>mfw just put S. Retriever and the sound is super clear now.

>>61657604
Disable all equalizers or dynamic audio settings.
Flat sound is what you should be seeking to get.

>>61657691
So should S. Retriever be off?

>>61657811
S. Retriever is a DSP so it colors the audio, making it's highs higher and lows lower so it feels like it have more impact.
It's not flat, but if it sounds good for you then use it.
Disable it, listen to the speakers when you have nothing on, then turn if on and listen if there's any white noise.

>>61658132
I hear white noise with both, but it sounds more clear with S retriev

>>61658363
It's similar on my Denon when I use the DSP in it.
That's why I disabled it.
Flatter audio also sounds better with higher volume, and since it's flatter it doesn't annoy neighbors as much either so you can play at higher volume, at better quality without sound going through walls.

Do you have carpet floor or mats? If not, get some, because if you have a room that is open with nothing to dampen the sound it's gonna sound worse as well.

>>61657691
Very much depends on the music and system. You may want to adjust for your speakers/room/headphones. Also, modern (recorded) music has been compressed (meaning they used stuff like limiters, not audiodata compression like mp3) to get more loudness and this often means certain frequencies had to make room for others.

Before it reaches your ears it has already gone through countless filters and other processes to make it a good "average", meaning it should sound passable on pretty much every system. Adjusting it somewhat for your own specific system is perfectly fine.

>>61658713
You're pretty much repeating what I said.

Using DSP for music you haven't listened to is like spicing food you haven't even tried to see if it's okay as it is.

>using a receiver instead of an integrated stereo amp
>disabling all equalizers and not using room correction to get “flat” sound

>>61659328
>what is 5.1/7.1ch

>>61659722
Useless for 90% of recorded music?

might as well ask this here, but my receiver is producing a humming sound with literally nothing connected to it except for the speakers. what can i do to fix this?

Audio general?

Question: I have two towers with dual channel hookups. Will I get better sound running both channels from my stereo amp to each speaker?

>>61657691
Unless you applied an eq

>>61660733
Bi amping. No you wont

>>61659878
>bought a receiver only for music
And 95% of movies and tv show are at 5.1ch

>>61661885
Who cares. Why waste money on a receiver that will have drastically worse sound quality. 5.1 is a meme especially if you’re able to have a phantom center

>>61659328
pls fuk off with ur room treetmint meme gramptard

>>61660884
u mean bi-wiring?

>>61662199
Either. Depends how it’s wired to the amp. Bi wiring is useless. Bi amping is slightly less useless if you’re using two separate amps

>>61658410
>Flatter audio also sounds better with higher volume, and since it's flatter it doesn't annoy neighbors as much either so you can play at higher volume, at better quality without sound going through walls.
Not for me, flatter audio give more bass on my reciever,


>Do you have carpet floor or mats? If not, get some, because if you have a room that is open with nothing to dampen the sound it's gonna sound worse as well.
First time I heard this.

>>61662287
all of this depends on your speaker quality

File: bed cave.jpg (511KB, 1800x1800px) Image search: [Google]

511KB, 1800x1800px

>>61662287
Then the DSP lowers the bass for some reason on yours.

>First time I heard this.
Good speakers mean nothing when you haven't put them in a room that can play them correctly.

It doesn't have to be $2000 preparations, but a cheap big carpet on the floor, thicker window sheets etc does more than you think on the sound.
My bed room where I have my extra speakers sound way stronger in there than they did in the other room due to how this room is angled and the carpet and sheets remove the echo making it sound more precise.

>>61662287
Forgot to ask if you had a sub-woofer.
Don't underestimate the position of it.
Some say it's not important where it is placed, and that's a total lie.
Sub-woofer placement is a VERY important thing.

But back on topic.

If you get lower white noise with your S. Retriever off, it just means your sound will be better with it off, your taste in how it sounds is a different thing, and as people have said in the thread, use an equalizer to get the sound to your liking.

