As an ST-250 B-format pantophonic practitioner of nearly 20 years, I yield to no one in my appreciation of FOA via a hexagon layout with a Cepiar decoder. That being said, the benefits of the 3 rear loudspeakers (i.e., localized applause and reverberation) do not compare with the benefits acheived by the 3 front ones (i.e., soundstage envelopment and spaciousness)! Indeed, I would never replace my 3 front loudspeakers with a quadrilateral layout. Why three-speaker stereophony never became an end in itself is a mystery to me. It is not nearly as financially and logistically burdensome as surround sound and yet its benefits are very tangible.
--- On Fri, 4/13/12, Robert Greene <gre...@math.ucla.edu> wrote: Surround could have had the same effect for music. It could have raised one's expectations of realism and made some kinds of music sound nearly right in a big way. But for various reasons, it did not happen. For one thing, the pop music industry had moved into a realm where people no longer cared about the acoustics of the venue. "Music" became something that was not anchored in acoustic reality with a real venue. But a lot of music is so anchored. And for that , surround done right is still valuable. But done right is the operative phrase. Robert _______________________________________________ Sursound mailing list Sursound@music.vt.edu https://mail.music.vt.edu/mailman/listinfo/sursound -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: <https://mail.music.vt.edu/mailman/private/sursound/attachments/20120413/362564fd/attachment.html> _______________________________________________ Sursound mailing list Sursound@music.vt.edu https://mail.music.vt.edu/mailman/listinfo/sursound
