Support NeoGAF

[nintendork666]

Hey Gaf, so I mostly game on my PC in my living room, which is attached to my tv. The tv is connected directly to a 2001 JVC receiver (via RCA, there is no HDMI input on the jvc) which is hooked up to two Polk bookshelf speakers and a Yamaha subwoofer. This is my current 2.1 audio setup.

Eventually, I'll be upgrading to a 5.1 setup, but am just looking at a center speaker until I can splurge on two new higher end front speakers.

If I set my audio settings in Windows 10 to 5.1 and disable the rear speakers, should I notice a decent improvement just from adding a center speaker? Most games I play offer 5.1 surround as an option, and I want to know if the difference between 2.1 and 3.1 will be noticeable in this instance.

Any help would be appreciated.

 

[RedlineRonin]

Does your JVC have either optical or digital coaxial (digital coax) on the back? otherwise you won't get "true" 5.1 signal from the PC to the receiver.


Also, maybe you could provide a JVC model number?

A bit more background... Dolby receivers since the 90's have had a feature called "Pro Logic" (most current iteration is Pro Logic IIz). The idea behind pro logic, was to use processing to take signals that traditionally only had two channels of information (front left and front right) like CDs or early movies, and manipulate the information into the center and surround channels to sort of make a "faux" surround sound. That was before movies/games became dolby digital 5.1, where there isn't really processing needed because the game or movie is telling the receiver exactly where each sound goes in each of the 5 channels and subwoofer.

This is important because, in your scenario, if you don't have optical or digital coax, (I think you should) you won't be able to get a discrete 5.1 signal into the receiver anyway, so you'd be stuck with pro logic (which is what you'd have to use if you keep using RCAs).

 

[ApharmdX]

Why not do a 4.1 instead? You will get better positional audio out of a 4.1 setup than just adding a center. I would add the center last.

 

[GearDraxon]

The receiver is from 2001, so it's preeeeetty likely that it actually has Dolby Digital / DTS, whether by optical / coaxial, or 5 RCA inputs.

As for the end result: adding a center channel helps dialog, primarily. In home theatre setups, this is a big change and worthwhile, even if you don't get the "wow" factor that adding the surround channels would. In a gaming setup? I'm not sure that it'll make much difference. It will definitely sound better, but you won't get the "something is coming up behind me" benefit that surround channels bring.

 

[TheExodu5]

3.1 will be most beneficial to movies/TV, as the center channel is primarily dialogue. Your plan to eventually get better front chanels and relegate your current fronts to rears is solid. If you watch movies in your current setup, I say go for it. 3.1 is better than 4.1 for movies, IMO.

 

[RedlineRonin]

Recommendation above to do 4.1 is solid.

Your combined front left and right, setup properly, will already simulate dialog coming from where a center channel would be, and you'll likely get more "immersion" from having two surround speakers, versus adding a center. I would imagine pricing would be somewhat comparable as well.

 

[nintendork666]

The receiver is a JVC RX-9010VBK. It actually has a USB input for PC audio which I've yet to try. Anyone else try this? Will I need drivers? I'm at work now and can't test it out myself.

"For surround sound, the 9010VBK decodes the usual Dolby Digital and DTS formats, although it doesn't have Dolby Pro Logic II processing."

"The 9010VBK is blessed with a host of connectivity options, including two component-video inputs, eight S-Video ports, three optical inputs, one coaxial digital-audio input, one optical digital-audio output, and a six-channel analog-audio input for connecting a DVD-Audio or Super Audio CD player."

Source: CNET

I'm getting a solid deal on a center speaker, so I'd rather purchase this before the other 2 speakers.

 

[Doctoglethorpe]

Get the better L/R speakers first. Center is overrated, I don't even have one anymore cause I decided to put all my upgrade money into the best pair of bookshelf speakers I could get, ones with good enough bass that I could finally rid myself of ugly space wasting subwoofers. Best decision I've ever made on audio.

 

[pswii60]

A good centre speaker is absolutely essential for any home theatre setup as it makes a massive difference for dialogue. But for gaming I'd say rear speakers are the more worthwhile upgrade, especially for FPS games.

Whatever you do, don't buy crappy tiny speakers and rely on a sub for everything below the mid-range. So basically avoid those crappy 5.1 in a box speaker sets. Buy quality separates.

