Quote: I've recently moved the surround channel outputs from the 5.1 discrete outputs of my SACD player from surround channel direct inputs of my 7.1 channel AVR to the back channel inputs.
I find the change satisfying.
Anyone else tried this?
---------------- Bill
Bill, I had to read your post several times before I got its meaning. Your surround SACD outputs were connect to the AVR's front inputs. You changed the SACD outputs to the rear inputs of the AVR instead of the front, and you judged the change as "satisfying". Can you describe more, as to what the difference sounds like, and what makes it more satisfying?
Here are a bunch of guesses:
It's possible that the front and rear inputs have different input impedances, which could cause a different sound, if the SACD output impedance is too high relative to the AVR (not likely I would think in modern gear). The front and rear inputs also reach the active circuitry from different paths inside the box, going through different lengths of wire or circuit traces, and also subject to different interferences, if any. Perhaps the path is more direct on the rear inputs? Perhaps the input circuitry is acting differently (parts drift, or differenct values due to tolerances) from the front vs. the back?
I read this a little differently, WTL. Receivers with 7.1 channel inputs have an extra 2 "surround back" channels in addition to the surround channels for sources with 6.1 or 7.1 capability (like Blu-Ray). If you only have a 5.1 source (like SACD or DVD-A), the usual connection is made at the surround input (surround back inputs left unused). However, I don't think there would be any discernable difference using the surround back channels instead of the surround channels, which, apparently, Bill has done- correct me if I'm wrong (it wouldn't be the first time!).
For even more confusing choices my Marantz 7.1 receiver allows me to flip a "Speaker C" switch (normally used for a 3rd room speaker pair) to direct the surround back outputs for bi-amping/bi-wiring the front speakers with the 6th and 7th amp channels (in addition to the front channel amps). I've done so and I like it.
Quote: I read this a little differently, WTL. Receivers with 7.1 channel inputs have an extra 2 "surround back" channels in addition to the surround channels for sources with 6.1 or 7.1 capability (like Blu-Ray). If you only have a 5.1 source (like SACD or DVD-A), the usual connection is made at the surround input (surround back inputs left unused). However, I don't think there would be any discernable difference using the surround back channels instead of the surround channels, which, apparently, Bill has done- correct me if I'm wrong (it wouldn't be the first time!). ...
rvance,
After reading your interpretation, I see what you mean and I would agree with you that it's the right one (light bulb overhead lights up). I have a Blu-Ray 7.1 player. The normal 5.1 outputs are Front L&R, Surround L&R, Center and Subwoofer. There are a separate pair of Front L&R for 2-channel operation, or becomes the Surround Back channels L&R when used with 7.1 sources.
I have not tried the Surround Back with 5.1 sources. My guess is that the Surround 5.1 signals would not be passed to the Surround Back jacks when in 5.1 mode.
Bill, I had to read your post several times before I got its meaning. Your surround SACD outputs were connect to the AVR's front inputs. You changed the SACD outputs to the rear inputs of the AVR instead of the front, and you judged the change as "satisfying". Can you describe more, as to what the difference sounds like, and what makes it more satisfying?
Here are a bunch of guesses:
It's possible that the front and rear inputs have different input impedances, which could cause a different sound, if the SACD output impedance is too high relative to the AVR (not likely I would think in modern gear). The front and rear inputs also reach the active circuitry from different paths inside the box, going through different lengths of wire or circuit traces, and also subject to different interferences, if any. Perhaps the path is more direct on the rear inputs? Perhaps the input circuitry is acting differently (parts drift, or differenct values due to tolerances) from the front vs. the back?
Tell me it ain't so?
RG
I read this a little differently, WTL. Receivers with 7.1 channel inputs have an extra 2 "surround back" channels in addition to the surround channels for sources with 6.1 or 7.1 capability (like Blu-Ray). If you only have a 5.1 source (like SACD or DVD-A), the usual connection is made at the surround input (surround back inputs left unused). However, I don't think there would be any discernable difference using the surround back channels instead of the surround channels, which, apparently, Bill has done- correct me if I'm wrong (it wouldn't be the first time!).
For even more confusing choices my Marantz 7.1 receiver allows me to flip a "Speaker C" switch (normally used for a 3rd room speaker pair) to direct the surround back outputs for bi-amping/bi-wiring the front speakers with the 6th and 7th amp channels (in addition to the front channel amps). I've done so and I like it.
rvance,
After reading your interpretation, I see what you mean and I would agree with you that it's the right one (light bulb overhead lights up). I have a Blu-Ray 7.1 player. The normal 5.1 outputs are Front L&R, Surround L&R, Center and Subwoofer. There are a separate pair of Front L&R for 2-channel operation, or becomes the Surround Back channels L&R when used with 7.1 sources.
I have not tried the Surround Back with 5.1 sources. My guess is that the Surround 5.1 signals would not be passed to the Surround Back jacks when in 5.1 mode.