The solution to establish any mass market for surround would be
obviously to look into better playback via headphones.
(binaural, 5.1, FOA, .AMB, etc.)
Listening via (4-x) speakers at home would be higher en.
Motion-compensated playback is possible nowadays. Many devices have
motion sensors.
(I personally believe that motion-compenation has to be included into
the "surround via headphone" approach.)
Mark: I dislike this "case closed" rhetorics, it is just your opinion.
We know that the music industry has missed many boats, but maybe you
also had one or two wrong predictions in your recent life?
Best,
Stefan
newme...@aol.com wrote:
Folks:
ALL reproduced music is a "special effect" -- if you wish to hear a
performance, as it was actually played, go to the performance.
MONO is a special effect.
STEREO is a special effect.
SURROUND is a special effect.
MP3 is a special effect.
None of them is a live performance.
And, no amount of money spent by "audiophiles" can change that. Neither
can a few extremely well-executed recordings. It will always be a special
effect and everyone knows it.
Starting In the 1960s, the *stereo* special effect beat out the *mono*
special effect for the reproduction of music. A lot of people *made* a lot of
money as a new mass-market was generated, culminating in the CD (followed
by MP3 etc.)
Beginning in the 1990s, the music industry tried to promote the *surround*
(i.e. 5.1 style) special effect -- driven by the installed base of home
theaters and DVD players, along with a preceived need to recapture the
revenues being lost in CD sales (due to the MP3 special effect).
They *spent* a lot of money, tried various technologies, and they failed.
The "consumer" did not believe that it was "good enough" (i.e. compared to
the stereo special effect) to make the switch. No one is going to try
that again.
Furthermore, as music reproduction shifted to MP3-based online delivery and
ear-bud reproduction (i.e. another version of the stereo special effect)
-- the idea of pretending that all this isn't a *special effect* by trying
to get "absolute sound" in your living-room just seemed more ridiculous than
ever.
Case closed.
Mark Stahlman
Brooklyn NY
P.S. By the 1990s, the "ground" of our experience had shifted from the
acoustic/electric to the tactile/digital and we were "freed" to do whatever we
wanted with sound. People playing with Ambisonics was the result. But
our personal interests no longer intersect with the now obsolete efforts to
generate mass-markets around new sonic special effects. Lou Reed can play
around all he wants. It will not create a new mass-market for a new special
effect.
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL:
<https://mail.music.vt.edu/mailman/private/sursound/attachments/20120413/10ced087/attachment.html>
_______________________________________________
Sursound mailing list
Sursound@music.vt.edu
https://mail.music.vt.edu/mailman/listinfo/sursound
_______________________________________________
Sursound mailing list
Sursound@music.vt.edu
https://mail.music.vt.edu/mailman/listinfo/sursound