 

[SirMossyBloke]

Get the better L/R speakers first. Center is overrated, I don't even have one anymore cause I decided to put all my upgrade money into the best pair of bookshelf speakers I could get, ones with good enough bass that I could finally rid myself of ugly space wasting subwoofers. Best decision I've ever made on audio.

Centre is overrated? Are you joking?

Space wasting subs? Lmao. You really don't know the first thing about HT do you?

 

[Doctoglethorpe]

Centre is overrated? Are you joking?

Space wasting subs? Lmao. You really don't know the first thing about HT do you?

I know enough to know how much more important the primary speakers are to anything else, especially in a living room, not a home theater. And I also am frugal enough to know how much of a waste of money all the other bells and whistles are in said living room. Better LRs, better TV, shit better furniture is all a better investment than a center speaker.

 

[RedlineRonin]

The receiver is a JVC RX-9010VBK. It actually has a USB input for PC audio which I've yet to try. Anyone else try this? Will I need drivers? I'm at work now and can't test it out myself.

"For surround sound, the 9010VBK decodes the usual Dolby Digital and DTS formats, although it doesn't have Dolby Pro Logic II processing."

"The 9010VBK is blessed with a host of connectivity options, including two component-video inputs, eight S-Video ports, three optical inputs, one coaxial digital-audio input, one optical digital-audio output, and a six-channel analog-audio input for connecting a DVD-Audio or Super Audio CD player."

Source: CNET

I'm getting a solid deal on a center speaker, so I'd rather purchase this before the other 2 speakers.

Awesome. So taking a quick look at the owners manual, what you'd wanna do is go optical out from your pc to the receiver. In windows you can go into the sound options for specific outputs by right clicking on the speaker icon in the tray. You'll want to do the "test" option and see if you're getting any sound output from your front left and right speakers when it runs the test tone for the rears. You might not, which is just going to be a fact of life if you want to get the dedicated center channel information of a 5.1 signal to the center channel

Alternatively, you could keep running your RCAs, as you are now, and simply use the pro logic processing (no pro logic II) and that essentially attempts to take stereo sound and move stuff that's in both speakers, to the center channel via matrixing.

Two options, neither 100% ideal, but both workable.

 

[CS_Dan]

Centre speaker is possibly the most important speaker. 3.1 and building towards 5.1 is the way to go OP, you're on the right track.

Positioning probably won't be affected that much (other than, you know, sounds coming from the centre instead of L/R) but a good centre will make your setup much better.

 

[nintendork666]

Awesome. So taking a quick look at the owners manual, what you'd wanna do is go optical out from your pc to the receiver. In windows you can go into the sound options for specific outputs by right clicking on the speaker icon in the tray. You'll want to do the "test" option and see if you're getting any sound output from your front left and right speakers when it runs the test tone for the rears. You might not, which is just going to be a fact of life if you want to get the dedicated center channel information of a 5.1 signal to the center channel

Alternatively, you could keep running your RCAs, as you are now, and simply use the pro logic processing (no pro logic II) and that essentially attempts to take stereo sound and move stuff that's in both speakers, to the center channel via matrixing.

Two options, neither 100% ideal, but both workable.

Thanks a million man, I'd never even heard of optical out before. Here's to hoping my mobo (z97s sli krait edition) offers a digital output. Either way, Pro Logic should work for now.

 

[RedlineRonin]

Thanks a million man, I'd never even heard of optical out before. Here's to hoping my mobo (z97s sli krait edition) offers a digital output. Either way, Pro Logic should work for now.

Yup! Feel free to PM or w/e if you run into setup issues.

I'm extrapolating a bit on how pro logic should function; I came into the audio game starting at pro logic II, a few years after your model JVC came out, but a brief spin through the owners manual makes it sound like it should work for your situation!

 

[dr_rus]

I personally wouldn't recommend using a 3.1 setup as a 5.1 with no rear speakers since in many games important sounds (like dialogs) do tend to come from rear speakers and you will be just missing those completely in such setup.

In fact, looking at what's possible to setup in Windows audio panel, I'd say that a more preferable way would be to go from 2.1 to 4.1 first and add a center speaker later.

