View Full Version : 5.1 Surround XM Station - How cool would that be?
Was reading another XM thread here and got me thinking. How cool would it be if D* had an Audio only (partner with XM I guess) channel that played all of the 5.1 formats. There are tons of SACD, Dualdisc 5.1 and DVD-Audio discs out there that could be played and even the sound from concert DVDs that have either DD5.1 or DTS soundtracks.
I am a huge fan of multichannel audio. have been since the days of Quad in the the seventies.
So what do you think.
After you answer the poll I would love to hear why you think it would be good great or a bad idea.
jediphish
02-02-07, 02:49 PM
The sad thing is, a couple of XM's channels are broadcast in NeuralHD surround, however DirecTV's transmission of those channels does not allow NeuralHD-capable receivers to decode them - you just get the standard stereo.
oldschoolecw
02-02-07, 02:55 PM
I my self could care less about the XM Radio stations on D* that is the last reason I have D*. But if I did care I would want 5.1
I listen to the XM stations with my HR20 all the time and I like the music that they play especially on the classic rock stations. Now that I can stream from my music collection on my PC I do not play the XM stations as much as I used to but I still do play them.
If there was a 5.1 station I would listen to it whenever i was not watching TV.
morgantown
02-02-07, 04:20 PM
It would be awesome to have HD radio via DTV (XM or whatever). I Can't imagine that the bandwidth could be nearly as demanding as a HD picture. 5.1 (or better) would be awesome.
Just another way to differentiate oneself from your competitors.
:righton:
It would be awesome to have HD radio via DTV (XM or whatever). I Can't imagine that the bandwidth could be nearly as demanding as a HD picture. 5.1 (or better) would be awesome.
Just another way to differentiate oneself from your competitors.
pgiralt
02-02-07, 07:01 PM
I'd settle for decent audio quality before 5.1. XM sounds like a bad MP3 file for the most part because of how much compression they use.
If it were SIRIUS I may care. I just have a very strong preference of it over XM. I have found a whopping 2 channels on XM I like. XM may have a slight sound quality edge, but Sirius content is light years ahead.
Staszek
02-02-07, 09:50 PM
If it were SIRIUS I may care. I just have a very strong preference of it over XM. I have found a whopping 2 channels on XM I like. XM may have a slight sound quality edge, but Sirius content is light years ahead.
Agreed, maybe full XM is alot better then the DTV XM but I cant find anything to listen to on the music channels, just stick with my Stiletto in the house.
Agreed, maybe full XM is alot better then the DTV XM but I cant find anything to listen to on the music channels, just stick with my Stiletto in the house.
Yep, proud stiletto owner here as well. I get a darn good signal in my house with antenna "mounted" to back of television set and I am out of repeater area. Only Xm channel I play is 818 occasionally whatever that is.
XM Radio in 5.1 would be superb!!
Actually - why not have all the XM channels in 5.1?? I'm serious: the bandwidth requirements are trivial compared to HD.
The days of great "2 channel stereo" are long, long gone.
Steve Mehs
02-03-07, 09:00 PM
I agree, but remember first you'd have to have content in 5.1. Really how many Brittney Spears or Black Eyed Peas or whatever crap is popular these days is mixed in 5.1? I doubt these airheads can even spell 5.1 let alone know what it is. Judging from the DVD-A and SACD selections out there, not much.
Really how many Brittney Spears or Black Eyed Peas or whatever crap is popular these days is mixed in 5.1? I doubt these airheads can even spell 5.1 let alone know what it is.
Nice
Steve Mehs
02-03-07, 11:00 PM
Hey I tell it like it is, no need to sugarcoat anything. The world would be better off if we were all more brutally honest rather then being afraid to offend or hurt feelings.
paulman182
02-04-07, 06:09 AM
Hey I tell it like it is, no need to sugarcoat anything. The world would be better off if we were all more brutally honest rather then being afraid to offend or hurt feelings.
Well, since you want brutal honesty, my take on the thing is that all the XM channels on D* are totally worthless and should be removed to make more room for TV channels, which is what 99.9% of D* subscribers sign up for.
I find that most people don't like to be offended or have their feelings hurt, and I am not in the habit of condemning anyone else's interests, but I guess brutal honesty has its place.
