No la..  My pioneer is not a receiver

It is a home theater comes with DVD player. Not sure what it is called. Those thousand plus can get 5.1 home theater system...

Thanks..  Active sub entry level is more than 1K?

Hi, I have a set of Samsung home theater with DVD. The system had spoilt and left me with the speaker. But I don't wan to waste the speaker. What can I do to use back the 5.1 speaker with subwoofer.

1) If you set your receiver in "Pure Direct", the sub won't be used unless you manually set the crossover on the sub itself because on Yamaha's receivers, engaging pure direct will disable the bass management from the AVR itself.
You seem to be mistaken that a crossover point would mean it removes something from your speakers. The meaning of a crossover is basically what it says, a crossover = a bridge in layman terms. All a crossover does is moving the pre-determined frequency set by the user to the sub. If you set it to 80hz, then ANYTHING below that goes to the sub, plain and simple. Of course, if your sub cannot go down to the LFE frequencies (20hz and below), then it will simply distort or have inaudible volume down in those areas.
2) If you bass managed properly in the first place from the AVR, using any "music" DSP or upmixer (PLII, DTS Neo), anything below the crossover point will be sent to the sub. As explained in point no.1, anything below the set xover point will be sent to the sub. It is NOT copied nor is it removed from the L/R channels, it is just being re-directed to the sub.
3) As already explained, ANYTHING that is set below the xover point is sent to the sub. If the movie has 20hz content and your sub is capable of playing down that low, then yes with a crossover above that; the sub will indeed play it. You set the speaker SMALL BECAUSE you are limiting its bass output and sending it all to the sub.
There are really only a few tower speakers in this world that can play CLEANLY down to 20hz, with no distortion. SMALL and LARGE has very little to do with the physical size of the speakers.
4) No, if there is no sub then you set your L/R speakers to large and everything else to small. If your center channel is gutsy enough, you can set it to large also. What does this does is the AVR will redirect the bass to the speakers designated as large. Whether it plays the bass frequencies down to its "rated specs" with authority or not is a different matter.
If you don't turn on the sub, then simply set the L/R speakers to large from the speaker setup menu. You can also set different "SCENES" for your AVR. So you can have SCENE1 with settings for the sub enabled (with bass management) and you can set SCENE2 with no sub, no bass management. There are a lot of things you can do with your receiver, you just need to read the manual and figure out what does what.

no sub, normally put sw = no
front is forced as large. the rest can choose.
all bass will push from large spk include 0.1 LFE signal

u can insist sw=yes
crossover point will filter out the bass to rca port. u get no bass.
if u dont want goto menu change, try the double bass i mentioned above post

1) You won't get any output because most MUSIC does not have notes below 60hz. What music did you test with? I can play Tron's soundtrack in pure direct mode and my sub will indeed be in use once I manually set the crossover on it. That said, I listen to music in "straight" mode or with an upmixer most of the time.
3) Bass management has been a common method since the 90s, it's not a hack, it's just common sense. Why would a 5.25" or 6.5" driver be able to produce bass below 30hz without distorting and wrecking itself? It's simple physics, think about it for a moment. A sub's driver is usually much bigger, at 8", 10", 12" or even the massive ones going up to 18" or 20".

Then there's also the issue with trying to drive multiple speakers in "Large" mode. You're asking a lot from the puny amps in receivers these days (yes even so called "flagship" ones). They're designed for dynamic power spikes, not a constant draw at long periods of time. You run into the issue of possibly overheating the receiver, they start to clip and then they would go into OVP. Leave the bass to the sub (which often times come with amps multiple times larger than what receivers have), leave the midrange and high-end to the individual speakers.
4) I'm not talking about modes. I'm talking about the SCENES on the Yamaha receiver. They're just different presets that the user can overide with their own settings, so I'm just suggesting you have different "SCENES" set for different listening conditions. Check the manual, it's all there. Too long to explain the steps here.
For the center channel, it really does depend on how it is designed. Not all center channels benefit from setting itself at a lower crossover just so voices can sound "deeper". Because there are certain CCs where then voices can become boomy and muddy, robbing it of detail. Not to mention if there's a panning of effects from any direction, things can sound "weird". Designing a center channel is a lot more complicated than just the L/R bookshelf or tower. Cabinet size being the main concern, driver size being another, then internal crossover can usually be a lot more complex as well depending on the design.

Many enthusiasts would use 3 identical speakers for the LCR, be it bookshelf or towers, place them at exactly the same height and at ear height position behind an acoustically transparent screen.

I find that many people seem to like their center speakers to sound a bit "warm" simply because the voice would be deeper. It's preference of course, but sometimes when you think logically, what if the actor's voice is just genuinely "thin" sounding in the first place?

