|
|
![]() |
||||||||||||||||||||
|
Best Blu-ray Movie Deals
|
Best Blu-ray Movie Deals, See All the Deals » |
Top deals |
New deals
![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() |
![]() $67.11 | ![]() $35.00 | ![]() $32.28 9 hrs ago
| ![]() $31.32 | ![]() $14.37 | ![]() $29.96 | ![]() $34.96 | ![]() $29.99 1 day ago
| ![]() $22.49 | ![]() $49.99 | ![]() $22.49 | ![]() $36.69 |
![]() |
#11 | |||
Blu-ray Samurai
|
![]() Quote:
I've never been impressed with the "no one is forcing you" argument. It implies a level of elitism of the "let them eat cake" stripe. If any technology is supposed to be for the consumer market - layered onto every disc sold, for example, and obviously paid for by all consumers as part of the purchase - it should be accessible without undue technological compromise, or appearance, or cost. Someone would definitely be forcing me to pay for 30 speaker signals to be encoded. Quote:
I have already considered this, and thought through the methods for tacking on this "drool-worthy" sound schema. It obviously will be through modular expansion of existing equipment. The idea that everyone will run out and buy new receivers makes no sense, and can only be "bleeding edge" bait. Whether it is actually worth it is a subjective idea. Adding thirty new speakers to a home environment is ludicrous, no matter how subjective. Elitism has little charm. All this dick-stretching comparison about "who has the most comprehensive, impressive, complete audio dream" is going to be funded by the hoi-polloi who only have soundbar equipment; I'm not fooled, and nor will be the average consumer. Such folly sandbagged 3-D (line up, folks, buy the 3-D version of the film) and I'd expect to see the Dolby Atmos version of a film on a special disk, too, if it's all that desirable. We'll see. Quote:
I've heard that line before, from the 3-D people. Haven't you? It was part of the "you only have to buy one disc, your objections are meaningless" crowd, circa 2010-2011. I'd rather wait and see what kind of encode comes with another phantom, the UHD/4K Blu standard. The average consumer is not going to add another 4, or 8, or 30 speakers to 5.1 or 7.1 array. I have two such arrays now, and two 2.1 setups, all for areas used both as social and viewing/listening areas. This is not a "new standard", it's a gimmick to sell audio gear, just as 3-D was a gimmick to reboot television sales. I don't expect it to be anywhere as well received as 3-D. This is not to criticize the standard, far from it. It might be really nice, but it is a technological Rube Goldberg mess. As I've already mentioned, crossing vaulted ceilings, certain room furnishings, and other things found in the normal consumer setting, is a mess already. Considering this is the type of home where upscale buyers - able to purchase this gear - are actually going to have to place it, it makes less than no sense. I think the ability to multiplex these audio tracks has exceeded the delivery technology by quite a bit, and this thing is nowhere near ready for prime time home consumer delivery. Having a ceiling on a nice home festooned with some cluster of speakers is not going to be a popular home decoration staple. When looking for audio gear for my own home, I wound up paying a premium price for Sonus Faber, Definitive Technology Mythos, and other gear, primarily for good looks - many speakers sound great, but look terrible - and the same will face "Atmos" speaker arrays on generally unfurnished ceilings. What, 30 speaker cans trying to hide "concealed" speakers in a ceiling? Wiring this mess sounds reasonable? And "adequate"? If you're convinced every home should have a dedicated theater, go ahead and say so. |
|||
![]() |
|
|
![]() |
|
|