Is your local audio / HiFi dealers stuck in 2-channel music?

[ar surround]

I thought that you always maintained that Dolby Surround didn't produce "cogging". I do realise that the movie was likely discrete, you really should be a proponent of Ambisonics then. It can place images between speakers better than other methods. Myself I don't see "cogging" as a problem. Ambisonics or some elements of it could/should be used in the mixing of discrete surround!

I have never heard the term "cogging" in the world of audio. I looked up many pages of "cogging" in audio and all I seem to read is motor driven and when in the world of audio, only relates to a turntable, start up with the motor.

I am curious, how do you define "cogging" when listening to a surround system? I have no experience to debate, just curious as to your definition vs what I have read.

Like Marpow, I have absolutely no idea what you are talking about regarding the term “clogging.” Sounds like “judder” on brakes.

 

[cbmmm3]

Like Marpow, I have absolutely no idea what you are talking about regarding the term “clogging.” Sounds like “judder” on brakes.

This is a post from last year by another QQ member ---

Can you explain "cogging"

When multiple speakers are placed to the sides of the listener, the following happens.

With two speakers on the same side of the listener, each speaker sends audio to both the left ear and the right ear.

The human hearing system creates a separate image location for each speaker. Unlike image fusion when a sound is
panned between speakers on opposite sides of the head, either front or back, the two side images never fuse.

So when a sound is panned from (e.g.) left back to left front, the image that is louder becomes the heard position of the
sound. The other image is perceived to be a reflection. So as the sound is smoothly panned from LB to LF, the perceived
image suddenly jumps (or cogs) from one speaker to the other.

You have to turn your head to hear the smooth pan correctly. Sitting between the back speakers also reduces the effect.

With 7.1, the cogging jump is smaller, but it happens twice once from LB to LS and again from LS to LF.

Some matrix systems also cog.

Dolby Surround and the Pro-Logic versions (when set up properly) do not cog. The delay provides the missing location
information coming from the other side.

SQ has reduced cogging due to the quadrature phases in the diagonally opposite speakers.

QS through the QS decoder has reduced cogging for the same reason. But QS played through an EV decoder cogs.

Some people on this forum say they do not hear the cogging. Maybe they found a way to trick their ears into properly
integrating the two images from the side. But I can't get rid of the effect.

I am designing a system with added delay speakers to try to remove the cogging.

 

[marpow]

This is a post from last year by another QQ member ---



When multiple speakers are placed to the sides of the listener, the following happens.

With two speakers on the same side of the listener, each speaker sends audio to both the left ear and the right ear.

The human hearing system creates a separate image location for each speaker. Unlike image fusion when a sound is
panned between speakers on opposite sides of the head, either front or back, the two side images never fuse.

So when a sound is panned from (e.g.) left back to left front, the image that is louder becomes the heard position of the
sound. The other image is perceived to be a reflection. So as the sound is smoothly panned from LB to LF, the perceived
image suddenly jumps (or cogs) from one speaker to the other.

You have to turn your head to hear the smooth pan correctly. Sitting between the back speakers also reduces the effect.

With 7.1, the cogging jump is smaller, but it happens twice once from LB to LS and again from LS to LF.

Some matrix systems also cog.

Dolby Surround and the Pro-Logic versions (when set up properly) do not cog. The delay provides the missing location
information coming from the other side.

SQ has reduced cogging due to the quadrature phases in the diagonally opposite speakers.

QS through the QS decoder has reduced cogging for the same reason. But QS played through an EV decoder cogs.

Some people on this forum say they do not hear the cogging. Maybe they found a way to trick their ears into properly
integrating the two images from the side. But I can't get rid of the effect.

I am designing a system with added delay speakers to try to remove the cogging.

Wow Rickey, glad I am one of the ones that doesn't hear cogging, in fact I am going to stop reading about cogging, knowing less is knowing more, right?

 

[cbmmm3]

Wow Rickey, glad I am one of the ones that doesn't hear cogging, in fact I am going to stop reading about cogging, knowing less is knowing more, right?

absolutely Mark --would hate to have you be a cog in the machine

 

[WozzaDog]

Interesting. Very interesting.

So what Rickey has bout up here is what I know as convergence. However convergence is the scientific term for a stereoscopic point of two eyes focused on a single point, accommodation being able to focus on two separate points of varying distances, but for the ears the science is different.

My system has no “cogging” on the front soundstage or rears, but from rear to front it’s mild as I’ve used dipole speskers since the 90s and now usd Polk Audios LSIM 702 fix side speskers firing in different directions to prevent “cogging” I also have Polk LS800 which also have drivers facing outwards for reflections to prevent “cogging”.

But this comes back to the question I originally posted and the salesmen asking how is multi channel better.

To start making the speakers disappear with an overlapping soundstage is key. And if anyone fhoikc be able to do that it’s resellers in their treated rooms. Bug treating a room for one speaker may not be the same other models of speakers. And sone of the rooms were too small for surround, they really needed to more to new facilities or renovate to bigger and less rooms

 

[LuvMyQuad]

Wow Rickey, glad I am one of the ones that doesn't hear cogging, in fact I am going to stop reading about cogging, knowing less is knowing more, right?

