduce this. The maker of the converter swears that there should not be a compatibility problem with his converters with the systems developed for editing and mastering We have sold over 12 thousand of this production with 3 people having contacted us about the pressing. You are number 4. Very frustrating.
Thanks for the reply. Very mystifying! I have sent my CD back as defective and ordered another. I will let you know if there is a problem with the replacement: hope not as this is a GREAT recording!
Well, I just got copy 2 of the Beethoven, and distressingly the problem is exactly the same: a low level buzz in the right channel on all layers. The player is a Marantz SA8260, a VERY mainstream player, so it is hugely distressing that this wonderful recording was somehow ruined for some of us! You say there was some problem with converters for this recording. Is there any chance this will get re-pressed or that I can get hold of a burned pressing from you that might actually be listenable? As it turns out the first copy I sent back was never received by the shipper, so I have now payed for two defective copies of what seems to be a defective CD. I was considering buying more Channel Classics CDs, but on this evidence how can I take the resk? They are expensive, and you should hear this buzz!! Distressing to say the least. Again- this is the ONLY disc in my entir collection - of 1500 cds - that has this problem!
Willliam, This is the only recording in which I used this converter. All the other 80 recordings do not have this problem. I wanted to re- do the project again but unfortunately there was a part of the project that was erased so that I cannot re-edit it. Please contact me on our email at info@channel so that we can come up with a solution for you.
that there are no sacd players anymore is just not true. There are less players but still enough choice. Seems however that a good number of players are just stereo only. For multichannel there playing field is limited to Sony, Linn, Marantz. I just bought a Sony XE 1200 ES. Price reasonable, userfrienly and the sound is what I expected for the price. There are a number of high end players available but indeed the price is high. I also see a good deal of small labels bringing out sacd releases so with over 5000 releases there is still a good amount coming out. (though not all recorded in DSD)
Only about 2% of my collection, about 20 discs are SACDs - but it is growing. As of recently, I can listen to the multichannel version and I certainly prefer it over stereo. Please keep up the great work!
channel classics say not many sacd players. NOT TRUE! There are many new univesal dvd players from pioneer, marantz, denon.cambridge,onkyo,oppo. integra,krell.linn,arcam, etc etc.at all price levels many are the equal of the best cd-sacd combos/ after all the sacd dsd format is a species of dvd.and some of the above matching av processors convert to analogue directly although this is somewhat academic.
could you please consider multi channel hi res dohnloads? FLAC 24bit 96000hz6 channels would be compatible with both Mac and PC and still download a lot faster than using mail order! The world seems to moving this way.
Because I really love the highly detailed sound of the SACD albuns, with the same preamp + poweramp + spakers budget, I prefer to connect my SCD-XE597 to a higuer quality stereo sistem (passive stereo preamp, pair of good B&W speakers...) than a mandatorily lower quality mutichanel setup (with lower resolution sound capable). Antonio.
Both, but with a preference for multichannel (if it is a m-ch disc, I'm not letting my system create fake m-ch). Channel m-ch SACDs are a feast for the ear, both artistically and technically. Thanks!
56 Comments:
I use both stereo and multi-channel. I wish that Channel Classics would use the rear speakers for rather more than just ambience. I find the "aggressive" mixes as used by Tacet for example to be very much more satisfying.
6/11/2005 4:25 PM
I am trying to recreate the ambience of the hall, so by making the mixes more aggressive, this would not be natural at all. Actually most feedback has been very positive from all sides concerning the use of rear speakers.
Just like listening during a live concert, one is not conscious of the reflections of the hall, but these reflections coming from above, the sides, and the back are what makes the hall have good or back accoustics. this is what I am trying to create. If one is 'hearing' the rear speakers, then in my opinion, they are too loud. Only if one turns them off are you noticing that one is missing them.
Again there is no true answer because everyone has their own tastes. My taste is based on my philosophy of having the natural sound. How we achieve that is for everyone for themselves to decide.
7/08/2005 10:55 PM
I use surround sound for everything - most stereo discs and even BBC Radio 3 sound very good in surround via Dolby prologic IIx or DTS Neopro 6, but the best of all is real surround on SACD or DVDa. Regards AL London
7/20/2005 10:27 AM
I Use both stereo and multichannel. I must say I prefer the mixes op Channel classics, just the ambiance. Otherwise you'll get, in my opinion, an unnatural sound. Just keep up the good work, and stay on SACD multichannel!