Don't just read. Is also to find out what you read is it what is the result

It depend on who is answering you. Some believe in cables and some don't. I am sure there are a lot of clever people in this forum will reply differently.
Anyway, below are my answer to your question - inline.

1) Does it matter if the speakers cable is not of equal length?
Yes it does. Obviously shorter cable will have signal travel faster than the longer cable.

2) Does YPAO adjust for delays due to this difference?
Yes it does to compensate.

3) While I think for this length of 2m vs 0.6m it would be impossible to hear the delays (if any), does this means that if I'm using Straight or PureDirect mode the compensation done by YPOA (delays and levels) will not be applied?
In any mode you use, as long as you apply the YPAO it will do what is suppose to do to make the sound right as per the auto calibration. As for if you can hear delay, that is what I have answer in no. 1

4) Also does having less resistance means saving electricity as well as putting less stress on the AVR?
less resistance does not mean saving electric but yes less stress for the AVR.

5) For surround speakers, does it means that you can get away with thinner wires? I asks since most would ask whether the cables is for front or surround and that the original cables for the surround is much thinner than the fronts.
Well, in HT center speaker is the most important that follow by sub and than front speakers. The least important speakers are the surround. So that is why some choose to sacrifice a bit for surround to compensate for budget. Of course if all cables can be the same for all speakers will be great.

Hope this helps.

Cable voodoo out of the way, let's talk logic;

1) In theory, at least for home theater runs; no it does not matter. Electric travels at the speed of light, a difference of 1.4m isn't going to make a snort of a difference provided both runs are the exact same cable.

2) YPAO adjusts delay in relevance to where the mic is position at (MLP), not the cable.

3) If you were to use an oscillator and measure the conductance of 2 cables with different lengths and of different quality, then yes it is measurable that the difference in length can and will show a difference in conductance. Whether that is audible or not, well.. it shouldn't be, but we have people who can hear the difference between cheap tin solder vs rosin solder used on the cable end.
Straight uses YPAO processing and adjustments, Pure Direct doesn't. They're not relative to each other.

4) Again, if you were to take oscillator and measure; you will see a difference. But the difference is so minute that it doesn't actually matter.

5) Logically speaking, the farther your cables are from the amp/receiver, the thicker of a gauge you want for the cable. But we will reach a point (around 10 gauge) where any thicker doesn't provide any more benefit unless you have a room as big as Michael Bay's own home cinema.
People place all their cable budget on the main speakers (LCR) because apparently, the cables will make a huge difference because the mains are the important speakers.
Sidenote;
As to why YPAO set one side of your speaker louder than the other, there can be various factors.
Example;

- Difference in noise level within surrounding environment, are you absolutely sure that prior to the YPAO measurement after you switched cables that your environment's noise level was the SAME?
- Did you verify the SPL with an SPL meter at least, not just by going off the reading on the receiver?
- Was the mic in the exact same position before and after you change the cables?

I don't know how to answer your question because any answer from me may cause further replies of disagreement to my poor knowledge of speaker, interconnect or whatever cables. So I do feel that it makes more sense for me to just post a few articles and videos that I have read and watched before. I hope I do not cause further confusion to you as well as be able to help you make a much better choice.

http://www.audioholics.com/audio-video-cab...ker-cable-gauge
http://machinedesign.com/blog/5-myths-about-speaker-wire
http://www.prosoundweb.com/article/tech_ti...re_gauge_right/
http://www.cablecurls.com/cable-curls/cabl...-speaker-cable/

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lG-3KyURXqk
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=r7DdcZCbABo
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=RR4crLxpd4U

I think that speaker cables selection can cause "heated discussions" between different camps, similar to the question of HDMI cables and other cables.

My own uneducated opinion is... get a cable which you think is supposed to be reasonable AWG thickness for the length used (refer to the links I posted above) AND do make sure that the speaker cables have proper shielding because electro-magnetic interference (EMI) can cause some problems... and of course, I know that you will not put your speaker cables near to any electrical wires or anything that can cause EMI issues. Don't worry too much about not equal length of speaker cables... just use equal lengths for left and right speakers since its DIY so the costs of saving a few Ringgit for just a short length will not matter. Branded (factory terminated) expensive ones ALWAYS come with equal lengths so that is never an issue. I sensed bullets being fired at me now or am I just hallucinating?

Below is an interesting YouTube Video about cable curls ...
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6duVvwdd5F0

Phew! Tough, tough.

electric cable is litz type (7, 16, 24 core).
spk cable is stranded (many fine core)

has tried qed xt300 vs local ayam vs electric cable.
give difference in high frequency response

What ever you read on Internet is just something good to know. Is always good to try out yourself to experience it. The more you read the more you will confuse. Is better to trust your ear

You like to read base on logic and scientific data?Read here :

http://www.roger-russell.com/wire/wire.htm

Friendly reminder; dont trust your ears to differentiate sounds between cables,your ears will lie..science wont..its called placebo effect,unless you do blind test and i've done many..

