What do you think of this article?
Section "6.1, 7.1 and MORE" Fig (4) - Multiple Surrounds, such as in a larger home theater presentation room,
with multiple rows of seating.
Well, as I was reading the article, I thought it sounded very dated, and then I saw the publish date at the bottom - 2007 (with "updates" in Feb. of 2011), so the most recent update sort of coincides with the advent of lossless audio codecs, but, IMO, certainly predates the recent surge in natively encoded 7.1 movie soundtracks. We also don't know what was updated.
In fact, as I read the article, I got the sense that EVERY TIME he mentions "7.1" he's actually referring to non-native 7.1 soundtracks, i.e. extrapolated 7.1 via Dolby ProLogic II decoding (notice he refers to the back channels as "the back channel resynthesis"). Based on this, his assertion is that duplicating the natively-encoded surround channels on a 5.1 soundtrack is preferred to using DPLII to create "faux" surround back.
I can see his rationale here - I too share the perspective that listening to sound in it's native format is always the better choice.
However, seeing that since this article was written, Blu-ray along with it's superior (and often 7.1 native) soundtracks is becoming more and more prevalent in the home, a "traditional" 7.1 setup is still the better way to go, IMO. - that is to say, adding the correct surround back speakers should take precendence over adding additional surround speakers.
Edited by Jason Charlton, December 20 2013 - 06:42 AM.