I also kinda unsure on the matter of center speaker importance since for every game which does make great use of it there is a game where it's implementation is rather meh.

 

[Paragon]

I think the suggestion to go to 4.1 rather than 3.1 is a good one.
As long as you have good front speakers you can get away without having a center channel, at least until you can afford to complete the 5.1 setup.
It's mainly lower-end or satellite speaker setups where a center channel becomes 'essential'.

Looking over the manual for your receiver, you should use the analog 5.1 connections.
Optical connections can only do uncompressed stereo or Dolby/DTS-compressed 5.1. Analog 5.1 is uncompressed.

To get 5.1 over an optical connection from your PC you would need a sound card with Dolby Digital Live or DTS Connect support.
This will result in worse quality and often higher latency than analog 5.1

Space wasting subs? Lmao.

Though I generally agree with your reaction, since subwoofers have to be big to displace enough air to have a good low-frequency response, if you have larger full-range bookshelf speakers with an 8" woofer, that's as big as - or even larger than - many "home theater in a box" subwoofers.
And you have one per channel, which can really make a difference. I would probably go 5.2 before 7.1.

 

[Haint]

I ran 4.1 for years, once I finally added a physical center I couldn't really tell a difference tbh. If you have high quality LR mains placed properly a phantom (simulated) center works just as well.

 

[SirMossyBloke]

I know enough to know how much more important the primary speakers are to anything else, especially in a living room, not a home theater. And I also am frugal enough to know how much of a waste of money all the other bells and whistles are in said living room. Better LRs, better TV, shit better furniture is all a better investment than a center speaker.

Based on actual knowledge, and the replies in this very thread, I think you're already aware that you're wrong. I'll leave it at that.

 

[muu]

Thanks a million man, I'd never even heard of optical out before. Here's to hoping my mobo (z97s sli krait edition) offers a digital output. Either way, Pro Logic should work for now.

There's USB to optical out dongles that should do the trick if your mobo doesn't have it.

If you're fairly set on getting a certain center I'd say just go for it. Upgrade your L/R with something that matches the center, move existing L/R to satellite pos and you got 5.1.

 

[theRizzle]

I can't imagine any scenario where 3.1 is going to benefit you in games over 2.1... Your gun will be louder, and dialog will be blasting in your face from a foot away. 4.1 is a MUCH better suggestion.

 

[SirMossyBloke]

I can't imagine any scenario where 3.1 is going to benefit you in games over 2.1... Your gun will be louder, and dialog will be blasting in your face from a foot away. 4.1 is a MUCH better suggestion.

I think what you're not realising is that more than just guns and voices come from the centre. Part of the L+R channels are placed through the centre when sounds move from left to right and vice versa, also ambient noise in front of the player.

If you have kickass L+Rs and a bad or no centre, you're missing out on a LOT.

As far as importance goes for sound, it should be L+R first, then centre, then sub or surrounds depending on preference. Typically the surrounds are the last upgrade, but that can be switched for the sub depending on the frequency range capabilities of your mains.

 

[Paragon]

There's USB to optical out dongles that should do the trick if your mobo doesn't have it.

That will only get him stereo audio, unless it also includes a Dolby Digital Live or DTS Connect encoder.
It will be cheaper and higher quality to use the analog output from his motherboard (which does not appear to have an S/PDIF connection) connected to the 5.1 RCA connection on his receiver. He just needs 3x 3.5mm to RCA cables.

 

[theRizzle]

I think what you're not realising is that more than just guns and voices come from the centre. Part of the L+R channels are placed through the centre when sounds move from left to right and vice versa, also ambient noise in front of the player.

If you have kickass L+Rs and a bad or no centre, you're missing out on a LOT.

As far as importance goes for sound, it should be L+R first, then centre, then sub or surrounds depending on preference. Typically the surrounds are the last upgrade, but that can be switched for the sub depending on the frequency range capabilities of your mains.

I think what you're not realizing is that's just your opinion, and it's okay to have one. I used to be an audio engineer for TV and my opinion is that having positional audio in the rear is much more useful for gaming than having two channels you already have mixed into one and put in the middle of those two.

Thanks for your input though.

 

[SirMossyBloke]

I think what you're not realizing is that's just your opinion, and it's okay to have one. I used to be an audio engineer for TV and my opinion is that having positional audio in the rear is much more useful for gaming than having two channels you already have mixed into one and put in the middle of those two.