>>61662939
I don't have a subwoofer.
>If you get lower white noise with your S. Retriever off
I only said it sounded clearer, it seems to be evenly volumed

>>61662531
That might explain it. The speakers I got or from 1983
>Good speakers mean nothing when you haven't put them in a room that can play them correctly.
I know of that but the carpet part I haven't heard before

>>61661987
>I dont know what im talking about: the post
Do you ever try it?

>>61661987
>receiver will have drastically worse sound quality
Citation
>5.1 is a meme
Citation

>>61663405
Yep. Center channel is only good if you’re not in a position to have a phantom center and surrounds you forget about half the time.

>>61663476
Look up a spec sheet for a $500 Denon receiver vs a $500 Marantz integrated stereo amp. Really not that hard to imagine. You have the same amount of money to throw at 5 channels vs 2, not to mention all the processing and deciding on top. Even if you run a receiver in Straight it’s still going to be worse.

File: Screen Shot 2017-07-31 at 20.56.17.png (391KB, 637x1048px) Image search: [Google]

391KB, 637x1048px

>>61657604
You need to buy some proper interconnects!

So how do you guys feel about giving up control of the software while buying/using Blu ray players? Knowing that they probably run some proprietary OS and don't use mpv/mpc-hc

>>61663772
Who gives a flying fuck

>>61657604
you could use a gooderizer to make the sound more gooder, but that might be too technical

>>61663659
Jesus

>>61663639
Get a rx-v379, get a McIntosh amp, with a bookself speakers. You will see zero difference. Nowadays, all amps made in Japan are decent. You still live in the 80s anon.

>>61663639
I love +5.1 movies. 2.0 for movies is pure shit.

>>61663901
>he doesn't know about audiophiles

>>61657691
This if you want to fall asleep to metallica.
Purists are fags.

It's current year just use a soundbar.

File: 1449845126311.jpg (126KB, 669x658px) Image search: [Google]

126KB, 669x658px

>>61664595
Did someone say CURRENT YEAR?!

>>61664595
cheap tiny fullrange drivers being pushed beyond distortion by dsp to get some sort of sound from a small plastic enclosure / tv's internal speakers side grade master race

>>61664740

My new Samsung 3.1 with wireless rear speakers sounds better than my old setup which would outshine the majority of what /tv/ has. The convenience and form factor also go a long way since most of you are blind as to how retarded and ugly most home theater setups look. The only reason to do a receiver based setup with huge speakers is in a legit home theater not just a living room or spare bedroom without real sound treatment.

>>61657604
Congratulations on a new receiver.

Tell me, does it manage to act as a USB sound card yet? My guess is that it can't. I am also guessing that no other receiver manages to be a USB sound card either. This why I am still using a ancient Pioneer receiver that's connected to my computer with a SPDIF with AC3 encoding.

Seriously: There's headphone $20 DAC/AMP's that sound great that act as USB sound cards. My Bluedio R headphone is even a USB soundcard itself, I can use it with 3.5mm or Bluetooth or connect it with USB and it shows up as a USB sound card. Yet... a $1000 or $2000 receiver can't do this. And they all have a worthless "USB" port you can use to plug-in USB sticks with audio files on it. Like... who does that, anyway? I get why it could be useful on a car stereo (though a SD slot is more practical there too) but why put that and not a USB sound card interface on a receiver?

Screw buying a new one unless it get that's basic feature, I'll probably be using the one I have 10 years from now.

Any more tips? [spoiler]pls no audiophile myths[/spoiler]

File: dynaudio contour 60 full range.jpg (42KB, 574x574px) Image search: [Google]

42KB, 574x574px

>>61662868
>Good speakers mean nothing whe-

c'mon

good speakers are where you start, and they sound great even if the room is shit

pic related; and any high tier full range speaker will be about the same in terms of being great no matter the kind of room

>>61667106
>c'mon
>pic related
Will sound bad if your room have no furniture and walls are made of sheet metal because the walls will vibrate and ruin the sound that those DAs would've given you.

>>61667345

not at lower volume

>ruin the sound

so, tell me, what are the best speakers you've ever heard