JLucPicard
02-04-07, 08:10 AM
I have CDs, FM stereo, XM Radio in a "home base". If I want music, I do NOT turn to DirecTv for it. I get DirecTv for TV - as long as what they do does not infringe on that, I don't care what they do with their music channels.
resqguy
02-04-07, 08:49 AM
I'd settle for decent audio quality before 5.1. XM sounds like a bad MP3 file for the most part because of how much compression they use.
I strongly agree. Most audio receivers/processors already have surround modes for music. That is where the conversion to multichannel should be done. I have 7.1, others may have 5.1 or 8.1. Get the 2 channel quality up to standard and leave the conversion to multichannel under the control of the individual to suit their taste.
Steve Mehs
02-04-07, 11:18 AM
Well, since you want brutal honesty, my take on the thing is that all the XM channels on D* are totally worthless and should be removed to make more room for TV channels, which is what 99.9% of D* subscribers sign up for.
I find that most people don't like to be offended or have their feelings hurt, and I am not in the habit of condemning anyone else's interests, but I guess brutal honesty has its place.
Well I'd rather be honest with other people rather then put on a show. If someone’s offended that's not my problem. What difference does it make anyway, I doubt any one from the Black Eyed Peas is reading this.
For you the XM channels may be totally worthless and a waste of bandwidth, but DirecTV is making a killing off of these channels for commercial accounts. Audio channels on satellite TV will never go away, unless every fast foot restaurant and every retail store in the country goes out of business. I bet you didn't know there are about 10 extra XM channels on DirecTV that you don't get that are also using up bandwidth. They're specifically for commercial subscribers only. Most of them are uninterrupted feeds of existing channels along with Taste Of Italy, a DirecTV exclusive. Besides audio channels don’t use much bandwidth.
I think the catalogue of all of the formats between SACD, DVD-A, Dual Disc, and 5.1 Music DVDs is pretty extensive enugh to have a channel in 5.1 or maybe even a few hours a night on one of the channels even
I agree, but remember first you'd have to have content in 5.1. Really how many Brittney Spears or Black Eyed Peas or whatever crap is popular these days is mixed in 5.1? I doubt these airheads can even spell 5.1 let alone know what it is. Judging from the DVD-A and SACD selections out there, not much.
No matter what modes you have if the original content is not sourced as 5.1 the best yo can hope for with your modes is Dolby Pro logic. You simply can not get the sound and seperation that DD5.1 and DTS5.1 produces unless that is the source.
I strongly agree. Most audio receivers/processors already have surround modes for music. That is where the conversion to multichannel should be done. I have 7.1, others may have 5.1 or 8.1. Get the 2 channel quality up to standard and leave the conversion to multichannel under the control of the individual to suit their taste.
If it were SIRIUS I may care. I just have a very strong preference of it over XM. I have found a whopping 2 channels on XM I like. XM may have a slight sound quality edge, but Sirius content is light years ahead.
Ug, I have Sirius in my Jeep and it sucks. The DJ's don't know when to just STFU. I pay to listen to music, not some half assed DJ that try's to be funny.
I love XM and have a Russound whole house audio system with XM built in so I could really care less that they broadcast music over D or E for that matter.
Groundhog45
02-04-07, 09:08 PM
I have D* for video, almost never tune to any XM or whatever the previous provider was. I would also vote for dropping XM and getting more HD on the air. I have a radio and CDs for music and would get satellite radio if I wanted it.
GH
celticpride
02-04-07, 10:24 PM
where have you guys been? channels 855 and 856 fine tuning and audio visions have been in 5.1 surround sound since last year on directv ,i believe since october or november of 2006, check it out it sounds awesome!
celticpride
02-04-07, 10:29 PM
855 currently playing david gilmour, also coming up tangerine dream!
jediphish
02-05-07, 06:29 AM
where have you guys been? channels 855 and 856 fine tuning and audio visions have been in 5.1 surround sound since last year on directv ,i believe since october or november of 2006, check it out it sounds awesome!
Can your receiver decode the 5.1 Neural HD from D*'s transmission? My Pioneer Elite, which offers Neural HD decoding for XM connected antennas cannot detect 5.1 from the D* stream. Either D* is not passing it or my receiver is limited to activating that surround mound to the XM input.