Again, yes in theory it would. But we're talking about microseconds here. YPAO simply isn't even advanced enough to account for such difference. I mean look at YPAO's manual adjustment, it only gives you 0.2ft as the lowest denominator for delay adjustment, that simply isn't even enough to compensate (an example) for the 0.000001 second of delay.

The difference is there, but reality is; we're not Matt Murdock a.k.a Daredevil.

The time it takes for electromagnetic signal to travel from the amp to the speaker driver is negligible compared to the time sound travel through air from speaker to your ears. Calibration software can not pick up the difference.

However, for stereo, the difference in speaker cable lengths can give rise to significant phase difference between the left and right channels, and adversely affects the stereo imaging.

Please correct me if I am wrong.... this is what I understand from your question...

What you are asking is that the longer the speaker cables used, the longer it takes for the amp signal to reach the speaker and so, you mean to say that there will be a "slight" delay for the speakers to receive the signal and therefore the speakers generate the sound "delayed" causing the mic to detect it later. This is what you meant when you say "wouldn't the signal arrive at the speakers at different time". You were not referring to the sound from the speaker arriving at the calibration mic. If you said "the signal arrive at the calibration mic at different time", then its a different question which you did not ask.

I hope I understood what you were trying to say.

Ok... I know that you did not ask but let's clear the air first about the "delay" of the speaker sound reaching the mic. This is what all calibration software such as YPAO, MCACC, Audyssey, etc have been designed to calculate. The sound engineers will already have factor in the speed of travel of the "calibration pink noise" and already knows how long it takes to travel the distance of, say, 1 mm or whatever. The longer it takes for the actual speaker sound to arrive at the mic means the greater is the distance of the listening position to the specific speaker. After calculating the distance based on the "delay" of the sound from speaker reaching the mic, the calibration software will also calculate the SPL level, the proper delay timing AND as well as the proper equalizer settings for a range of frequencies. Its a tall order from a simple "calibration pink noise" !! Calibration software is all about detecting such delays and SPL for a range of different frequencies. So... with that explanation out of the way, since "delays" is one important criteria for calibration, I don't think you are talking about the sound generated from the speaker "delay" in arriving at the mic.

Let's get back to your question.

That signal from the power amp to the speaker is basically electrical current and I don't have to explain to you how fast electricity travels.



As you can see, obviously the difference in time it takes for the electrical signal to reach the speaker is extremely very very small when compared between a 1 metre speaker cable and a 30 metre cable!

Here is what I think. Just forget about "any possible delays" for the audio (electrical) signal from the power amp to reach the speaker. Its insignificant, in my opinion.

What about "delays" caused by electrical resistance and conductance of copper? Will it be significant for speaker lengths in  the range of 1 metre to 30 metre? Resistance is measured in ohms. Let's say I used AWG 24 cable thickness... a 1 ft length will have resistance of 0.026 ohms roughly, but a 30 ft length will have 0.77 ohms which is quite a difference. BUT will an extremely thin cable that cause 1 ohm resistance cause any significant signal delays reaching the speaker? Maybe not significant. I don't know but what I do know is to "simply" use a reasonably thick copper cable such as AWG 18 or 16 and I just forget about the resistance/conductance mumbo jumbo and forget about any "delay issues".

Reference... http://hyperphysics.phy-astr.gsu.edu/hbase...les/wirega.html

Honestly, actually I don't pick speaker cables from the exact AWG. In fact, I don't look at the AWG at all! What I actually do is pick a cable that I "feel" is the appropriate thickness and proper shielding. Choosing the "proper" shielding is a tricky one because there are also branded and unbranded ones that "cheat". I also know next to nothing about shielding materials.

In my personal opinion, once you have bought a reasonably thick cable with proper shielding, just relax and don't think too much about such "delays" from the power amp to the speaker which may cause unnecessary doubts on the accuracy of the calibration. For the sound delays from the speaker to the mic... that's part of what is calibration is all about.

There are so many factors and so many things to talk about for speaker cables when we bring in electrical resistivity of copper, conductance, EMI, behavior of electrical flow in a circular copper strand, etc etc. I am not an engineer in this area so I will not be able to explain much deeper here. Already have a headache just thinking about it. I may already have made errors in my explanation here because of my "general knowledge". I sound like a parrot.... if got any errors, correct me, please do.

Various Info...
http://www.activebass.com/a42--Understandi...mp-and-Speakers
http://www.marktaw.com/recording/Electroni...ndSpeakers.html
http://hometheaterreview.com/automated-roo...tion-explained/

For me it was worthwhile, I upgraded from small satellites to a better speakers and there was significant improvement with a more seamless and detail surround effects.