I guess it's there when I listen, but I can't say I find it objectionable. There's not a lot that dynamically pans like that (like moving sounds). I do hear side oriented soundstages. But they are seldom dead between the LF/LR or RF/RR pairs. It kind of images like a wide U.

 

[ar surround]

OK, OK, I claimed not to know what "cogging" is, yet I replied three times to the "Cogging" Discussion thread.

https://www.quadraphonicquad.com/forums/threads/cogging-discussion.32425/
(Make that four times as I'm about to post yet again.)

 

[mandrix]

I shall endeavor to never purposefully read any post with the term "cogging" in it ever again.

 

[mblindsey]

I can’t speak for the local HiFI hardware dealers in my area (Kansas City metro), but I can say the local record stores are stuck in stereo IMO. My favorite store has some CDs, 10-12 R2R tapes (last I looked), but had no quad section … until recently. Apparently, me and 1-2 strangers have been asking for quad vinyl and it now has its own small (and hopefully growing) section. I’ll call that a “win” and tangentially related to this thread. Keep asking for what you want and smart small business folks just might deliver where they can. Cheers!

 

[barfle]

I can’t speak for the local HiFI hardware dealers in my area (Kansas City metro), but I can say the local record stores are stuck in stereo IMO. My favorite store has some CDs, 10-12 R2R tapes (last I looked), but had no quad section … until recently. Apparently, me and 1-2 strangers have been asking for quad vinyl and it now has its own small (and hopefully growing) section. I’ll call that a “win” and tangentially related to this thread. Keep asking for what you want and smart small business folks just might deliver where they can. Cheers!

TBH, I don’t recall ANY record store having a separate quad section, whether recently or in the times when it was being pushed by the record companies. At a recent trip to our fairly small Boise record show, I asked pretty much every booth if they had quads, and the ones that did pulled records out of the other stacks. Even Rasputin’s (the most incredible record store since Wallach’s Music City) in Berkeley had their quads mixed in with the mono and stereo.

 

[quadsearcher]

A local big used record/book store had a quad LP section, left over from the way the original owners filed records. When new owners took over I thought it was great they were still there and slowly bought one, then another quad record. I wanted to go through them again to get some samplers that were priced low enough to take a chance on them. Where's the quad section? "Oh we filed them in with all the other A-Z pop records".
They don't get it. The same place created a section for "Hair Metal". I get what that is, and it is definitely not Thin Lizzy, which I found there.

 

[Sonik Wiz]

I can’t speak for the local HiFI hardware dealers in my area (Kansas City metro), but I can say the local record stores are stuck in stereo IMO. My favorite store has some CDs, 10-12 R2R tapes (last I looked), but had no quad section … until recently. Apparently, me and 1-2 strangers have been asking for quad vinyl and it now has its own small (and hopefully growing) section. I’ll call that a “win” and tangentially related to this thread. Keep asking for what you want and smart small business folks just might deliver where they can. Cheers!

Hi Ya mblindsey
I live in Northeast JoCo. What record store are you referring to? Always good to find a new place to explore!

 

[MidiMagic]

I thought that you always maintained that Dolby Surround didn't produce "cogging". I do realise that the movie was likely discrete, you really should be a proponent of Ambisonics then. It can place images between speakers better than other methods. Myself I don't see "cogging" as a problem. Ambisonics or some elements of it could/should be used in the mixing of discrete surround!

It was a demo of 7.1 playback.

Dolby Surround play adds a delay to the back channels which fixes the cogging.

Discrete 5.1 and 7.1 do not add the delay, so it cogs.

I have heard Ambisonics only once. The sound sources were not moving, so I could not tell if it cogs. It probably does not.

Unless the phase-shifting part of Ambisonics is used, the cogging will be there. The B format is not enough by itself to prevent cogging.

 

[MidiMagic]

Like Marpow, I have absolutely no idea what you are talking about regarding the term “clogging.” Sounds like “judder” on brakes.

I coined the term because I could not think of another word. But I have felt what they called cogging in a control knob. It jerked when turned from one position to another even though there was no mechanical detent. The knob did not jerk when the power was off.

My definition is that a sound on one side of the listener that is supposed to be smoothly panning forward or back instead sounds like it is suddenly jerking from one speaker to another.

For example, if the sound comes from the back around to the left and then to the front, it sounds like it stops at the left back, then it stops at the left side, and then it stops at left main.

This is true even if the sound is actually being panned smoothly. You have to turn your head to the left to hear the smooth pan. Human hearing does not hear smooth pans between speakers when all of them are to the same side of the head.

 

[gene_stl]

At "the Record Exchange" (open for 47 years in St. Louis) they had all the quad discs in "audiophile records" bin. This in itelf was wonderful to dig through.
In addition to a short stack of matrix quad LPs I did buy one dbx encoded one. They had a historical stack of every audiophile label including many I hadn't thought about in decades. (Command records, Phase 3 , Phase 4 original Mercury's Vanguards, and Living Stereos and even MoFis) good pricing too.