I never knew that. Thanks for the update. As soon as my daughter is done watching Teletubbies I will see if I can hear it in 5.1 ;)
where have you guys been? channels 855 and 856 fine tuning and audio visions have been in 5.1 surround sound since last year on directv ,i believe since october or november of 2006, check it out it sounds awesome!
I never knew that. Thanks for the update. As soon as my daughter is done watching Teletubbies I will see if I can hear it in 5.1 ;)
XM Pops is also in 5.1
Got all excited about the possibility of having some XM channels in 5.1 audio.
But I've just checked out Audio Visions, XM Pops and Fine Tuning. Like all the other XM channels, they come in as a two channel PCM stream.
I'm running the Sony STRDA9000ES A/V Control Amp; it's the same unit that the theatres use. It handles every flavor of Dolby and DTS that exists. If I tune the HR20 to HDNET, the 5.1 audio blossoms all around me. But on the XM channels: nada, zilch, nuttin.
I use the fibre "optical' links for audio connectivity between all of my units.
So the question: 'celticpride' - what is the magic that lights up the blue 'multichannel indicator' bar on your system?
I've been an engineer for lots of years - something here is not making sense.....
celticpride
02-05-07, 09:28 PM
I don't know what to tell you, but i use the HR 10-250 HD-TIVO,hooked up to a panasonic H100 receiver with optic cable from monoprice cable. IF you don't believe me there was an article in sound &vision magazine a few months back,sorry i don't remember the excact monthof the issue, but i would guess oct. nov. or dec.
Well, 'celticpride', thanks for your help! Your reference to "Sound and Vision" magazine had all the answers. (It was the June, 06 issue, by the way.) I'll paste in the link at the end of this sad post.
To begin: I think most of us consider it a tragedy that the Blu-Ray and HD-DVD folks are so driven by greed that they can't recognize they are poisoning the market for each other and shooting themselves in the foot.
Well, the folks at XM have taken the 5.1 Surround capability and gone one step better. Instead of shooting themselves in the foot, XM placed the gun barrel in their shorts and then pulled the trigger.
Apparently not aware that Dolby and DTS have a 100% lock on the DVD, CD, SACD and DVD-Audio markets as well as a 100% lock on HD broadcast 5.1 audio, the XM folks came up with **tada** their own proprietary protocol, called "Neural HD". What a brilliant approach!! Yup - let's all trash our DTS and Dolby capable equipment and go out and buy a receiver with a Neural HD processor.
XM has gone to great expense to guarantee that only a handful of DIRECTV's 16 Million subscribers will ever, ever decode their 5.1 signal. There are fewer receivers available today with the "Neural HD" decoder than there were a year ago. With no demand, the manufacturers no longer include "Neural HD" - and oh, yes pay the royalties to XM.
There are only three XM channels in 5.1 and no current plans to add more. Surprise, surprise: because of no demand.
The article provides some background about all the work XM has to do playing Dolby and DTS material to break it out to 6 discrete channels -- which they then need to re-combine using their secret protocol. What a waste of time and expense - and a nifty way to lower quality too!
The XM answer: "...you need to buy OUR hardware...". Yeah, right.
Here's the link to the read-it-and-weep article:
http://www.soundandvisionmag.com/features/1510/satellite-goes-surround.html
What a shame. Instead of distinguishing themselves with a great 5.1 capability the XM folks have distinguished themselves with short-sightedness and greed.
PS - After some more research: XM hyped the "Neural HD" at last year's CES show. At this year's CES show: not mentioned. They successfully created their own dead horse...
Well that explains a lot thanks.I am not one of the lucky ones that can receive this 5.1 neural sound from XM.
Another dream shattered.
:(
Steve Mehs
02-06-07, 10:01 PM
The Neural format isn't really proprietary to XM. It's what HD Radio is using as well. My issue with XMHD, is neither of the two channels in 5.1 are what I want to hear, but due to the content of the channels, they are probably the best choices to be in 5.1, I suppose Cinemagic would be a great choice as well.
I really don’t see how this is negative at all, Sirius is doing no such equivalent . I’m also not seeing where XMHD receivers are dying out. I’m seeing more home theater receivers with built in XM tuners than ever before and the majority of them are Neural capable, Sony now does XMHD.