Better surround for sure will give you better ambient. Of course with better speaker also need better amp to run it properly. If your volume is like-40db eco mode or not is not much different

I think there should be a way to reduce the soundbar bass level using its control switches on the unit. I searched and only found HW-J7501 which have a separate wireless sub-woofer. I think your soundbar model should also come with a wifi sub. I didn't have time to read the manual so if you have not read it, I would advise you to do so. I may be wrong but I believe there will be controls on the soundbar itself which allows you to reduce the bass and also the same for the sub. I won't be able to offer much help on your bass problem.

DTS-MA means DTS Master Audio which is actually a audio format technology used to encode and decode audio with a combination of using lossless and lossy encoding.

DTS (Digital Theatre Systems) is used in DVDs to give better sound quality using less filespace. DTS-HD (Digital Theatre System High Definition) which is used in blurays, improved on the audio quality of DTS. Then... DTSX was introduced to add in another sound dimension above the listener.

Another well-known competitor, Dolby Laboratories, actually came out first with Dolby Digital and then later came out with Dolby Digital Plus. Dolby True-HD came out next and then the latest Dolby Atmos was released. Dolby Atmos (Dolby Atmosphere) came out earlier than DTSX. A lesser known Auro-3D audio (http://www.auro-3d.com/ can also be used in the bluray BUT not many HT amps support this and its "rarely" found in any blurays too. There are cinemas that uses such Aura-3D technology. My HT Pre-Amp supports Aura-3D Engine but at the present time, unfortunately I have not yet seen any movie blurays that uses Aura-3D.

Both Dolby Atmos and DTSX was introduced to make the sound appear as though it envelopes the listener in the room with additional 2 or 4 (or even more) speakers for sound coming from above the listener. For older HT amps, both Dolby Atmos and DTSX are still backward compatible so such older HT amps will decode them as Dolby True-HD and DTS-HD MA because the "additional channel" tracks cannot be read and just ignored.

Because DTS-MA is just an audio format (technology used in blurays & 4K blurays), it CAN be recorded as 2.0, 2.1, 4.0, 5.1, 6.1 or 7.1 channels.

WAV, PCM and FLAC are all digital audio technologies which can also be 2 channel stereo, 4.0 and other various channels similar to DTS-MA number of channels.

DTS-MA cannot be said as equivalent to 2.1 channel. DTS-MA can 2.0 ch, 2.1 ch, 4.0 ch, 5.1 ch and others which are all the same audio quality when the same bitrate, sampling rate and bit depth are used.

When you selected DTS-MA to play, its not always 2.1 channels... it depends on whether the film was recorded in how many audio channels AND whether the movie company decide to include other choices.

Example, DTS Demo Disc Volume 20 (2016) Blu-Ray available audio...
English / DTS-HD Master Audio / 7.1 / 48 KHz / 5552 kbps / 24-bit (DTS Core: 5.1 /48 KHz /1509 kbps /24-bit)
English / DTS-HD Master Audio / 7.1 / 48 KHz / 7851 kbps / 24-bit (DTS Core: 5.1 /48 KHz /1509 kbps /24-bit) << DTSX audio track
English / DTS-HD Master Audio / 2.0 / 48 KHz / 2082 kbps / 24-bit (DTS Core: 2.0 /48 KHz /1509 kbps /24-bit)
http://www.demo-world.eu/2016/01/26/2016-d...mo-disc-vol-20/

From the example... we cannot just say DTS-MA is equivalent to 2.1 channels because DTS-MA also have 5.1 and 7.1 channels too.

Below are a few of the various audio options used depending on whether the bluray (or DVD) have them or not and usually have a Menu for us to choose which available audio option to play...
DTS-HD 2.0
DTS-HD 5.1
DTS-HD 7.1
DTS-HD Master Audio 2.0
DTS-HD Master Audio 5.1
DTS-HD Master Audio 7.1

When the encoding quality is the same used for all the channels, then its just a choice of how many audio channels to play. DTS-HD MA is NOT specific to just 2.1 only. Many times, the bluray will have both DTS-HD 2.0 (for Director's Commentary added to the movie track) and DTS-HD MA 7.1 (for just the actual movie track). If they want, they can even choose to use DTS-HD MA 2.0 (Director's Commentary added to the movie track)

Its the same for SACD discs... encoded in DSD audio format.. can have Stereo 2 Channels or 5.1 Channels. CD discs support 2 channels only.

More info...
http://www.differencebetween.net/technolog...dts-and-dts-hd/

not familiar with yamaha avr. perhaps is repeating side surround or just ear illusion.
auro may put additional codec for unsupported receiver.
otherwise ppl buy disc cannot play sound.

AURO-3D and DTS

You did not give any detailed info of your "DTS Demos contains Auro3D tracks". Bluray? MKV file? MP4 file? Not enough info for all your questions so I can only make educated guesses.

Not possible for Auro-3D to be encoded as other formats such as DTS.

DTS from DTS, Inc company.
Dolby Digital from Dolby Laboratories, Inc company.
Auro-3D from Auro Technologies company (Belgium)

Auro-3D recognized as DTS? Really?

Auro can change its own Auro-3D to be recognized as PCM or maybe Auro-2D. But... Auro Tech will have to PAY DTS, Inc licensing fees to include DTS into Auro-3D to allow it to be encoded and "recognized" as DTS. Do you think Auro Tech company will do that? I really do NOT believe Auro Tech will do it !

Same situation for Dolby Digital audio. Do you think Dolby Laboratories will allow its own Dolby True-HD to be encoded and recognized as DTS? NO... its impossible!

If you are playing your "DTS Demos" from a bluray disc, there should be bluray menu that allows you to select either Auro-3D or DTS. So... when you believed that the Auro-3D track was being recognized as DTS, then I suspect your demos are video files (MKV?). If MKV video files, then your "DTS Demos" should have TWO audio tracks... Auro-3D and DTS. If its a DTS DEMO bluray disc released by DTS Inc, I can be 100% percent certain that they will NOT include any Dolby or Auro-3D track inside... so this disc must be a compilation DEMO (not DTS Demo) disc from other companies (not from DTS, Dolby and Auro companies)

When you use any player such as Kodi or others that can "Bitstream", it means the source audio is sent directly out with any decoding to the HT Pre-Amp/AVR. As long as the player can bitstream out the audio type (such DTS, Dolby, Auro-3D), it means the player can support sending raw audio out without decoding. When bitstream happens, its your AVR that received and did the decoding of the audio source. If the player don't support Auro-3D bitstream out, there will be NO sound eventhough the AVR support Auro-3D!

Example, my Oppo 105D bd player support bitstreaming MKV files to my HT Pre-Amp. Due to a bug in its firmware, Dolby True-HD in the MKV file is "bitstream" out as PCM. The latest version BDP10X-83-0715 released in August 2016 restored the ability to bitstream Dolby True-HD out from MKV files.

I assume your HT AVR AND your player (or Kodi) don't support bitstreaming Auro-3D out so what actually comes out depends on your player firmware (or computer plug-in) too. If your player don't support Auro-3D, by right it should "bitstream out" as PCM audio, not DTS. Did you find any info about your player which says that it converts Auro-3D to DTS?

When a MKV file contains both Auro-3D and DTS audio tracks inside, the "default track" can be set to DTS track by the muxing software so the player will auto play DTS, not Auro-3D. That may be why your AVR shows DTS which you assume "Auro-3D recognized as DTS" which is actually playing just the DTS track inside.



Kodi is a open source (GPL) XMBC software media center for the pc. I am not familiar on Kodi. Does it need to have the correct plugin to support Auro-3D bitstreaming? If Kodi don't support bitstream Auro-3D, I think Kodi will NOT convert Auro-3D to DTS (any conversion is actually NOT bitstreaming). IF Kodi support Auro-3D, then DTS will not appear.

If your HT AVR don't support Auro-3D and when such audio is received, then should be no sound. Yes, its possible for the AVR to receive Auro-3D and then convert to DTS but I don't know whether any HT Pre-Amp/AVR can convert Auro-3D to DTS loh. Mmm... so far I have not seen it. Yes, my HT Pre-Amp CAN change DTS-HD Master Audio/Dolby True-HD to emulate/convert to Auro-2D and is NOT the actual audio track inside the video file itself.



Original 5.1 Audio but Yamaha AVR showing 7.1 Audio

I have many years ago owned Yamaha RX-V1900 and Aventage RX-A3020 previously. If you use "Pure Direct", your amp will bypass all its own "sound modes" (such as Concert Hall) and tweaks to preserve the audio as near as original so it will not change 5.1 audio to 7.1 audio. If an audio is bitstreamed to your AVR, the audio is untouched so your player won't change 5.1 to 7.1. When you set your Yamaha to "Pure Direct", your Yamaha will also NOT change 5.1 to 7.1.

An AVR can be set to identify 7.1 as 5.1 by ignoring 2 channels BUT when the audio signal is just 5.1, your AVR can "increase" it to 7.1 by setting to "Multi CH Stereo" so your AVR will show 7.1 on its display panel. What this happens is that your AVR is taking the original 5.1 audio and changing it by select only 2 channels from the Left And Right Front channels and resends it out to the other speakers so the original Centre and all the Surround channels are ignored.

For example, I have 5.1.2 speakers and my HT Pre-Amp is also set the same way. When I play a CD, my HT Pre-Amp will only display 2 channels nut when I pressed my remote Green button, I can change it to "Multi CH Stereo" sound mode and all the 5.1.2 channels will be displayed. When I changed to Pure Direct, the 2 channels will be shown again.



