I'll believe it when I hear it.
"But I assume this technology will end up everywhere where you can afford to have more than a few loudspeakers."
Ummmmm.....yeah, like the 300 or 400 that are mentioned in the article.
"A doctrine fostered by a delusional, illogical minority and rabidly promoted by an unscrupulous mainstream media, which holds forth the proposition that it is entirely possible to pick up a turd by the clean end."
I want to say B&W did something similar one year at CES (or some other show).
They had I want to say, 30 or 40 speakers set up in position just as an orchestra would have been. They had 30 or 40 separate audio tracks of each individual instrument, and the 30 or 40 amps and sources to go with it.
Nothing realistic for home use, for a lot of reasons, first of all being the media - but a lot of people said it was truly something to experience.
I look at it sort of like this, the pursuit of high fidelity is an illusion. What we are after, all of us, is to make that illusion as close to reality as possible. To that end, what constitutes overkill depends on, primarily, budget and personal preferance. That being true, the sky is the limit. More channels, more speakers......more more more
(did I sound Zen-like? I was trying my Dan imitation)
I plan for the future. - F1Nut
The costs would be prohibitive. Although neat as a novelty, not what I'd really need. Besides, what good is three dimensional sound without three dimensional projection? Disney could use it, I suppose...
I smell ass, burning ass, glowing cherry red spanked ass.
Well I'm sold. I'm trading in my polks right now, and picking up 300 of those little bose 2 way acoustimass speakers. Sweet.;)
There are two ways to argue with women. Both of them are wrong.
There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)