8/18/2005 10:08 AM
I prefer stereo....I do not have the money to build a truly high end surround susyem, though when finances allow, I will build a serious surround...
Until then, stereo is just fine!!!
8/25/2005 3:34 AM
I only have two speakers, so I listen to stereo exculsively at home. When I visit friens I may try the multichannel option, but I'd rather spend my money to two good channels than to five mediocre ones. Of cource if I could afford it, 5 good channels are better then 2!
8/26/2005 12:42 PM
I use mainly multi channel thorugh a Sony all - in - one home cinema system. Please keep recording in SACD!
10/07/2005 9:04 PM
Your tasteful use of the rear channels for ambience sets a high standard for the rest of the industry to emulate.
Now that I have the equipment to handle 5.1 I am happy to listen in multichannel whenever possible. No doubt, however, that stereo SACD is a nice step up from standard CDs.
Keep up the outstanding musicianship and production values
10/16/2005 9:55 PM
Don't believe the trade press -- you don't need expensive rear speakers to go multichannel. Modest minimonitors are more than sufficient.
10/16/2005 9:57 PM
I love the idea of using surround creatively, instead of conservatively. The stage surround comes to mind. I am, however, not happy about the ambient surround most records companies apply, because what's the point of spending a lot of money for extra pairs of loudspeakers just for an ambient that barely noticable in many recordings. I would love to have all my speakers work equally. That's the fun thing listening in surround to have sound coming from all around you. Unless, I'd better save my money and just listen to normal CDs in stereo. Well, most consumers are not extremely rich like some influential high end journalists who have plenty of money to spend for an extra pairs of loudspeakers to use just for a soft ambient surround sound who insisted on conservative approach of surround recording. That's boring.
12/11/2005 9:30 PM
I have a 6.1 system and much prefer multi-channel SACD to stereo SACD/CD. I think using the rears for ambience only is the correct approach for the majority of classical music. Dumping different bits of the orchestra into all the channels, like a lot of old quad LPs did, just doesn't work well in my opinion.
An alternate technique that I've heard used once only on SACD but to good effect is wrapping the orchestra around a few degrees beyond the front speakers, this can be achieved 'naturally' by actually placing the orchestra in a wide arc. The effectiveness of this approach would depend on the piece being recorded though. In general best to stick to your current approach, quality beats gimmicks on repeated listening.
In response to Jeremy. 3 decent fronts + 2 smaller/cheaper surrounds work very well for classical. Plenty of speaker manufacturers make smaller 'surround' speakers to match their bigger speakers anyway. Plus the centre channel allows you to widen the front speakers beyond the recommended 60 degrees without the 'hole in the middle' effect if you so wish. (I have my front 3 in an 80 degree arc and the soundstage is great)
1/14/2006 5:32 AM
I use multi-channel exclusively now and I vehemently disagree with the approach used by Tacet and endorsed by oxenholme.
The five channels should be used in a way that puts me some distance in the hall from the stage. I should never "hear" the rear speakers, just be aware that something wonderful is missing if I turn them off.
I vote for natural sound that one would hear in a concert hall!!!
2/08/2006 2:41 AM
Multi channel, and am happy with non-aggressive mixes for rear channels. Prefer a natural sound.
2/13/2006 11:39 PM
Multichannel for discrete MC discs, stereo for stereo recordings. I like ambience mixes for Orchestra, but have a soft spot for the Tacet surround approach in chamber music (one player per speaker). Also there are pieces that are composed to use spacial impressions, e.g. where several groups are distributed in the room (often used in modern works since World War II). I would like to hear something like that from Channel.
2/15/2006 9:36 AM
Multichannel as often as possible!
2/15/2006 3:38 PM
stereo only.prefer classical and none of the already released works.The greatest percentage of sacd buyers are stereo so I would object to items NOT being released because they are not surround sound..
2/15/2006 3:45 PM
stereo only.prefer classical and none of the already released works.The greatest percentage of sacd buyers are stereo so I would object to items NOT being released because they are not surround sound..
2/15/2006 3:45 PM
I have multichannel, but am happy to have quality two-channel titles on super audio with its higher resolution.
2/15/2006 3:57 PM
Please consider releasing Dvorak Symphonies 6 & 7 and any of the earlier symphonies too.