Thanks for your input though.

*facepalm*

I'll remember that then the next time someone watches a movie and complains "the voices are too low, I can't hear what they're saying".

Ex-audio engineer or not, my opinion is pretty much the general consensus among people interested in HT as a hobby. If you don't agree with it, thats fine, and theres nothing wrong with preferring back or rear speakers before a centre. However if you want better sound quality, you got with a centre before rears.

 

[RedlineRonin]

That will only get him stereo audio, unless it also includes a Dolby Digital Live or DTS Connect encoder.
It will be cheaper and higher quality to use the analog output from his motherboard (which does not appear to have an S/PDIF connection) connected to the 5.1 RCA connection on his receiver. He just needs 3x 3.5mm to RCA cables.

Good catch.

I assumed mobo's had been standard with optical for awhile now.

I'm guessing the uncompressed vs compressed argument becomes a bit moot at the price levels of equipment we're talking about, but what isn't is the fact that 3x 3.5mm to rca cables should be all of $5, so if nothing else, it's likely the cheapest option.

Related: What structurally happens to the uncompressed 5.1 signal with no rears attached? Presumably you still need to configure the sound output to "fold in" the rear channel information to the fronts, prior to it actually being output from the PC? Otherwise you'd be missing 2 channels of information, i'd assume?

 

[theRizzle]

*facepalm*

I'll remember that then the next time someone watches a movie and complains "the voices are too low, I can't hear what they're saying".

Ex-audio engineer or not, my opinion is pretty much the general consensus among people interested in HT as a hobby. If you don't agree with it, thats fine, and theres nothing wrong with preferring back or rear speakers before a centre. However if you want better sound quality, you got with a centre before rears.

*facepalm*

Are we talking about movies? or PC games?

 

[SirMossyBloke]

*facepalm*

Are we talking about movies? or PC games?

Well considering the quality of a lot of cutscenes nowdays, it can be considered both.

 

[nintendork666]

*facepalm*

Are we talking about movies? or PC games?

Fwiw, I actually use my PC for blurays and music quite often as well. It's sort of my everything machine.

 

[Paragon]

I'm guessing the uncompressed vs compressed argument becomes a bit moot at the price levels of equipment we're talking about, but what isn't is the fact that 3x 3.5mm to rca cables should be all of $5, so if nothing else, it's likely the cheapest option.

Dolby Digital 5.1 has a maximum bitrate of only 640kb/s for 6 channels of audio. That's ~106kb/channel which is highly compressed.
Many sources are even lower quality than that. A lot of sources use 224/384/448kb/s. I'm not sure what DDL uses, or if all DDL encoders are the same.

DTS is much better - typically 768 or 1536kb/s, but that is still noticeably compressed when you consider that it's 6 channels of audio.
Again: I'm not sure what bitrate DTS Connect uses.

But analog audio is going to be cheaper and should be higher quality as long as interference is not an issue, since it's uncompressed.

Related: What structurally happens to the uncompressed 5.1 signal with no rears attached? Presumably you still need to configure the sound output to "fold in" the rear channel information to the fronts, prior to it actually being output from the PC? Otherwise you'd be missing 2 channels of information, i'd assume?

It's probably just mixed into the left/right channels.

I'll remember that then the next time someone watches a movie and complains "the voices are too low, I can't hear what they're saying".

That shouldn't be a problem if you have good front speakers.

 

[theRizzle]

Fwiw, I actually use my PC for blurays and music quite often as well. It's sort of my everything machine.

In that case, if you can only get one component at a time and you know you are going to build into a 5.1 no matter what, I would say decide what you want to sound "better" in the interim, either movies or your games. If you are watching more movies than playing games, definitely get the center channel first. If it's for games, I guarantee you will be underwhelmed by just adding a center channel. It's far more useful information to hear what's going on behind you, (assuming you are playing 1st/3rd person stuff... you aren't going to hear much behind you in Dota or adventure games, etc) thus I would suggest a 4.1 setup first.

For music, it should just come out of your L/R speakers anyways. I personally hate stereo-upmixing because music isn't mixed for 5.1 (unless you buy a specific 5.1 version of the album).