Quote:
Originally Posted by David Spearritt  I'm afraid I am in the gimmick camp. Who cares if surround envelopes the listener more than stereo, those of us interested in listening to music with great enveloping sound go to live concerts with good friends. We don't sit at home tweaking our surround system. |
I am a little baffled at this comment. Isn't our job, ney our creed to give the listener the most realistic and enjoyable listening experience that we possibly can?
Not everyone wants to spend x$ to sit at a live performance with the coughing, small children, and overweight gentleman that smells like the pastrami sandwich he ate an hour ago. I love going to live performances, but I am actually more relaxed and can enjoy the performances more on my couch or in my studio.
If we aim not to improve the experience of the home listener, than by all means, halt production of all new playback devices, and stop all research. I however am not content to accept the mentality that "stereo works, therefore it's good enough"
5.1 is flawed, as any home reproduction system for the foreseeable future, but it is a better, more enjoyable listening experience than stereo. If we don't try to improve the experience, than we are no better than the mp3, earbud set.
With millions of 5.1 systems in peoples homes with their home theaters, it seems stupid not to be delivering music that they can enjoy the same way.
If the internet had been around 60 years ago we would be having the same debate about stereo and mono.
Flaw yes, Gimmick NO