In Reply to: Why is surround sound not "high end"? posted by Raymond Leggs on July 14, 2012 at 21:27:41:
Couple of things occur...some of which has perhaps already been mentioned.
The room for HT / 5.1 must be proper for hifi. Most aren't. Setup / treatments could get extreme.
The source material should be recorded with 5.1 in mind. Most isn't. 2ch thru a 5.1 system can start sounding........glitzy
Equal costing systems favor 2 ch. Less is more.
A single sub, properly setup and crossed over low enough is fine, though.
Too much is never enough
This post is made possible by the generous support of people like you and our sponsors:
Follow Ups
- RE: Why is surround sound not "high end"? - pictureguy 12:21:26 07/15/12 (12)
- RE: Why is surround sound not "high end"? - josh358 17:37:42 07/18/12 (4)
- RE: Why is surround sound not "high end"? - pictureguy 17:57:35 07/18/12 (3)
- RE: Why is surround sound not "high end"? - josh358 18:15:52 07/18/12 (2)
- RE: Why is surround sound not "high end"? - pictureguy 21:26:33 07/18/12 (1)
- RE: Why is surround sound not "high end"? - josh358 06:52:29 07/19/12 (0)
- RE: Why is surround sound not "high end"? - 3db 04:47:56 07/18/12 (1)
- RE: Why is surround sound not "high end"? - pictureguy 09:08:57 07/18/12 (0)
- Is there a conflict here? ;-) - Kal Rubinson 13:03:42 07/15/12 (4)
- LOL !! - AbeCollins 13:32:27 07/15/12 (3)
- RE: LOL !! - pictureguy 18:42:22 07/15/12 (2)
- Too much information. It was just a jab. (NT) - Kal Rubinson 07:17:57 07/16/12 (1)
- RE: Too much information. It was just a jab. (NT) - pictureguy 08:11:45 07/16/12 (0)