Flyingdutchman
2/15/2006 7:14 PM
Oh and both stereo and multichannel are used for me. Prefer multichannel.
2/15/2006 7:16 PM
Multichannel, with discrete rears.
2/15/2006 9:34 PM
Stereo - too much expense at present to add another power amp and three speakers. I've been very impressed by a few demonstrations of surround sound heard in the past year.
2/15/2006 11:02 PM
Please retain your natural philosophy with respect to the rear channels.
I have both stereo and multichannel SACD capability. Listening in stereo only is to miss a dimension.
2/16/2006 5:49 AM
Good stereo has been good enough for my two ears for the last 50 years. If I wish to totally immerse myself, I put on earphones.
2/16/2006 10:45 PM
Ever since a "went" multichannel a few years ago, I much prefer listening in that format than stereo.Anything that helps make the recording more realistic should be used in my opinion.I don't mind a more aggresive use of the surrounds if the music calls for it,ie the recent Verdi requiem: otherwise ambience is more appropiate.
2/17/2006 3:07 AM
I will certainly want to record works that ask more of the full use of all Channels. In the meantime, as I have written before, there is no book one can open to say how it is suppose to be, but for me to get the full emotional impact of the music and all the harmonics which I am trying to capture, I like the discreet use of the rear speakers the best. Of course I could record as a 'gimmick' like a string quartet with the listener sitting in the middle. Though it is just that - a gimmick, which would tire very quickly.
2/20/2006 8:50 PM
Go with your instinct to record in a way that the disc delivers what a listener seated in a concert hall would hear. Sure if the composer called for it (Verdi Requiem etc.) then we want some "action" from the rear speakers. But that is exactly what the concert goer would have heard! no gimmicks!!!
Thanks for the wonderful work you have done so far!
2/25/2006 1:00 AM
I have 2 4:0 setup with B&W 804S front speakers and Acoustic Energy rear speakers. I am not in favour of using a centre speaker for music since it does not help to create depth in the reproduced sound. It also does not fit in my living room setup.
The most important thing for me is a recreation of the atmosphere in a good concert hall. I know this is not completely possible in a normal living room since early reflections determine the perceived size of the room and unless you make the room completely dead, the early reflections of the living room will always determine the perceived size.
Another thing that is of prime imporance for me is that when I am in a concert hall I can hear where the sound is coming from. So I want to hear a cello to stand on one place and not wandering around as function of the note played (as is the case with typical A-B microphone recordings). I also want to hear a piano which is located somewhere and does not fill the complete room between the loudspeakers. Such an effect is completely unnatural and never happens in a good concert hall, so it should also not happen at home. Being an amateur recording technician in my free time, I personally prefer ORTF , crossed 8's or similar recording techniques or a Jecklin disc since in my experience only these types of recordings can combine a good imaging with sufficient spaciousness.
4/06/2006 11:55 AM
Channel Classics say they don't use the subwoofer channel for SACD. I understand their comment about artificial movie effects etc.
BUT, more often than not, surround systems has 4 to 5 small speakers with most bass comng from the sub.
Surely your SACD's won't sound good here.
6/14/2006 3:21 PM
About .1 channel : in case of small speakers with subwoofer present, low freqs must be redirected by users hardware "bass management", not in the studio with fixed crossover setting.
6/26/2006 1:20 PM
I am totally impressed with quality of Channel Classics recordings, but i must admit about rear channels : they are simply unhearable and can be turned off without any regrets. Most of the imaging, stage information comes from fronts. Maximum level stereo recordings.
6/26/2006 2:11 PM
I do not agree with your comments about being able to turn off the surround channels without regret. During the final mixing, I spend hours turning on and off the surrounds until I get the level that I feel is correct in adding the ambience of the hall. So my mix means that at home one does not have to change any levels on the speakers. I might be on the conservative side in that I don't want the surrounds to feel like they are being used as a gimmick, but I don’t feel that they have been too soft that their added value is not heard. What I cannot control is the settings that people use in their homes. Not that your settings would be changed in this case, but I have been in houses (and audio showrooms, ) where people had the levels of the surrounds already less as a standard setting without even knowing it. A question of taste.
6/27/2006 8:13 PM
In response to the correspondent who thinks that people with subwoofers and small speakers won't be able to hear channel (and other labels) efforts properly because of no lfe channel, those folks only have to hook the subwoofer up as part of the front left and right channels like in a cd based stereo system and the bass will be there for them as it should. The .1 channel is completely unnecessary!