I believe that you have already tried changing the AVR to "Pure Direct" so the original 5.1 will be used, no longer using any sound modes anymore. IF still appear as 7.1... then I suspect that your Kodi player have already changed the original 5.1 audio and sent out to your AVR as 7.1 so check the player that it is not changing anything. When Kodi player is bitstreaming, it will NOT "convert" 5.1 to 7.1

Additional News
http://www.demo-world.eu/2016/05/28/samsun...demo-disc-v2-0/
http://www.auro-3d.com/press/2016/03/denon...m-av-receivers/

I didn't know that the "expand surround" is locked to "enabled" for the current crop of Yamahas as I no longer have any Yamaha now.

Yes, I do agree that pure direct is not a good suggestion to use. I also don't use Pure Direct for my Pre-Amp too (except for my external DAC input and turntable). Your clarification on this will help people who didn't know and may have misunderstood my suggestion of using Pure Direct.

I believe you already know why I suggested Pure Direct so my following recap is NOT directed at you. Teop's  question or rather "problem" was that his Yamaha was showing 7.1 audio on its display panel indicating 7.1 eventhough (according to him) the source audio was actually 5.1.

My primary reason to suggest Pure Direct was to ensure as far as possible that his Yamaha did NOT do any alteration or changes to the input source audio. So... using Pure Direct as a method of elimination of possible causes that "changed" the audio to 7.1 channels will at least tell me that his Yamaha was NOT the culprit.

After testing with Yamaha on Pure Direct and IF 7.1 still remained then it will indicate to me that the audio was already 7.1 when received so I can assume by pointing my finger to other possible causes... as explained in my earlier reply.

Hehe.. its never easy to pinpoint the reason for the change from 5.1 to 7.1 channels. For Teop's situation, its just like giving directions by phone to a blind person who don't actually know where he/she is.

Regards.

Its fine to use this method of picking just 1 file to play. However, there are many times when the entire move is broken up to numerous smaller files AND these files may not be numbered in the same order such as 00021.m2ts plays the first chapter and then 00016.m2ts plays the second chapter. This usually happens for most Lionsgate films WHEN they used "profuscation" (or is it proliferation) method to mess up the chapters with the wrong playlist being played by the bd media player so probably this is one way that they use to fight piracy. There is a downside to playing bluray folder/ISO with full menu too... sometimes ripping can go wrong and the wrong playlist are read.

Whenever the movie is broken into multiple files, the only way is to use computer to remux the bd movie using the correct playlist (xxxx.mpls). The playlist file contains intructions to play the the multiple files in the correct order/sequence. There are software that can auto choose the correct playlist BUT mistakes CAN happen when the wrong playlist are chosen... and the result is that you have to search manually (tough, tough) which playlist to use in remuxing to single MKV, M2TS, or MP4 file. Can you imagine searching through (example) 50+ mpls files?

As an example... the bd movie Allegiant (distributed by Lionsgate) do have 148 MPLS files and when ripped to harddisk as full ISO or BDMV folder, the movie played in the WRONG ORDER!! Even remuxing to a single untouched MKV file do NOT help. What I did find out is that "somehow" the player chose the wrong 00484.mpls file to play the ripped bd when the correct one is 00897.mpls. So, even if you have the genuine bd and wants to rip this to your harddisk as an archive to play... chapter sequence problems CAN happen! Bear in mind that its the computer software that can choose the wrong playlist for ripping. But... without the software, you cannot join all the multiple files as a single file to play and you cannot just select play in numerical order because the numbering is messed up.

Ok... coming back to your method of picking 1 single to play. Yes, its a good way to do it without ALL the hassle and the stupid "waiting" for the menu, trailers, titles, etc. BUT.... problems WILL appear when there are multiple files. Also... this method means "convenience" BUT remuxing to single file, searching for correct mpls file to use, etc etc is NOT convenient loh.

Anyway, I do agree with your method in general but there are problems that need to be fixed loh.

Note: Gods Of Egypt (2016) Blu-Ray is another one that needed to be fixed for the chapter skipping issues (have multiple files). No comment on "internet download" ones which may have been "fixed" or may still have problems. Sometimes the same movie for EU release don't have problems with just a single file but US release have such issues with multiple files. It depends on the Release version too.
I do agree with your method of playing just the single file. Read my answer to bad2928 above for the problems that do appear.

I absolutely do agree with you about ALL the nonsense that we have to endure to watch a bluray!

What I am going to say next is my opinion based on own reasoning. You wondered why people still use physical discs to play but I think you may have missed something here.

