Does this guy have any clue?

QuadraphonicQuad

Help Support QuadraphonicQuad:

This site may earn a commission from merchant affiliate links, including eBay, Amazon, and others.

boxhead

300 Club - QQ All-Star
Since 2002/2003
Joined
Aug 24, 2003
Messages
382
Location
Sydney, Australia
May I introduce to you Andrew Heinzman, News Editor for Review Geek. Now I'm all for respecting other's opinions, but I don't think this guy gets it at all.

Going by his comments I'm having trouble believing that he's even heard a proper surround mix by Wilson, Scheiner and the like. And don't start me on his (lack of) understanding on spatial audio. He needs educating.

https://www.reviewgeek.com/129509/why-surround-sound-doesnt-make-sense-for-music/
 
May I introduce to you Andrew Heinzman, News Editor for Review Geek. Now I'm all for respecting other's opinions, but I don't think this guy gets it at all.

Going by his comments I'm having trouble believing that he's even heard a proper surround mix by Wilson, Scheiner and the like. And don't start me on his (lack of) understanding on spatial audio. He needs educating.

https://www.reviewgeek.com/129509/why-surround-sound-doesnt-make-sense-for-music/
bah, i wouldn't give much credence to the witterings of a hippy in need of a haircut - if he got those luscious locks away from his ears he could start using them properly to listen without prejudice šŸ˜‚

should he tackle such a subject in future he should probably learn to present his case based on actual facts to backup his misinformed opinion šŸ§

ultimately i'm glad i don't bother subscribing to such drivel but thank you for the handy reminder by way of sharing it here! šŸ‘
 
Certain audio frequencies have more room to ā€œbreatheā€ in surround sound, but the format can be unkind to the midrange, which is where we traditionally get a songā€™s ā€œenergy.ā€
Or you haven't set up your speaker system properly. I've heard dinky 200 dollar setups that don't have this problem.
Most songs available in surround sound were originally made for stereo. Someone just decided to remix these tracks for surround sound. And the results are usually awful. Taking advantage of the expanded soundstage means panning instruments willy-nilly around the listener, leaving uneven gaps where instruments used to meld together and create lushness.
Are...are you by chance listening to a Silverline disc? Or perhaps a disc mixed by a stereo purist? Or a disc released at the infancy of surround sound? I guarantee you any modern release you pick up will be fine.
Rear speakers are often the most annoying part of these surround sound remixes. In a perfect world, rear-firing speakers would reproduce the sound of a room, giving you a better feel for the environment where something was recorded.
Whar??? Auouughhough??? So in a perfect world, you DON'T use the rear speakers for anything but ambience? Everything should be in stereo only? Did you know most things are recorded in mono?
Artist intent is also a factor in this conversation.
So I guess Elton John, Steven Wilson, Genesis, Pink Floyd, Jethro Tull, and many more are just dead wrong when they say that surround is the best way to enjoy their music.


Someone please help this man!
 
Fake news. Say what you want about Apple spatial audio, but at least they are making an attempt to bring some sort of surround sound to the masses...even if via those ridiculous looking wireless decorations hanging out of one's ears. One of my grandsons walks around with AirPods in his ears almost all the time.
 
Last edited:
What annoyed me most was the repeated use of "Rear-Firing speakers" what's wrong with just saying "Rear Speakers"?
Well, upward-firing means they are pushing sound upwards, so rear-firing must actually mean "Front Speakers". If he really is putting rear-firing speakers behind his listening position no wonder he is disappointed. šŸ˜€

(I scanned the article but clearly it is not worth spending time on, but this mistake was too fun to miss.)
 
Judging by the reactions, it seems he struck quite a good nerve. Why such a strong reaction, are you feeling threatened some of what he is saying might be true? Not everyone is jazzed on Atmos and surround, peace on earth and coexistence.
 
Judging by the reactions, it seems he struck quite a good nerve. Why such a strong reaction, are you feeling threatened some of what he is saying might be true? Not everyone is jazzed on Atmos and surround, peace on earth and coexistence.
true, not everyone gets Surround Music and he is one of those people, fair enough.

its his flimsy defence of Stereo that makes his anti-Atmos argument so.. ridiculously obnoxious! šŸ˜‚
 
simple...this guy's brain is not wired for MCH.
I have always said that the QQ brethren and those who enjoy MCH i because we are more ...intelligent(??) in that way and can process sound coming from other directions and enjoy the experience...more or less the same way women are able to process speech in both brain hemispheres, as opposed to us less advanced XYs (women have the advantage of having the connection between hemispheres be physically almost twice as wide as ours!)...
I'd admire the guy if he had been humble and say something akin to "hey, I don't get it but I am happy for those who do because , just because I don't enjoy it , there MUST be something to it because millions of people actually enjoy MCH...."
....but that's just me!!!
 
Back
Top