8/15/2006 1:52 AM
I like Surround sound. I think Channel Classics should find a suitable time to release pure SACD----dual disc----with out CD layer.Then we can have about 160min instead 80 only!
10/06/2006 11:56 AM
I realize that you would like to have double the amount of music on the disc, but would you be willing to pay double the amount. Because what you are asking is doubling the time to record which involves musicians, hall rental, production costs etc.
Our margin is already been halved because of the cost of pressing SACD so adding more music would not be in our best interest if we want to stay in business!
10/06/2006 8:11 PM
I think you've got the balance spot on! Thank you. I don't want to be able to "hear" the rear channels, but they do add a sense of spaciousness to the listening experience, opening out the sound, and curiously, in my set-up at least, giving a greater bass response, even though the rears are small in comparison to the main speakers.
So, yes, I prefer the multichannel option, though stereo is fine too. I think your discs are some of the best recorded I have in my collection. Buxtehude next! Keep up the excellent work.
10/29/2006 10:48 PM
Hi.
Nice site design. Okay, I need your help.
So, I wanna make online-shop, and I am looking for site template.
Can you advice some online catalog or other resource where I can find many site templates?
It would be better if it will be free:)
I think many of us have personal sites, do you design it yourself?
Regards, Bill.
1/09/2007 10:08 AM
To those who want the total surround experience I suggest multi-channel mixes like Goodbye Yellow Brick Road or Tommy. But for Classical music I want that realistic 10th row seat--I don't want to sit in the middle of the orchestra! I greatly appreciate your care in achieving concert hall ambiance with the rear speakers. From your numerous accolades for sound it obviously pays off.
2/28/2007 11:12 PM
As a former surround enthusiast nowadays I play only stereo.It seems to me that surround enthusiasts are in the minority and are getting a better deal from most record companies.There are no doubt many stereo only recordings that could be released and stereo only listeners are missing out..probably big time...
There are a number of processes that can be used to create the ambience rear channels.So why restrict all releases to genuine multi channel discs.?
3/10/2007 10:20 AM
I prefer SACD in multichannel. I think the quality leap is bigger from sacd stereo to multi than from cd to sacd stero. But a multichannel setup for listening properly to sacd is expensive and needs carefully setting, especially the position/delay of the center channel, which can ruin stage focus if badly set, if only for some 10 cm...
I do like channel classics use of sacd, and don't like to hear "recreations" of rear sound. Also prefer full dsd recordings.
There has been a record though where I liked a different use of rear channels: it was a recording from biber in harmonia mundi, where there were chorus in the back and front, because the performance was in a large church or cathedral, and there were supposed to be 4 chorus, one at each corner of the cathedral for the event biber wrote that work for.
BTW, your microphones and amps seem excellent and your recordings are among the clearer ones I've heard on sacd.
A tip for stero fans: how about downloads in WMA at 24/96 at mastertape quality? I've tried some and the result is amazing.
3/16/2007 1:49 AM
I would also love to do a recording where the composer wanted the use of all multichannel speakers to be used as main speakers instead of just the ambience of the hall.
Actually in one of my records just coming out on my Channel of China series. One of the pieces is with 20 pipa players in a circle. This works great because of the hard attack of the instruments. We will be releasing this the end of April.
I know about Linn Records downloading in 24/96. They are asking a good deal of money and of course don't forget the time it takes to download. Why not just by the real thing in multichannel SACD!
3/22/2007 12:37 PM
I listen stereo, and enjoy it very much. Related, I think Channel Classic's recording of Membra Jesu Nostri (24006) is the most beautifully recorded SACD I own. Bravo!
3/30/2007 6:04 PM
If the disc is multichannel then I play it multichannel. Nearly all my purchasing is now of multichannel classical recordings. I do have a huge archive of CD and LP which is, of course, stereo (except when it is mono!)
6/01/2007 5:53 PM
Hi - I have already sent a detailed email to Jared about this, but has anyone noticed the pressing fault that I have on my copy of the Beethoven cello sonatas with Wispelwey? Intermittent (but always in the same places) buz/hum in the right channel. It is present in all three layers and makes the CDs un-litenable. And no, it i NOT in my syste, but definately on the recording: checked this first!
