Sennheiser Soundbar with Dolby Atmos, DTS:X & MPEG-H to launch in May

QuadraphonicQuad

Help Support QuadraphonicQuad:

This site may earn a commission from merchant affiliate links, including eBay, Amazon, and others.
I'm not really an advocate of sound bars...at least not yet...but since you mentioned advertising being close to dishonest...what about the car companies...they use the "surround" word when it's only 2 channels...one top of the line Bose systems in a Cadillac had 32 speakers and just 2 channels...nobody calls them on it...I guess they could say the music "surrounds" the passengers...that's just contemporary marketing...for various products..

I don't believe "surround" or "surround sound" are any sort of technical or copyrighted terms, are they? So, in that regard, it's probably to Sennheiser's credit that they DON'T use the word.

But what they also don't do is say anything along the lines of "as close to a real 5.1 surround sound system as one can get out of a sound bar!" or some such that would be much more honest, IMO.

But, like you said, I don't think they are going after the existing surround sound market. I don't think they are expecting to get people to trade in their surround sound systems for this. They are going after that guy who wants something better than the sound out of his TV, and maybe has never even heard a surround sound system except at the movie theater.
 
As an aside, the fact that "Atmos" which is supposed to be surround on steroids with height elements and up to 60 object speakers is devolved to a buzzword for shitbars before it even climbs out of the box is just sad.
 
I was going for the comparison that the stupid expensive USB cable still did the full job of a USB cable. All the ones and zeros got to the other end intact just like the $10 USB cable. Whereas the soundbar will not deliver the discrete experience of 5 even semi-properly placed individual speakers no matter what you try to do with it. (Again, physics. You truly can't ricochet sound off a wall and have it remain full spectrum as required for music program.)

Well, exactly. That's where your comparison doesn't work. The $1000 USB cable claims to do the exact same thing as the cheap ones, only better and are sold to people who foolishly believe those claims. Soundbars don't claim to deliver the discrete experience of 5 speakers spread around the room. They don't claim to defy physics. They don't claim to ricochet sound off a wall and have it remain full spectrum as required for music program.

They DO claim (at least in the case of this one soundbar) to create a "3D spatial experience" and to be "immersive". Does it do that?

I'd have to hear it to know how well it does it.

It's frustrating because there are more frugal options that DO deliver. Five little speakers as I said. You get a surprisingly efficient system dynamic range with even 5 modest little speakers with a surround mix spread out to them in addition to the spacial elements. Many people would be impressed with just that if they had a chance to hear it.

well, again, you're really comparing apples and oranges. It's not the "how much do I have to spend to get a decent surround sound system?" that is the appeal of soundbars. It's the space factor that is the issue. I don't care HOW frugal the system might be, if someone doesn't want to put speakers behind them then they aren't going to want to do that regardless of how modest the system is or how impressive it sounds.


It's double frustrating that some will dismiss surround as not really all that different than stereo because of this crap. "I've got a surround system (meaning a soundbar). Meh."
I agree that's a risk and if it happens would be frustrating.

You can lead a horse to water...
Yeah, some people will never, and I mean NEVER set up speakers properly even if you give them to them for free. Heck, you could go to their house and set up their system and the next day find they stacked all 5 speakers in one corner because it "looked better". I get that. Maybe one of these thingies would be net better than that? The likes of us just need to step back from those scenarios and move on of course. But the folks out there who would actually appreciate this golden age of audio we're in if they hadn't been bamboozled by Worst Purchase products and blown their budget on this crap. That's what frustrates me and make me say "Hey! Don't buy that! Check this out instead! It's better and 1/5th the price!" I think that would generate more interest in 5.1 music releases at the end of the day.

well, you're right that the likes of us need to move on because these products aren't geared towards you and me. As far as that sub-group of people who might prefer a real surround sound system if only they've heard one? Well hopefully most get the chance to if they haven't already.

Luckily, even in places like Best Buy, they all still have the room where the 'good' stuff is set up. Hey, maybe they'll even put these high-end surround bars in those rooms so people can contrast and compare first hand the different listening experience and decide for themselves which they most prefer vs the needs of their budget, room size, spouse, etc.
 
