a thoughtful web.
Good ideas and conversation. No ads, no tracking.   Login or Take a Tour!
comment

You realize that your statement, effectively, is that omnidirectional speakers can sound as good as directional speakers if you negate all the effects of their omnidirectionality?

Yeah - backscatter and such is no problem if you have adequate absorption. It's also no problem if you have no backscatter. And even with two perfect radiators in freespace, the cancellation between two identical sources is bad for fidelity. From an acoustical standpoint, everything beyond closed-basket headphones is a compromise; early reflections of any kind have a negative impact on fidelity and clarity but sometimes you luck out.

So. You can buy a conventional loudspeaker and stand in front of it and enjoy it... or you can buy an omnidirectional loudspeaker and hope that it doesn't sound too bad. Ultimately it will never reproduce the sound to your ears as well as a conventional loudspeaker. Wanna hear it with more reverb? More comb filtering? Less definition? Sure. Bounce that shit off the wall.

This is why, for a brief shining moment, the industry was trying to convince everyone into dipole rear surrounds: for 5.1, splashing the surround channels around make them sound more "enveloping" because they make things harder to localize. Of course, you were supposed to turn the dipole off when listening to surround music because of all the detail you lost. But then that extra two channels in the bitstream finally annoyed everyone enough into doing 7.1 so now 7.1 systems are even more common than 5.1 and if you want diffuse, you just send the same signal (ish) to both surrounds.

It's not that you're uneducated. It's that you've been lied to.