7/24/2007 11:32 PM
Hello!! Anyone home? All other questions seem to hve been answered within a week? Why no response to my personal email or this forum post??
7/31/2007 11:48 PM
William,
Sorry for the delay. the office has been closed and I had a taken my vacation during this period.
The Beethoven production has had some interesting problems that we have not been able to solve. We used a prototype AD converter for this recording and it would appear that there are a small number of players that have had problems with this.
There is also a man in Korea who said he was getting a kind of DC offset - noise out of his tweeters which was intermittent. DC offset is low frequency so how this can come out of his tweeters is a real puzzle.
We did tests here and also at the factory and could not reproduce this. The maker of the converter swears that there should not be a compatibility problem with his converters with the systems developed for editing and mastering
We have sold over 12 thousand of this production with 3 people having contacted us about the pressing. You are number 4.
Very frustrating.
8/13/2007 7:54 AM
Thanks for the reply. Very mystifying! I have sent my CD back as defective and ordered another. I will let you know if there is a problem with the replacement: hope not as this is a GREAT recording!
8/16/2007 4:35 PM
Well, I just got copy 2 of the Beethoven, and distressingly the problem is exactly the same: a low level buzz in the right channel on all layers. The player is a Marantz SA8260, a VERY mainstream player, so it is hugely distressing that this wonderful recording was somehow ruined for some of us! You say there was some problem with converters for this recording. Is there any chance this will get re-pressed or that I can get hold of a burned pressing from you that might actually be listenable? As it turns out the first copy I sent back was never received by the shipper, so I have now payed for two defective copies of what seems to be a defective CD.
I was considering buying more Channel Classics CDs, but on this evidence how can I take the resk? They are expensive, and you should hear this buzz!! Distressing to say the least. Again- this is the ONLY disc in my entir collection - of 1500 cds - that has this problem!
8/23/2007 8:57 PM
Willliam,
This is the only recording in which I used this converter. All the other 80 recordings do not have this problem. I wanted to re- do the project again but unfortunately there was a part of the project that was erased so that I cannot re-edit it.
Please contact me on our email at info@channel so that we can come up with a solution for you.
8/23/2007 9:33 PM
The best of a SACD is in multi-channel way !
1/16/2008 7:43 PM
It looks like SACD players have been discontinued, does Channel have plans to use an alternative multichannel system? Our players won't last forever.
4/02/2008 2:00 PM
that there are no sacd players anymore is just not true.
There are less players but still enough choice. Seems however that a good number of players are just stereo only.
For multichannel there playing field is limited to Sony, Linn, Marantz.
I just bought a Sony XE 1200 ES. Price reasonable, userfrienly and the sound is what I expected for the price.
There are a number of high end players available but indeed the price is high.
I also see a good deal of small labels bringing out sacd releases so with over 5000 releases there is still a good amount coming out. (though not all recorded in DSD)
4/05/2008 9:03 PM
Only about 2% of my collection, about 20 discs are SACDs - but it is growing. As of recently, I can listen to the multichannel version and I certainly prefer it over stereo. Please keep up the great work!
4/09/2008 3:47 PM
channel classics say not many sacd players.
NOT TRUE!
There are many new univesal dvd players from
pioneer, marantz, denon.cambridge,onkyo,oppo.
integra,krell.linn,arcam, etc etc.at all price levels
many are the equal of the best cd-sacd combos/
after all the sacd dsd format is a species of dvd.and some of the above matching av processors convert to analogue directly although this is somewhat academic.
could you please consider multi channel hi res dohnloads? FLAC 24bit 96000hz6 channels would be compatible with both Mac and PC and still download a lot faster than using mail order!
The world seems to moving this way.
6/01/2008 4:03 PM
Because I really love the highly detailed sound of the SACD albuns, with the same preamp + poweramp + spakers budget, I prefer to connect my SCD-XE597 to a higuer quality stereo sistem (passive stereo preamp, pair of good B&W speakers...) than a mandatorily lower quality mutichanel setup (with lower resolution sound capable).
Antonio.
6/15/2008 7:32 PM
Both, but with a preference for multichannel (if it is a m-ch disc, I'm not letting my system create fake m-ch). Channel m-ch SACDs are a feast for the ear, both artistically and technically. Thanks!
6/16/2008 10:00 AM
Post a Comment
<< Home