My new Surround Master V3

[Sonik Wiz]

Just got my Surround Master v3 two days ago. Wasn't sure if I would like it, given my system is all solid state

Yes but the SM is solid state. Not a tube/valve to be found.

Maybe exotic audio cables would make a difference??? But color me ecstaticly satisfied.

If you are ecstatically satisfied then exotic cables would not add much, eh?

Congratulations on your new component! I've never heard a bad thing said about the Surround Master, well worth every penny. I might point out that there are manyTV/Netflix/Blurays that have discrete surround sound but very mediocre, barely there surround. Down mix to 2 ch stereo, feed it through the SM & it comes to life!

has anyone tried a linear 9v DC power supply instead of the supplied power cord with the Surround Master v3? If so your thoughts?

I have not tried it... no reason to. What do you mean by linear, as opposed to?? The SM has other PS circuitry internal to make the pos & neg voltages needed. The plug in power supply is just the first part of it.

 

[par4ken]

Question - has anyone tried a linear 9v DC power supply instead of the supplied power cord with the Surround Master v3? If so your thoughts?

I have for testing with the evaluation modules. I'm now using a small switching type power supply, soundwise I don't think that it makes any difference. The necessary voltage regulation is done on the board itself.

On the other hand I hate wall warts! They just look cheap and they fill up a power bar quickly by blocking the other outlets.

 

[Steve Bruzonsky]

I attached photos showing my family room system to my post above.

 

[Steve Bruzonsky]

What do you mean by linear, as opposed to?? The SM has other PS circuitry internal to make the pos & neg voltages needed. The plug in power supply is just the first part of it.

The Surround Master 3 is speced as a 9vDC power supply. So instead of using the wall wart, one could substitute an external 9v LPM (linear power supply) outputting 9v.

 

[Steve Bruzonsky]

Question - I have some Circle Surround CDs (ripped) which I got years ago in my Theta Casablanca 2 and 3 days as the SSP had Circle Surround mode. I have played a few using the Involve mode. Or should I use the SQ mode?

 

[J. PUPSTER]

Question - I have some Circle Surround CDs (ripped) which I got years ago in my Theta Casablanca 2 and 3 days as the SSP had Circle Surround mode. I have played a few using the Involve mode. Or should I use the SQ mode?

Hi Steve,

I have some of those CS CDs also, seems in my experience they were always (per CD) hit or miss from any system; so I'd say when in doubt just go ahead and switch to whatever mode swings your fancy and give it a try.. ya just never know about any of this stuff really.

additionally, I remember thinking this one sounded pretty good in Involve mode:

https://www.discogs.com/release/5148575-Chuck-Loeb-Memory-Lane

 

[Steve Bruzonsky]

Hi Steve,

I have some of those CS CDs also, seems in my experience they were always (per CD) hit or miss from any system; so I'd say when in doubt just go ahead and switch to whatever mode swings your fancy and give it a try.. ya just never know about any of this stuff really.

additionally, I remember thinking this one sounded pretty good in Involve mode:

https://www.discogs.com/release/5148575-Chuck-Loeb-Memory-Lane

Back in the first decade of this century, with my Theta Casablanca using Circle Surround, Chuck Loeb's Memory Lane was my favorite CD - in Circle Surround mode!

 

[jaybird100]

Hi Steve,

I have some of those CS CDs also, seems in my experience they were always (per CD) hit or miss from any system; so I'd say when in doubt just go ahead and switch to whatever mode swings your fancy and give it a try.. ya just never know about any of this stuff really.

additionally, I remember thinking this one sounded pretty good in Involve mode:

https://www.discogs.com/release/5148575-Chuck-Loeb-Memory-Lane

The Involve mode is just right for Circle Surround. The SQ mode is only good for SQ.

 

[Steve Bruzonsky]

The Involve mode is just right for Circle Surround. The SQ mode is only good for SQ.

This has been my assumption. I played Memory Lane via Involve (actually, everything so far and everything I have, as everything is either downloads or rips with only a few regular LPs that a friend ripped) and not only Memory Lane but everything that I have played has sounded very nice, wonderful, so far - making it very hard to go back to vanilla stereo which sounded so outstanding before!

 

[MidiMagic]

Question - I have some Circle Surround CDs (ripped) which I got years ago in my Theta Casablanca 2 and 3 days as the SSP had Circle Surround mode. I have played a few using the Involve mode. Or should I use the SQ mode?

Actually, use SQ mode and trade the back speakers.

 

[par4ken]

Actually, use SQ mode and trade the back speakers.

Not true. Circle surround is not encoded with the back (surround) signals in quadrature with each other as with SQ. It is more like QS.

 

[scpettinga]

Congrats for discovering what many of us have been enjoying for some time! You're going to have a lot of fun, rediscovering your record and CD collection. And if you have any QS, EV, or SQ quad records, you'll finally hear them in their full glory. You have a great system there; you just made it better. Enjoy!

 

[MidiMagic]

Not true. Circle surround is not encoded with the back (surround) signals in quadrature with each other as with SQ. It is more like QS. View attachment 86462

Odd. That diagram does not match the encoding equations I got from an article describing the system,

Encode equations

• L = lf + .71f - .71lbj + .50rb
• R = rf + .71f - .71rbj + .50lb

Note that there is no J on the last term in each equation. The diagram above has a j.

Now which is correct?

 

[par4ken]

Odd. That diagram does not match the encoding equations I got from an article describing the system,

Encode equations

• L = lf + .71f - .71lbj + .50rb
• R = rf + .71f - .71rbj + .50lb

Note that there is no J on the last term in each equation. The diagram above has a j.

Now which is correct?

The diagram should be correct. It looks to be very close to Dolby PLII as well but with the + and - J terms reversed. Assuming that the published data on Dolby is correct; OD has called that into question but again without providing any specifics.

 

[Sonik Wiz]

The diagram should be correct.

Yup that's the diagram I remember. It is shown in the Roctkron Circle Surround users manual. Read all about it on Disclord's archived website:

https://issuu.com/disclord/docs/rocktron-circle-surround-encoder-manual
IMO the Circle Surround approach was pretty unique & deserved more success than what it had. I don't think I have any CS encoded material. Now I will have to check for sure.

 

[J. PUPSTER]

Yup that's the diagram I remember. It is shown in the Roctkron Circle Surround users manual. Read all about it on Disclord's archived website:

https://issuu.com/disclord/docs/rocktron-circle-surround-encoder-manual
IMO the Circle Surround approach was pretty unique & deserved more success than what it had. I don't think I have any CS encoded material. Now I will have to check for sure.

http://www.surrounddiscography.com/circle/circdisc.htm
I don’t have many of them, but overall not that impressed with their decode.

IMO the QSound stuff is better.

 

[scpettinga]

par4ken: It was my impression that SQ and Quadradisc were made by the artists & the Record Companies. That they might have been mixed with a soundstage in mind. Yes, No, maybe? As the original 4 channel CD mixes have been made with those first mixes, do you find them better. I'm very wary of all these new MSFL quad mixes that they are made with permission of the record companies, many don't seem to involve original producers, engineers, of tapes. Are they bogus? Same with many of the new streaming surround or 4 channel mixes available mostly in Dolby Atmos for Tidal & Apple. They seem to be made just for the streaming service. Does Pono still exist? What do you thing or their products. I'd much own a physical copy than pay for a streaming version. I'm looking for an experienced listener who understands what is going on. Is going to all the trouble worth it. Secondly, is it only achievable from a AV reciever? Thanks, Steven Pettinga, Indianapolis

 

[par4ken]

par4ken: It was my impression that SQ and Quadradisc were made by the artists & the Record Companies. That they might have been mixed with a soundstage in mind. Yes, No, maybe? As the original 4 channel CD mixes have been made with those first mixes, do you find them better. I'm very wary of all these new MSFL quad mixes that they are made with permission of the record companies, many don't seem to involve original producers, engineers, of tapes. Are they bogus? Same with many of the new streaming surround or 4 channel mixes available mostly in Dolby Atmos for Tidal & Apple. They seem to be made just for the streaming service. Does Pono still exist? What do you thing or their products. I'd much own a physical copy than pay for a streaming version. I'm looking for an experienced listener who understands what is going on. Is going to all the trouble worth it. Secondly, is it only achievable from a AV reciever? Thanks, Steven Pettinga, Indianapolis

The original quad releases would have been made under the direction of the record companies and maybe the artists. Many were mixed with a similar soundstage as the stereo version. Others are quite different. Complaints about particular quad mixes usually come from those well acquainted with the stereo version.

I am not a huge fan of most modern 5.1 mixes, they usually are not very immersive like the traditional quads. Some modern releases, especially those mixed by Steve Wilson are excellent, I'm thinking in particular of the Yes Blu-rays.

I'm not a fan of streaming, I'm old school, I prefer physical releases. As for Atmos, I don't know why we need speakers on the ceiling when most people can't even accommodate four on the floor. Some people here love Atmos and like streaming as well, it's just not my thing. However I do think that it's great getting new surround releases any way that we can.

Pono no longer exists. I do have a player and It sounds great. You don't need to purchase music from the (defunt) Pono site, you just upload your music files to the player, it plays hi-rez files, including DSD as well as lowly mp3's. Neil Young was/is a firm believer in high resolution audio, as am I.

You will likely need a modern AV receiver as everything these days seems to be using HDMI. My own preferences is for professional, vintage and home built equipment and all separate components, I guess that I'm an equipement junky!

 

[Steve Bruzonsky]

I am running the Surround Master v3 in quad 4.0 mode (my REL subs use high level connections, so I am not concerned about the .1 channel). So I haven't connected interconnects for the subwoofer or center channels out of the SMv3. And I have turned the center and subwoofer knobs on the front of the SM3 all the way down to the left. Am I correct that this effectively defeats the SMv3 internal crossover so that the subwoofer is not used and the front left and right, and surround left and right, channels are output as full range?

 

[Sonik Wiz]

I am running the Surround Master v3 in quad 4.0 mode (my REL subs use high level connections, so I am not concerned about the .1 channel). So I haven't connected interconnects for the subwoofer or center channels out of the SMv3. And I have turned the center and subwoofer knobs on the front of the SM3 all the way down to the left. Am I correct that this effectively defeats the SMv3 internal crossover so that the subwoofer is not used and the front left and right, and surround left and right, channels are output as full range?

The Surround Master does not have low pass/high pass as might be found in mainstream AVR's for speaker management. It's simpler than that. The left & right input is simply summed & sent to a low pass filter & output for the subwoof. If you don't use the SM subwoof output it the level control has no effect on either the main chs or subwoofer output.