The shorter the transmission path of playing the movie to the AVR and TV the better. Its not because the best steps have not been taken to reduce interference. As an example, no matter what is done, a much longer path from ripped movie in NAS harddisk to USB cable to bd media player can introduce signal interference that can reduce the PQ and SQ. Directly playing the physical disc from the player to the AVR and TV IS the shortest path and can (in my opinion) help to reduce interference such as EMI and whatever noise. Yes, I will not dispute with you if you say that we will not have ears that are so perfect to notice any minute difference especially when properly shielded cables are used, good AC adapters used for the NAS harddisks, good power conditioner/filters used and so forth. Be it as it may, there are people like me that are "naive" to believe a better SQ/PQ from playing physical discs. Whenever I listened to the physical discs, it somehow sounded more dynamic, better details, etc for my Concert blurays. Two of my friends who did not believe it was a believer after they listened to the comparisons. Of course the "minute difference" will be more apparent when normal (not LPS high quality) AC adapter used for the external harddisk, SATA harddisk used (with internal rotating discs) instead of SSD ones, poorly shielded USB cables used, etc etc. I believe (may be technically wrong) that using laser light to read can reduce interference that is otherwise caused by spinning magnetic discs or electrically-charged solid-state cells. Granted, I may NOT be totally right but the reason I am explaining this to you is to help you better understand the reason why.

Yes... "a gigantic waste of pointless time". You are not wrong since its just only once that we have to endure to take the time to "rip" each bluray from our personal collection. At least its still better than constantly enduring the "nonsense" every time the same bluray is played. Eventhough ripping is done once... some time IS also used. Yes, slowly done one by one immediately after each bluray purchase will not seem much time taken... however, if 100+ blurays are done together, its a headache. IF only everything is perfect... it will be a great hassle with much more time wasted in correcting chapter problems as I have stated earlier.

Just for the sake of argument... I don't know whether ripping my genuine blurays as a "copy" in my harddisk is illegal or not in Malaysia. Maybe legal as people says its a "fair copy" to protect the original from wear and tear. One to one duplicate as ISO or BDMV "may" be ok BUT altering to a MKV or MP4 is a big No No. I don't even dare to talk about any internet downloads which is easy and no hassle with a fast connection. Hehe, you already know why.

In retrospect, I don't dispute what you have said. I am merely clarifying to clear the air when you wondered why people chose physical discs. Generally you are right except for my difference of opinion on the "transmission path".

Talking about legal downloads.. yes, such as from Apple Store but the ugly DRM monster comes in too! And the quality from such movie downloads just cannot compare to the blurays. NetFlix now allows me to download for offline viewing but the quality is incomparable to blurays (with DTSMA and Dolby TrueHD). Even when I watch a Netflix 4K movie on my TV, the 4K quality cannot even beat the bluray PQ !

While true there are movies that has different chapters, it's not an issue if I just use makeMKV to remux them into a single file. Doesn't take long for me either, but that's down to CPU hardware so one person's preference/experience will differ to another.

I believe we've discussed this before in regards to playing the source with as little paths as possible to eliminate any sort of interference. I studied programming and still is a part time programmer, so the knowledge I'm armed with does not allow me to believe that an "analog" interference will alter a digital piece of code UNLESS the hardware/device itself is faulty in the first place. The data being transported from one place to another is all done digitally, by 1 and 0s. If a 0 becomes a 1, then an artifact appears or the source just skips or has an error on a particular time domain. 

So... yeah, for me the signal path does not matter. To make a comparison, a piece of digital product like say a game which has hundred of thousands of lines of more variable data and has no difference being played on a HDD/SSD vs a disc, a movie which has no variable code in its source data will not be able to sound different just because they're playing from a different device.

Of course, playing on a high-end BD player (like the Oppos) has its own benefits. Not saying it doesn't and I won't dispute that. Darbee post processing can be a bonus, as does the HDMI scaler on the Oppo is better than on most receivers/TVs as well. But similarly, playing it on a PC and you're given choices like madvr provided you have the hardware to take advantage of it. But disable all of these bs and it's impossible to tell a difference other than your mind being in a placebo effect.

Well again, to each their own. Not going to say you're wrong, because it's your system so of course you should enjoy it the way you want to. And if I were to visit your place, I wouldn't be rolling my eyes endlessly while you're skipping through the piracy warnings.

No problem. No harm done.

I actually didn't know about TL;DR until I found out from Wikipedia which "generally" mean negative view of people who write too long. That is why I misunderstood you.

Still no problem... nobody can expect everyone to agree or disagree. Anyone do have the right to choose not to read my post loh. Yes, no offense intended by you BUT you ARE right in saying that I write too long. My Bad.

Mmm... I don't think that the studios are not interested. Its just not the right time yet to include 3D into 4K blurays because 4K bluray releases are still at the early stage so the consumer response is not yet clear.