I don't believe "surround" or "surround sound" are any sort of technical or copyrighted terms, are they? So, in that regard, it's probably to Sennheiser's credit that they DON'T use the word.

But what they also don't do is say anything along the lines of "as close to a real 5.1 surround sound system as one can get out of a sound bar!" or some such that would be much more honest, IMO.

But, like you said, I don't think they are going after the existing surround sound market. I don't think they are expecting to get people to trade in their surround sound systems for this. They are going after that guy who wants something better than the sound out of his TV, and maybe has never even heard a surround sound system except at the movie theater.

The definition of surround I've seen the most involves music that involves more than 2 channels(stereo)….just saying:unsure:
 
The definition of surround I've seen the most involves music that involves more than 2 channels(stereo)….just saying:unsure:
Well, I'm just saying I don't think there is an official or copywritten definition of the term that anyone would be in violation of using improperly.

It's kind of like saying something is "diet". We all know what it means and have certain expectations for it, but if someone puts out a "diet" soda that is only 1 calorie less than their regular version? I doubt they'll get in any trouble for it.

So, to that degree, I suppose Sennheiser deserves some credit for not violating the commonly-understood definition in the same way the car manufacturers have.
 
Although sound bars effectively beat the hell out of the 'average' TV's built in [crappy] speakers [I have one with a sub], the claims that they can do ATMOS and even 5.1 Surround CONVINCINGLY is a crock.

Can chickens Fly?


6811592_12911570_lz.jpg


Steely Dan said it well:


tumblr_m3w9p9BRDD1qk1mgxo1_1336800447_cover.jpg
 
Last edited:
Although sound bars effectively beat the hell out of the 'average' TV's built in [crappy] speakers [I have one with a sub], the claims that they can do ATMOS and even 5.1 Surround effectively is a crock.

Then I guess it's probably good that they don't.

Reading the literature, all it says about Atmos is that it is "compatible" with it. It says nothing about "doing it effectively".

https://en-us.sennheiser.com/ambeo-soundbar

Look, I'm no fan of soundbars (unlike you, I don't even own one :)) and I certainly don't think they are a substitute for a full surround sound system. But if we are going to start throwing around words like "scam", calling for disclaimers to be posted across the top of the forum, and (worst offense of all!) invoking the hallowed name of Steely Dan, let's at least make sure we are criticizing them for not living up to the claims they DO make, not the ones they haven't? :)
 
My final thoughts on the soundbar topic....

I see no problem with someone trying to get better sound....and if a soundbar is an improvement...I'm happy for them..
IMO the marketing for this specific product is no worse than most current marketing campaigns..

That's all:hi
 
My final thoughts on the soundbar topic....

I see no problem with someone trying to get better sound....and if a soundbar is an improvement...I'm happy for them..
IMO the marketing for this specific product is no worse than most current marketing campaigns..

That's all:hi

But you failed to answer the question, Clinty: Can Chickens FLY?


url.jpeg
 
I need to relate a recent true story... ill try to streamline it.

a few months ago I bought an entry level surround system for my brother whose wife had passed. I wanted to give him something he could get interested in.

my son sees this and when asked what he might like for Christmas, he says he would also like a sound system.

we are at a family party and I start to discuss with him what kind of system he's thinking about. He wants a full blown surround setup built for music (the apple apparently dosent fall far from the tree). At the same party are a few cousins. When they hear this conversation they suggest we look for one like cousin Pat has. Its awesome. They cant imagine a better system than his.

More discussion ensues. It turns out Pat's awesome system consists of a soundbar, a small wireless sub, and a pair of Bluetooth rear speakers. All part of a single box system.

to the great audio unwashed masses, this is their idea of an awesome surround rig.

When I tried to explain to them that the convenience of wireless speakers come with a significant loss in fidelity and that the little 2" drivers in the sound bar would really sound poor with a music source, I was met with blank stares. They don't get it. They don't care.

My son ended up getting a standard 5.1 setup made from T15 Polks, a matching center channel and 10" powered sub along with a networked 7.2 Atmos capable Pioneer receiver. Total cost... about $500. Much better than my first real system.
'
 
Back
Top