If you are ever in St. Louis, it's a great store, which I only went to the first time, about a year ago.

 

[WozzaDog]

TBH, I don’t recall ANY record store having a separate quad section, whether recently or in the times when it was being pushed by the record companies. At a recent trip to our fairly small Boise record show, I asked pretty much every booth if they had quads, and the ones that did pulled records out of the other stacks. Even Rasputin’s (the most incredible record store since Wallach’s Music City) in Berkeley had their quads mixed in with the mono and stereo.

Tower records in London had a surround sound CD section in the early 2000s that had DTS, SACD, and DVD Audio discs.

 

[barfle]

Tower records in London had a surround sound CD section in the early 2000s that had DTS, SACD, and DVD Audio discs.

I must have missed that, probably because the last time I was in London was 1984.

There may have been a few places that had separate mono and stereo sections when stereo was a new thing, or maybe I’m making this up. That was a long time ago.

 

[WozzaDog]

I coined the term because I could not think of another word. But I have felt what they called cogging in a control knob. It jerked when turned from one position to another even though there was no mechanical detent. The knob did not jerk when the power was off.

My definition is that a sound on one side of the listener that is supposed to be smoothly panning forward or back instead sounds like it is suddenly jerking from one speaker to another.

For example, if the sound comes from the back around to the left and then to the front, it sounds like it stops at the left back, then it stops at the left side, and then it stops at left main.

This is true even if the sound is actually being panned smoothly. You have to turn your head to the left to hear the smooth pan. Human hearing does not hear smooth pans between speakers when all of them are to the same side of the head.

Thank you for clarifying the origin of the term clogging, it’s creative.

Maybe, just maybe, there is a strong possibility the system you were listening to in the store was not that good.

Systems with small speakers and low quality amps are not good at creating a large soundstage. So when the panning from front right to side right takes place the speakers and amps can’t fill in the space in between. If you in a store like an open Best Buy you would need very large speakers to prevent “cogging” or I will say “convergence of sound” between the speakers. I’m talking about $5-$10 full range side speakers to fill the space. You soon have a $50k system. But in your home space where the roof isn’t 50ft tall and 150ft wide ….

Have you heard a Dirac room corrected 7.2.4 or 7.4.4 or 7.4.6 system with full range 7 speakers (no bookshelf’s / no slim towers)? Where the dude and rear speakers are speakers designed to be front speakers? This cogging doesn’t exist if setup correctly. Amps are as important as speakers.

Yesterday I heard a pair of Focal speakers on a Linn audio media player and the soundstage was easily 140 degrees wide, I measured it. And 3-4meters back behind the speakers (He-he calculate that if you live in a minority imperial measurement country) . It was one of the best sound stages I’ve ever heard. I have Polk LS800s with SDA array and they have a very wide sound stage. My side speakers fire forward and back which fils the soundstage to the sides and rear so the panning is consistent, and my rear spears are Polk LS600 which is typically a front speaker. All have very good cabinetry. I paid CAD$24k for speakers and power amps and that was with 35% off. I only share the price so you can have an appreciation of the investment to get my desired result. And it sounds awesome, but the subs are about to be switched out to 4x 15” subs go down to 14hz. 30% of music is in the bass. 30%. And there are calculations to how many and what size subs are required to pressurize a room size. So if your in Best Buy it’s probsbly 24x 24” lol. It’s actually way more.

I hope you get to experience a multi channel music experience that you are fully immersed in thst you can’t point to where the speakers are located.

 

[MidiMagic]

TBH, I don’t recall ANY record store having a separate quad section, whether recently or in the times when it was being pushed by the record companies. At a recent trip to our fairly small Boise record show, I asked pretty much every booth if they had quads, and the ones that did pulled records out of the other stacks. Even Rasputin’s (the most incredible record store since Wallach’s Music City) in Berkeley had their quads mixed in with the mono and stereo.

Here, our record stores had special Quadraphonic bins. The RM, SQ, and CD-4 records were mixed together. And most of them were of music I had no interest in. One store had a separate bin for classical quadraphonic.

At that time, I had very little money for records, and the quads cost more than the stereo equivalents. And most of the music I liked was not in quad.

 

[par4ken]

Here, our record stores had special Quadraphonic bins. The RM, SQ, and CD-4 records were mixed together. And most of them were of music I had no interest in. One store had a separate bin for classical quadraphonic.

At that time, I had very little money for records, and the quads cost more than the stereo equivalents. And most of the music I liked was not in quad.

I loved the Quad sections in the record stores! While I spent time looking through the regular bins as well, the quad section was always my first stop! It mattered not what the quad system was either, nor the price!

My other favourite bin were the cut-outs, when quad titles started to appear there I was in my glory I purchased many titles even those that I was lukewarm about or unfamiliar with. In many/most cases I was pleasantly surprised!

Today I'm starting to add more Pop and Classical titles that I would have not even considered in the past and finding that many of those are actually very good, made much better by the quad mix!