I think it is positive that they are offering it. I would listen to those stations more often if I could get them in true 5.1
Cleophus
02-07-07, 06:50 PM
"Hey I tell it like it is, no need to sugarcoat anything. The world would be better off if we were all more brutally honest rather then being afraid to offend or hurt feelings."
If you want to be brutally honest, you don't "spell" 5.1. One would spell "Five Point One". I find it unfortuante that people are too lazy, mentally stunted or lacking in education to be syntactically accurate these days. Honestly...
I would love some XM 5.1 on select channels.
Steve Mehs
02-07-07, 07:28 PM
:lol:
Yep I'm too lazy to spell it out, I guess Dolby Laboratories is as well since they don't spell it out either. I find it also a symptom of laziness when people use quotation marks instead of using the Quote Command.
Cleophus
02-07-07, 08:32 PM
Quotation marks are still a valid convention.
Dolby Laboratories is not asking someone to spell "5.1". No one stated that it is incorrect to note it in that manner. I was pointing out the difficulties in always being brutally honest.
Your logic is flawless.
The usefulness of this discussion is at its apex. It is also wildly off topic.
greenie95125
02-07-07, 08:56 PM
Personally, I think that music is meant to represent watching the band. Every concert I've been to has had the band in front of me, with sound coming from the front, and from the left and right. In that respect, I see no need for more than plain old vanilla stereo. OK, throw a subwoofer in there too. :)
Now, movies on the other hand, is where 5.1 comes into play. Just my opinion mind you.
--Mike
Cleophus
02-07-07, 09:12 PM
The dynamics that multi channel can bring include recreating (not perfectly) a soundstage that is different from the small room that most installations are in.
Steve Mehs
02-07-07, 09:54 PM
Quotation marks are still a valid convention.
Dolby Laboratories is not asking someone to spell "5.1". No one stated that it is incorrect to note it in that manner. I was pointing out the difficulties in always being brutally honest.
Your logic is flawless.
The usefulness of this discussion is at its apex. It is also wildly off topic.
I had no idea what your point was, and I still am not clear. But if you’re trying to prove what I think you are, yes, I can take it. I have faults, and yes I'd rather have negative things said directly to me, then be wishy washy about it. There is no dancing around the truth, quite often I am a bit of a jackass. I know it, and by now you probably know it and I’d rather have people tell me that, then sugarcoat it. I y'am what I y'am.
It took several months, but here's the EMail response from XM on 6/20/07. It seems they don't broadcast anything in 5.1.
From XM Radio's Audio Visions:
Hi gct,
We don’t broadcast in 5.1. There aren’t enough New Age albums mixed in 5.1 to make a good station. I think there was talk about a 5.1 station at some point but it would be a cross genre affair – as there are only handful of 5.1 mixed records in any genre. I have no idea whether or not that’s actually going to happen.
Thanks for Listening,
Peter
Audio Visions,
Please say that you are broadcast in 5.1 audio, not just in two channel stereo.
And then, let me know if that format carries through to the channel presented by my DIRECTV HD receiver.
And then, if you are in 5.1 and if the 5.1 is presented by the DIRECTV receiver,
Please let me know what I need to do to open up the 5.1 audio channel
I would be absolutely overjoyed to be able to get on the DIRECTV web forums and let folks know how to unchain AudioVisions and let it blossom into 5.1 audio.
tonyd79
06-22-07, 01:58 PM
Don't know about 5.1 but I have heard the difference when the XM signal is carried on one of the down HD channels (like 94 or 95) versus the 800 level channel. The 94/95 music is terrific. (I think they usually play Top Tracks.)
Steve Mehs
06-22-07, 02:11 PM
If there's no content in DD5.1 you can't broadcast it. I tuned to Audio Visions right now on my Sony HTR, while the music this channel plays makes me want to go ape, it sounds pretty damn good. Full sound, rich bass and nice rear action in Dolby ProLogic II mode. Fine Tuning and XM Pops, which are in full 5.1, sound excellent on Neural capable home theater receivers.
Now back to da Bone Yard.
I would definetly listen to XM more if it had 5.1... no doubt about it.
vBulletin® v3.7.6, Copyright ©2000-2012, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.