mick wrote:
On Sat, 18 Feb 2006 16:21:11 -0800, Andre Jute burbled:

snip

Your admirably complete par tells me everything I need to know about home
audio: it cannot substitute for a decent hi-fi system. It's still for the
anoraks, and apparently for less discriminating anoraks than those thirty
years ago who I thought deserved four-track sound.


I think you have to look at the current surround-sound idea from a
different viewpoint Andre, as a system to add "realism" to displayed
video. There isn't really any point in heading for "hi-fi" in that
situation as people will tend to concentrate on the screen action anyway.

I understand that now, Mick, after Serge explained. That's why I asked
the question, to determine where HV fits into the scheme of things.

However, I watch perhaps 10 movies a year, plus at most two or three
television programmes a week. That's not enough to justify the effort
of adjusting my attitude or expand the energy to understand the detail
and to set up a proper system.

The sound is of secondary importance (but makes a big difference).
Surround isn't an anorak thing now, but certainly isn't for those in
search of audio nirvana either!

No, it isn't a substitute for a decent hi-fi system, but then again it
isn't intended to be.

Oh - and thanks Serge, that was a most enjoyable read!

Yeah, wasn't that great. And a very readable thread following. Thanks,
fellers.

--
Mick
(no M$ software on here... :-) )
Web: http://www.nascom.info

Andre Jute