As you already know, 3D do have 2 frames (for left and right eye) which does pose problems with additional bluray diskspace needed but technology did manage to "fit" the 3D movie into the BD50 bluray disc. I actually don't know how its done and if you inspect the 3D bluray disc in your computer, you will notice an extra SSIF folder with additional files that increases the diskspace used to over 50GB, more than the capacity of the BD50 disc! When I ripped such disc to my harddisk as BDMV folders, the total size can go up to 70 to 80 GB size! Of course the studios can split the movie into extra discs just to fit the 3D extra size but that would mean increased production costs. With that being said... I may be wrong but I do believe that it needs more time to change the 3D 4K processing methods involved which alters the way on how to fit extra 3D data into the UHD discs. I am talking about 4K with a much larger resolution AND a huge file size PLUS HDR that needs to include 3D and then "fit" into BD100, BD66, BD50 or BD25 discs. At the present time, the maximum single UHD disc capacity is BD100 for 100GB. Yes, maybe 3D data have already been done to fit into the UHD discs but I still believe that it needs time for them to be produced. Maybe at the present time, they are just concentrating on non-3D 4K blurays.

Therefore, I will not say that the studios are "not interested". I will just say that they are presently reluctant to release 3D 4K blurays because of the reasons that I have explained above. Probably, they are having a "wait and see" attitude to see how the 4K blurays sales pick up in the future.

For the cinemas, the history of 3D started in the Fifties (mmm... 1953?) and as the years move on, many critics said that 3D are just a gimmick that will not last. They were proven wrong as 3D movies in cinemas are still around (eventhough not many cinemas). When the blurays were initially released in small numbers, there were practically no 3D blurays. At that time, I would be wrong to say that the studios were not interested in releasing 3D blurays loh. At that time, it was not the right time yet and they also needed time to find a method to "fit" extra 3D data into the limited capacity bluray disc too. Ok... when 3D finally did arrived in blurays, initially there were actually very few such 3D blurays being released... as time goes by... now more and more 3D blurays appeared. Now there are many 3D blurays BUT it does NOT mean that 3D blurays are more than the 2D ones.

If anyone were to ask me whether 4K blurays will release a 3D version or totally NOT, then I will say that the same question were also asked when bluray movies were released in those early days. At that time, there were people who believed that very few 3D blurays would be released because there weren't many 3D TVs available at that time and it was very expensive too. Let's go forward to the present time and you do already know that there are many 3d blurays available, not just a few.

Yes, 3D 4K Bluray is not yet available at the present time. Will it come in the near future? Yes, I believe it will come... as long as 4K blurays don't die! Will many 4K blurays be released in 3D in the future? I don't have to answer this question... just look at what happened when more and more 3D blurays appeared.

How loud do you often listen, how big is your room and how far do you sit from your speakers? 3 important questions to determine the power you need.

Truth be told however, most mainstream AVRs will not have much issue to drive the Primes really loud. And I mean loud enough to damage your hearing. You are mistaken that AVRs do not have enough power, they do. Rather they don't have the capability to uphold their power with enough headroom if you listen at reference volume regularly and your room is huge (over 4000 cu.ft). They also don't have the balls to drive 4ohms loads without clipping/overheating.

Also speaker efficiency matters. The Primes are average efficiency but they are rated at a 300hz-3khz band, which compared to many other companies that doesn't.

The v681 should be okay. But there are certainly other choices as well - Denon x1300w, Marantz SR5011, or perhaps go a bit higher if you need more features.

Don’t waste your money.

Why bi-amp? You don't even have an external crossover unit to make bi-amp a noticeable difference.

No comment on the Kenwood amp, but the Adcom GFA-6000 and Emotiva BasX A300 has a more capable amp section than the A3040. Both can handle 4ohm loads at high volumes with relative ease. I have an A500 which in comparison to my A3060, does handle transient loads more linearly and does sound cleaner overall.
The receiver will get pretty darn hot when running at near reference volumes, especially since I crossover at 60hz. Is there an objective "sound quality" difference though? No, lol. That said, my A500 is relegated to powering my height speakers only as my main LCRs are powered by a Parasound A51.

Honestly, if you are looking at entry-level external amps - you should just be getting them for the sole purpose of adding more speakers. The latter of which it seems like you are planning to do, so I guess that's a legitimate purchase.

On another note, is it possible for you to look at a second subwoofer option? Because that's the single most significant upgrade you can add to your system instead of all these external amp addition.

Not going to stop your experimentation if that's what makes you sate your curiosity.

I think the price for the Adcom amps are okay assuming they are still in decent condition. Check first. Otherwise, I do quite like the Emotiva BasX amps - they are more expensive than they used to be in their UPA variant, but you know in Malaysia you don't have endless choices.

As for the sub, let me understand this - you are measuring with REW, but how are you applying the EQ? YPAO Manual? IIRC, A3040 only has bands down to 30hz and that's not good enough.