"Giles Martin has achieved a sweet and happy balance here, creating an immersive listening experience while maintaining a somewhat traditional Stereo sound stage that honors the richness of the Mono mix. So fear not Dear Readers-who-are-haters-of-overly-immersive-surround-sound-mixes.."
@:
Pretty much the
worst thing to read in a review.
http://audiophilereview.com/audioph...-at-50-part-1-the-new-surround-sound-mix.html
Boy, I'm sure glad the 5.1 mix is faithful to the mono mix.
@:
@:
@:
How is that even possible???
Mono delivers all sound from the same point of origin(providing NO imaging whatsoever). Stereo gave the ability to "place" a sound in a certain point between two points in space, more importantly allowing to separate the instruments physically, providing a quantum leap in
clarity. 5.1 simply provides additional space to showcase musical parts, vocals or instruments.
I think it may be the name "5.1" that freaks people out like its some kinda techie-trick. Perhaps if the industry had adopted the term,
Ultra-Stereo or
SuperStereo, we wouldn't have this fallacy of a 5.1 mix being a gimmick.
A mono, stereo or multi-channel mix will always be unique to itself without the possibility of being similar to each other. Such complete ignorance would be akin to saying: "we are proud to offer chocolate ice cream that retains all the taste sensations of strawberry!"
So what is this imbecile talking about that it "honors the richness of the Mono mix".???
Sorry guys, I just hate utter & abject stupidity, hence the mini-rant.
5.1 is no trick or gimmick. It upsets me to see morons like this reviewer continue to promulgate this ignorant and false perception. And of course much worse that remixing engineers completely fail in the opportunity to allow an honest 5.1 remix to take the music to where we all know it can go...