Video Asylum

I'm not sure about your arbitrary percentage figure.

70.248.61.101

This Post Has Been Edited by the Author

In Reply to: RE: Hate to say this but most value PQ over SQ. posted by Robertc88 on October 26, 2007 at 05:55:31

The truth of the matter is that HT surround sound has been ahead of visual reproduction for a number of years. Lossless may be one of the final battlegrounds for nuanced improvement (that, 10.1 super DTS or whatever), but don't fool yourself: the visual experience is of much greater greater importance for HD; sound improvements are like icing on the cake for those seeking the best visual experience.
For me, having whiz-bang surround is less important than the overall quality of the sound and visual presentation obtainable (regardless of how many channels and whether the original medium is sourced from digital, 35mm film, 16mm film, videotape, etc.). I see, or rather hear this as a diminishing return issue that isn't even on the radar with Joe Public (who are almost always the final arbiters in marketing matters).
The reality: Most folks are still getting acquainted with the idea of having a flat-screen WS digital display device replacing their bulky 4:3 interlaced tee-vee.
Another factor: Only a portion of folks who have a surround set-up and will pursue anything beyond 5.1 for their living room environments, providing they're wives approved of adding additional speakers to begin with. Furthermore, it wouldn't surprise me if the majority of those folks who have a surround set-up still grapple with selecting between is DTS and Dolby Digital surround with few clues as to why more than one surround format is provided.
Trust me, in Fry's, Circuit City, Best Buy, Sears, etc., where most display devices are sold, improved sound is not going to be a prerequisite to selling those large flat screen display devices that make their cash registers ring. The idea is to hang it on the wall like a picture and not have too many interconnecting wires and boxes. Surround sound is merely an afterthought for most folks, and the customer's eyes are the key to the appeal of these products.
In the final analysis, surround is very much a niche market, even more so that either HD format. High-end Home Theater emporiums & showrooms, with some notable exceptions, aren't much better even though they target an upscale market. Specialty shops try to sell prestige to customers interested in spending money for what is perceived to be the best, not necessarily demonstrating what produces the best picture & sound.
The bottom line: Sound IS important to audiophiles, both stereo purists and high-rez surround advocates, but that is a total immersion environment with visual accompaniment often thought of as a distraction from the listening experience, hence the two system solution some high-end purists often set-up.
Just my two cents; YMMV.
Cheers,
AuPh

Edits: 10/26/07

Follow Ups: