Stereo > Surround - Matrix vs. Upmix

[kfbkfb]

My only experience with upmixed content is some professionally done mono to 5.1 (an episode of Lost in Space, done in 2015).

I was wondering, using the exact same stereo content, how the stereo > surround results compare for:

1. DynaQuad (no logic matrix decoding)
2. QS (Sansui variomatrix or Involve Audio Surround Master logic directed matrix decoding)
3. Upmix (I don't know much about the upmix options/adjustments, maybe there is a default setting for stereo to 4.0/5.1 surround or maybe each upmix requires listening tests and multiple adjustments)

Does an upmix sound significantly different than a matrix decode of the same stereo content?


Kirk Bayne

 

[J. PUPSTER]

My only experience with upmixed content is some professionally done mono to 5.1 (an episode of Lost in Space, done in 2015).

I was wondering, using the exact same stereo content, how the stereo > surround results compare for:

1. DynaQuad (no logic matrix decoding)
2. QS (Sansui variomatrix or Involve Audio Surround Master logic directed matrix decoding)
3. Upmix (I don't know much about the upmix options/adjustments, maybe there is a default setting for stereo to 4.0/5.1 surround or maybe each upmix requires listening tests and multiple adjustments)

Does an upmix sound significantly different than a matrix decode of the same stereo content?


Kirk Bayne

Usually some differences, I'm pretty sure; I've been meaning to do a shoot-out between a stereo decode from my SMv2 Involve mode and a Penteo Up-mix for some time now. You can select 4.0 or 4.1 or whatever from the Penteo including percentages for how much to send to the rears. But it just keeps getting put on the back burner. I'd assume you'd want something that "was not" already matrix Quad encoded? I could also run it through my Sansui QRX-8001 in a couple of modes and see what differences there were. But I'd also like to see some results from something like a Fosgate Tate II 101A (which I don't have, but others like the results here.) And of course SpecWeb, which I've used in the past but just got confused by all the command line coding.

 

[kfbkfb]

Right, stereo only, not matrix encoded (I'm partial to [passive] DynaQuad since there's no encoding in stereo content and thus nothing for logic directed decoders to latch onto).

I presume the upmixed stereo > surround doesn't have any image wandering since there's no logic system attempting to find (quad) encoded content.


Kirk Bayne

 

[kfbkfb]

Anyone have a chance to try this with stereo (not matrix encoded) content (CD-4 played in stereo would also work)?


Kirk Bayne