Frankly, and I could be way wrong...but I don't think it will fair better with "music" than quad did. It'll be cool for movies/home theatre, but more than likely will only serve to give Elliot Scheiner (sp?) and crew a few years of "remix" work on neanderthal product.

I seriously feel that the two greatest impediments to 'surround sound' catching on for music are my wife and my brother-in-law.

My wife wouldn't let that many speakers in the house...my brother-ion-law couldn't get them all in phase.

I can expand beyond Fletcher .

A few huge problems:

1. If you think mono compatibility is a problem, multiply it by 10 for surround. Nothing translates, your mix sounds wildly different from system to system.

2. very few artists are going to wave their hands to be the first on the block to drain their royalty accounts sorting it out. Since the artists don't want to pay for it and the labels don't want to pay for anything, there is not going to be a flood of killer recordings enticing people to buy surround systems.

3. Take a listen down at Circuit City. Do you think ANYBODY is going to spend a dime extra for what you hear there?

A lot of people really get pissed at me for talking about this stuff. And it isn't that I don't LOVE surround, I actually do hence my work in electronica music. It's just that nobody solved those problems last time around and the very same clowns who were hawking quad are now selling "5.1" while offering no solutions to the very same issues we watched sink quad.

a lot of people already own surround. it is questionable if its actually hooked up right so creative surround mixing is a hit or miss exercise BUT general concepts taken from movies could provide SOME constants. the center channel will most likely be sitting on top of the tv [or below it] with the LR SOMEHOW flanking it, the surrounds is where it gets tricky. who KNOWS where those will be. i figure at most they could safely be used as ambience.

i think live concerts on DVDv might be the highest possibility of surround working properly in the greatest number of setups.

as for an album, i have no clue. it would be pretty trippy though. i know i will do some for my own enjoyment.

....Just Wanting to add (I agree) to Bob's Statements, Who ever concocted 1 subwoofer for high fidelity just don't get it. So...bass is omni directional?? Tell that to us Classical recording cats that constantly go up against a set with Typs on the Right and Full bass drum on the left.

I don't want Tubas, Contra Bassoons, Bass Viols, Tymps, and Concert Bass Drum all going to a summed Woofer. The phase relationships between these instuments are completely lost in a single sub. If all surround channels were totally full range, think of that phase nightmare. What would I do(?) build a sphere and point the mics all different directions(?) or just make it up as I go in creative control?

Screw surround for music.

For HT...That is where it belongs.

The fucked it all up here folks.

The manufactures of home audio, software, and studio hardeare are wrenching their hands thinking of all the profits they will make. More record company royalities too...yea man. Britney can sing over your shoulder now...

Dual stereo low frequencies, or nothing.

That's my take. We shall see if it will improve universally.

Bill- anything below about 250Hz is 'non-dirctional'. These subs are usually crossed over at 80-100Hz. Put into a room, blindfolded, played only the 'subwoofer' and asked to locate it while sitting in a chair in the middle of the room, you couldn't do it.

There are lots of 'time based' issues with 'subwoofers', but they will not skew the Contra Bassoons v. Tuba placement. In fact, you're way]/b] better off with a single subwoofer in that situation...otherwise the whole bottom would turn into more of a 'time smeared ball of shit' than it is presently with only the one sub.

You would have to have the right type of system, room etc., I know some that work with 2 subs for mastering, and I am certain Bill could tell the difference, they are difficult to integrate, and phase in. I agree with Fletcher, Alpha, and Bob, "consumers and their systems", their (sub) IS most of the bottom, 250 and down, with little satellite speakers putting out very little low end, the little sub box is actually the woofer. People have no room behind them to make a large sweet spot. Nathan, there are going to be the specialists that will dominate this field, just like mastering. Go for it, could be a great niche.
--Rick