Welp.... Stevo's at it again!!!!! This time Surround Sound is dead!!!!

[Worf101]

Steve Guttenberg my favorite proclaimer of the "obvious" when he's right and not much else when he's wrong has decided this month that Surround Sound is dead... at least for home audio (music) and maybe for HT as well.

Is surround sound for music and home theater on its way out? | The Audiophiliac - CNET News

For once he makes some valid points about SACD and alike but he's on shakier ground with HT audio... Still even I must admit that Sound Bars are selling like hotcakes and fewer people seem concerned with dedicated multi-speaker HT systems....

Give it a read lemme know what you think.

Worf

[Hyfi]

Never cared for surround music. I have never been to a concert where people played behind me except for a few rare occasions where they played wireless and entered from the rear or ran around the venue.

As for movies, the more people I talk to are not interested in multi channel setup due to placement, amount of room needed, WAF, and other factors including getting it setup properly and maintained. I would say mostly us gearheads are the ones still doing it. I even opted for a ZVOX unit for the bedroom instead of another 2ch or 5.1ch setup.

[recoveryone]

I'm glad he focused on surround music and not try to bring the whole surround market down.

IMHO surround music suffered mainly of not having a dominate source that raised from the battle field of format wars. We all have seen from Bata vs VHS, Divx vs DVD and so on. The recording industry shares in part of the blame as they have not supported any of the formats whole heartly and that in itself made it a niche market.

With the eye on the prize, your/our dollars the industry focused on easy access over real quality of sound. Not to say that surround sound music is better, but in all cases it was produced at higher fildelity. It was easier to reach the masses with heavy compressed audio and leave the quality behind. Even in 2ch, a SACD is 10x better any day of the week than a ACC file from Itunes, but if the public has no real reference point to judge by then its mute.

As for the avarage joe part in all this, I would say that many are still visually owwwed and ahhhed with a big pretty picture than the sound. When big screens first came out, it was all about the size and that factor is still priority one for many. How many of us have been to friends home and try to help them get the most out of that big picture using the right cables. Surround sound suffers the same fate as many want it but do not really know what it is and what it takes to have it right ( heard stories of people having all 5 speakers aligned across the front, thinking that was surround sound). The industry again is not slow on capitalizing on making a quick dollar, and we get the sound bar. The all in one HT speaker with no need for wires and extra speakers, but again where did the quality go? in the backseat.

[Mr Peabody]

I also wonder if it's an effect of so many B&M stores being lost that could effectively set up a surround sound for a demo. Let's face it, if you don't know what it is, or about, you aren't going to buy it. I personally never thought surround music got off the ground. There's some surround music things I've heard that were fun like Porcupine Tree, Flaming Lips or BT, but I still prefer 2-channel music for my main listening.

[StevenSurprenant]

Concerning music, I don't see the need for surround. A friend uses SACD and he restricts output to the 3 front speakers, which he claims to sound much better than 2 channel, at least with his system.

I'm not sure that I can explain this, but with my stereo system, I can hear a 3D soundstage behind the speakers, but at the same time, the room seems to be filled with ambient sound. In other words, it almost sounds like surround except that the images are always in front of you.

I've got speakers all over my living room and I don't like it and I'm an enthusiast too, go figure! It would be different if I had a room specifically for audio. Sometimes I think about getting rid of my surround system just to clean up the room. I don't use it very much.

In real life, at a venue where music is being played, many times you can hear the sound being reflected off the walls around you as distinct sources of sound. I could be wrong, but it seems that the only reason for music surround is to reproduce the venue's acoustic attributes, which may or may not be that important to many listeners.

So, I agree with Steve. Surround music is a bust.

Some of you may remember that I'm no fan of digital, at least not 16 bit. I've gotten it to sound decent in my system, but when compared to vinyl or hi-res digital, it's lacking.

The problem with Hi-Res formats is that few people have a system capable of appreciating it. Where I live, my county has a population of about 113,000 people and no audio stores. Even our local Best buy has only a few systems available and all of them are midfi, at best.

So, without the hardware and the interest, it stands to reason that anything beyond CD or mp3 is a waste of money for most people.

[JohnMichael]

I heard a good music surround system once and it was not like the quad mess that did have speakers playing instruments behind you. The system made a wider, deeper and more solid soundstage with nothing odd going on behind your back.

