Think we will ever get 26.1 audio fields for home theatre?

[BigToque]

That would be kinda cool, sitting in the middle of a cube with 26 separate channels coming at you

 

[dug777]

mmm 5.1 trips me out when i'm pissed, so i'm in no hurry

 

[Howard]

The law of diminishing returns applies after 4 channels.

 

[FlashG]

I would settle for a high quality stereo setup.

 

[Quasmo]

only thing you get from 7.1 is the ability to truly pan audio.

 

[BigToque]

Originally posted by: Howard
The law of diminishing returns applies after 4 channels.

But do you know how cool it would be for underwater, aerial and space movies?

 

[nakedfrog]

I could maybe see 24 channels, three in each corner at high, medium, and low heights, and then inbetween the corners all the way around the room. But that seems excessive.

 

[n yusef]

I don't think so. I would like, however, to have speakers mounted on my ceiling and floor. That would be cool.

 

[YOyoYOhowsDAjello]

I think we'll have more subs by then

 

[sharkeeper]

I've seen setups with more feeds because each driver had its own amplifier!

In any case, if the effect cannot be achieved with the formats we have now you should consider hiring another engineer.

Good stereo (that's just two channels!) setups can easily spread the image well beyond the area of the two speakers as well as in front and in the rear. It's quite uncanny. I've had visitors comment about how well the "surrounds" were concealed and when I tell them there are no surrounds it's even better.

Most movies just plain suck as far as utilising the sound capabilities. There's no excuse for this.

 

[IHateMyJob2004]

Originally posted by: Stefan
That would be kinda cool, sitting in the middle of a cube with 26 separate channels coming at you

At home in your own Home theater? Sure. 7.1 is here. I'm sure there are processros that can take 7.1 and up it to 11.1. They have to exist somewhere.

But you are assuming the wrong thing. Bass is often though of non-directional. That is BS. If you turn a sub on in a room, I bet you can find it. The next evolution:

7.3?

Then 7.5
Then 7.7
Then 9.7

etc....

 

[IHateMyJob2004]

Originally posted by: Stefan

Originally posted by: Howard
The law of diminishing returns applies after 4 channels.

But do you know how cool it would be for underwater, aerial and space movies?

Oh, you mean mounting speakers on ceiling and hte such. An interesting idea. I have to admit, scenes where things fly over your head would be taken to a new level, liekt he opening to Star Wars Episode 4

 

[JoeKing]

I'm all for 360.1

 

[sharkeeper]

But you are assuming the wrong thing. Bass is often though of non-directional. That is BS. If you turn a sub on in a room, I bet you can find it. The next evolution:

No the term "sub" is VERY abused in the industry. A TRUE subwoofer takes over where the mains leave off. Decent mains should be capable of acoustic reproduction down to 39Hz. Good reference systems don't need a subwoofer in the sense that they will be within 3dB output at 20 Hz. (Laurie Fincham) We do use subwoofers with such systems and they go very very low and take lots of power and the transmission lines are equally big.

This 150Hz bullsh!t is nonsense. This is why I generall don't like three piece systems. The majority of your music CANNOT be accurately handled with a 3.5" driver. No way.

You cannot have too much bass. You can have too much in accurate bass though. True sub bass begins in the single digits or even millihertz. It's a realm that only a handful of systems can touch outside of pyrotechnical helpers which (obviously) are never used in the home!

 

[mobobuff]

I would settle for 9.1 (7.1 with ceiling and floor speakers). When I was watching Mr & Mrs. Smith, there was a scene where soldiers dropped onto the roof of a building that Pitt and Jolie were in, and the sound came from directly above my head... it was totally wicked! I don't know if they had ceiling speakers or if the used audio filters to feel like the audio was overhead (binaural?). Anyway it was sweet.

 

[IHateMyJob2004]

Originally posted by: sharkeeper

But you are assuming the wrong thing. Bass is often though of non-directional. That is BS. If you turn a sub on in a room, I bet you can find it. The next evolution:

No the term "sub" is VERY abused in the industry. A TRUE subwoofer takes over where the mains leave off. Decent mains should be capable of acoustic reproduction down to 39Hz. Good reference systems don't need a subwoofer in the sense that they will be within 3dB output at 20 Hz. (Laurie Fincham) We do use subwoofers with such systems and they go very very low and take lots of power and the transmission lines are equally big.

This 150Hz bullsh!t is nonsense. This is why I generall don't like three piece systems. The majority of your music CANNOT be accurately handled with a 3.5" driver. No way.

You cannot have too much bass. You can have too much in accurate bass though. True sub bass begins in the single digits or even millihertz. It's a realm that only a handful of systems can touch outside of pyrotechnical helpers which (obviously) are never used in the home!

Very good argument! And makes 100% total sense. I have to admit, my Infiinity Towers wit hthe 12" woofers did jsut fine. no subs needed there and it was a nice flat response down to very low frequencies.