So I get an email about an article in the Times about surround sound. Eric Taub, I’m sure, is a very intelligent man who is just trying to educate the masses about the importance of surround sound. For that, I thank you. I do, however, have a few comments about your article…

But they have forgotten about another major advance in TV technology: the ability to transmit enveloping, crystal-clear digital surround sound.

Not exactly new since it has been going on in the home since the early eighties but I generally agree.

Once available only in movie theaters, 5.1 digital surround was conceived early on as part of the HDTV feature set

Actually, as discussed it was conceived LONG BEFORE HDTV. We had true surround sound long before anyone ever even dreamed of HDTV.

Early HDTVs came with decent front speakers; all you had to do was add some rear speakers and a receiver and you could complete the full audio experience

Umm… what? Show me the HDTV with “decent” front speakers. Maybe if you are comparing them to BLOSE or other cubed speakers but they’d never hold up to a real speaker.

At the beginning of this decade, good surround systems complete with a DVD player cost about $1,000. They can now be had for as little as $250.

OH MY GOD!?! He must be referring to HTiBs and NONE of them would EVER be classified as “good” by any standard. I’m not saying you can’t get a good system on a budget, but $250? Not unless it is some crazy deal or used. Or stolen.

To keep costs down, manufacturers offer passive, rather than active, subwoofers

This may be true but I’ve never heard of anyone using it as a way of making a purchase. Passive subs in HTiB setups are designed with particular equipment in mind. I’m not really sure you are saving any money that way. It’s just moving the amp from the sub to the receiver/DVD player.

Buy a system that offers 1,000 watts output; most now do. (The higher the wattage, the less distortion when playing movies at high volume.)

My head is about to explode. While the higher wattage statement is basically true, that only counts when you are looking at real amps with real power ratings. The 1,000 watts of your HTiB isn’t even close to the true wattage. Heck, if they are saying 100 watts per channel with a 500 watt sub, you’ll be lucky if each channel can push 25 watts continuously. Then again, the craptacular speakers that came in the box are going to distort long before you reach even 10 watts so who cares? What you should be looking for is a receiver that can be connected to any speakers (no specialized speaker connectors) and speakers that aren’t trying to be full range at 2″.

And if money is no object… Sony’s $2,000 BDP-S5000ES

Let me tell you something Eric, if “money is no object,” the LAST thing I’m reaching for is a Sony. Heck, I don’t know anyone that would. If you really look over the article, it is nothing but HTiBs by Samsung, Panasonic, Sony and a few others. I’m not saying that they don’t sell (or even that the article isn’t properly marketed) but if you are going to give advice about home theater, a few fact checks should be done. Or, hey, you could call me. I’ll let you know what is up. Thanks to Jonathan for pointing me to this article. His point was about the growth of soundbar sales:

I have to say this doesn’t make a lot of sense, except that I’ll bet the quote is true, but misleading. Always beware growth rates. Since there have been roughly 46 soundbars introduced in the last year and maybe 10 HTiBs and 5.1 systems, the growth rate is shipments is probably not the best metric. Still, it’s good to see that even in a recession, consumers seem to care somewhat about sound, since I tend to agree with you that it’s a tough sell to get people interested in sound once they’ve laid out $1500 for a TV, which they’re still doing.

I agree Jonathan. I agree.

Liked it? Take a second to support AV Rant on Patreon!