My problem was with a fixed budget I always thought I could put together a better sounding two channel system. Two better quality speakers than five of lesser quality combined with a good two channel integrated amp along with your choice of sources. Not only is limited budget an issue along with a limited budget sometimes comes limited space.

[Sir Terrence the Terrible]

Never cared for surround music. I have never been to a concert where people played behind me except for a few rare occasions where they played wireless and entered from the rear or ran around the venue.

Not only have you never cared about it, but it is patently obvious you have no experience with it either. There are so few recordings that have discrete instruments in the surrounds that it is not worth mentioning. I have nearly 800 multichannel recordings, and maybe 15 of them have discrete instruments placed in the surrounds.

Have you ever been to a concert where all of the information hitting your ears is coming from the front only? I highly doubt it. How about the crowd noises happening from behind a orchestra? Not in any concert hall or venue I have been in.

As for movies, the more people I talk to are not interested in multi channel setup due to placement, amount of room needed, WAF, and other factors including getting it setup properly and maintained. I would say mostly us gearheads are the ones still doing it. I even opted for a ZVOX unit for the bedroom instead of another 2ch or 5.1ch setup.

You must be talking to folks in a reverberation chamber, because multichannel system are outselling 2 channel system by at least 20-1 based on NDP recent survey.

Anecdotal stories are only valuable within your own world. Your opinions have always been based on myths, outdated, recycled anecdotal information, and talk from a single minded crowd.

[Hyfi]

Not only have you never cared about it, but it is patently obvious you have no experience with it either. There are so few recordings that have discrete instruments in the surrounds that it is not worth mentioning. I have nearly 800 multichannel recordings, and maybe 15 of them have discrete instruments placed in the surrounds.

Have you ever been to a concert where all of the information hitting your ears is coming from the front only? I highly doubt it. How about the crowd noises happening from behind a orchestra? Not in any concert hall or venue I have been in.



You must be talking to folks in a reverberation chamber, because multichannel system are outselling 2 channel system by at least 20-1 based on NDP recent survey.

Anecdotal stories are only valuable within your own world. Your opinions have always been based on myths, outdated, recycled anecdotal information, and talk from a single minded crowd.

If you re-read the original post, the OP asked "What do we think". That means he asked for our opinions. I know that is hard for some to grasp since all they want to do is argue and attempt to point out their superiority and attempt to make other look small. It's OK, we are all used to it here.

As for your second remark, spiteful as usual, the people I talk to are in the same pay scale as myself and below. We do not have the cash and multiple houses and spare gear as you do and I guess the people you associate with. We all know the Haves don't spend much time with the Have Not's except to belittle them.

Glad you showed up. At least there were 4 posts yesterday.

[Sir Terrence the Terrible]

If you re-read the original post, the OP asked "What do we think". That means he asked for our opinions. I know that is hard for some to grasp since all they want to do is argue and attempt to point out their superiority and attempt to make other look small. It's OK, we are all used to it here.

I think we are used to your uniformed, airheaded, unfactual opinions as well.

As for your second remark, spiteful as usual, the people I talk to are in the same pay scale as myself and below. We do not have the cash and multiple houses and spare gear as you do and I guess the people you associate with. We all know the Haves don't spend much time with the Have Not's except to belittle them.

Once again, you base everything on somebody's else's finances of which you know nothing about. You can save this green crap you just spewed up, it is not relevant to anything in this discussion.

The only have and have not here is audio and video education, and that is a definitely have not area with you. Anything goes with you, and that is why you get anything but great results in the end.

Glad you showed up. At least there were 4 posts yesterday.

Glad I could contribute.

[Hyfi]

Glad I could contribute.

Please point me to your reply to the original post of your thoughts on the article that was linked. That would be helpful.

[Hyfi]

I think we are used to your uniformed, airheaded, unfactual opinions as well.

Once again, you base everything on somebody's else's finances of which you know nothing about. You can save this green crap you just spewed up, it is not relevant to anything in this discussion.

First of all, I do know about the finances of the people I referred to. How did you determine that I don't? ASSumption?

Secondly, can you explain to me the difference between an Unfactual Opinion, and a Factual Opinion when the definition of Opinion is "a view or judgment formed about something, not necessarily based on fact or knowledge"?

Why do you think it's called an "Opinion", genius?