Originally posted by curegeorg:
To benefit at all from surround sound, there needs to be separation between each channel. If you were sitting on a stool with each speaker right beside you, you would not hear surround sound, you would just hear a lot of sound. Surround sound is meant to provide localized sounds.
Separation between channels doesn't have to be done with distance alone. It can also be done with angles.
I've listened to a system made of 7 nearfield monitors, all of which were little more than arm's length away. There was no problem with localization; especially in the surround field, where I heard solid rear vs side separation.
Despite the close proximity of the speakers, most listeners could localize sounds at their sides vs sounds behind them. The difference in direction is easy to spot. Even moreso when they are listening to speakers physically at those locations rather than relying on phantom imaging.
I suppose you are nit-picking, but that is what room size has to do with surround sound in general and specifically 7.1 vs 5.1 vs 2.1, etc.
I still respectfully disagree with you, and it's not for nitpicking sake. I've seen too many people discouraged from doing fine 7.1 set-ups because they were led to believe that their room falls below some size threshold.
As I said earlier, if you're in a large room but your couch is against the back wall, your situation is not conducive to a 7.1 set-up. But you could be in a small room and be sitting near the middle and have an excellent 7.1 system. Size is not the deciding factor, seating location and how much room you have behind you is what matters most.
Lateral sounds should come from your sides, surround-back content should come from behind you. There's no reason why this should hold true for large rooms but not small ones. Please understand, I'm not saying this to be nitpicky or give you a hard time. I've just never seen a size threshold applied to 5.1 vs 7.1.
OK, you can take 15 minutes. But then it's back to posting.
Best,
Sanjay
Previous Topic
Index
