In Reply to: Re: Yes, but posted by Ted Smith on March 25, 2007 at 06:28:27:
I think it has probably more to do with the recording technique. If in the recording the center channel has not been used as 'prominant' as the left and right than the difference between a mixdown from 3 to 2 is less obvious than when the recording has a fully equal use of the 3 front channels. A third source used correctly like that will increase the overall resolution. The same also applies to the way the rear channels are used.
It takes time for engineers to take a different approach in their recording techniques with respect to surround compared to stereo. That is also difficult as we hardly ever make surround only recordings but always have to achieve an equally good result in stereo, much like the beginning of stereo when a mono result was still required. Only after not having to think about the mono did engineers fully concentrate on stereo. At the same time (2 channel) stereo has been the norm for such a long time that people generally take it as their reference. Also recording engineers. In my opinion (5 channel) surround can deliver much improved results over stereo and quadro, and with time and experience consumers and engineers will think of surround compared to stereo as they now of stereo compared to mono.
This post is made possible by the generous support of people like you and our sponsors:
Follow Ups
- Re: Yes, but - Erdo 07:50:19 03/25/07 (9)
- BTW, thanks. - Ted Smith 08:07:36 03/25/07 (8)
- Another question - Robert C. Lang 14:04:21 03/25/07 (7)
- Two answers :) - Ted Smith 15:37:18 03/25/07 (6)
- Do You Hear A Difference For These? - Robertc88 09:26:01 03/26/07 (3)
- Re: Do You Hear A Difference For These? - Ted Smith 11:27:04 03/26/07 (2)
- Re: Do You Hear A Difference For These? - Robertc88 12:12:24 03/26/07 (1)
- Bear with me a little - Ted Smith 12:22:46 03/26/07 (0)
- Re: Two answers :) - Robert C. Lang 16:08:26 03/25/07 (1)
- Re: Two answers :) - Ted Smith 17:02:49 03/25/07 (0)