Robbo99999
Master Contributor
In my interpretation I think this is more about ease of setup and appearance/space issues. People don't understand audio very deeply, they'll take whatever they get sold on as long as it's not silly expensive and supposedly offers various supposed multichannel experiences in a small conveniently located sound bar. "Ignorance is Bliss" as the saying goes, people just don't know any better. To be honest, a multichannel proper speaker setup is probably a little bit daunting to decide on & then to setup - most people probably don't even know where to start. To me, the challenge for the progress of good sound is to really try to make good multi-channel audio easy to understand, easy to market, easy to setup......but you'll always be left with the fact that good quality multi-channel means taking up more space at least, so there's aesthetic and "logistical placement issues" in the room. There's probably a good case for really good 2-channel sound being implemented in everyday TV/movie sound, but then again for movies a reasonable & old 5.1 channel AVR with corresponding satellite speakers and included subwoofer can be really convincing in my experience if properly level matched for all speakers and distance/time matched for all speakers to the listening position. So, thinking about it, in reality this last option of just having all your little satellite speakers time aligned & level optimised for the listening position is probably more than good enough for almost everyone, it's quite impressive - it's what I did with my parent's old Onkyo 5.1 system (with the help of UMIK & a laptop to time align & level match to listening position). But for 2-channel music listening it surely helps to have some good speakers & room correction. In contrast I think properly setup mediocre 5.1 surround is extremely convincing for movies. Soundbars though I imagine are rubbish (albeit no experience in them) - but goes back to the convenience/time/setup/space issues I mentioned earlier). People don't know any better, they don't want setup hassle, and they don't want speaker placement hassle and speaker space issues & ugly speaker positioning (& expense) - too many barriers unless they see the light through experience with some minimally to properly setup home movie rooms.@Floyd Toole
I’m probably not the only one who’s wondering why all these speakers from the likes of SONOS, Apple, UE are selling so well. And why a “portable Bluetooth” or TV Soundbar speaker is the defacto standard when consumers are buying speakers.
TVs got better- smaller lighter clearer higher resolution better colours even cheaper. I mean you and I owned a CRT, and I wouldn’t trade any of the modern OLEDs or high quality LCDs with an old CRT.
When and why do you suppose these battery powered speakers entered and ate up the market? I understand them and sound-bars…kind of; good enough quality for most use cases. And pound for pound or litre for litre better than any boombox from C20.
But how do you convince someone that a Revel Salon 2 or 3 is worth buying over a JBL Charge 5 or a pair of Partybox1000? Apart from looking like a nice of furniture? One of the hi-fi reviewers thinks that to “save hi-fi”, it should move into the category of luxury goods. But the engineer in me loathes that.
Why should good thoughtful design be tarted up and a zero added just to sit at the table with luxury wristwatches, pens, cigars, handbags, cognacs, perfumes and wines. Thank goodness Harman was acquired by Samsung not LVMH!
But perhaps the marketplace has already voted; it’s like asking people to go back to listen to lossless audio or CDs when they’d voted that MP3 or lossy streaming was good enough (or preferred). Convenience over excellence.
The spinorama, which is what get our crew here excited, is certainly not enough.
Or maybe Interior Designers Killed the Loudspeaker Star
Last edited: