Movie Software make HT a Waste of Resources?

OK, call me a masochist, but I'll bite again.

As to your argument that today's software isn't worth investing in HT; I think we can agree to differ, but maybe you aren't looking in the right places. As with any artistic medium, different strokes for different folks. Its like saying the world of music isn't worth investing in 2CH b/c pop music is populated with inane female teen toy idols and insipid boy bands. Lots of good movies being noted in another HT thread--try watching some of those. Maybe you don't like any of them. Maybe others do, and maybe they believe the ability to see them over and over is worth the HT investment.

As to your argument that HT is a lousy investment, I did a quick scan of some HT gear (surround sound processors) versus 2CH gear (preamps) in the A'gon bluebook, restricting my comparisons to companies that made both in the same year. The trend is that (whoa!) generally, more expensive gear has a greater percentage depreciation. But, your point that HT gear is worth less is wrong--at most a couple of percentage points in the comparisons I did, and in at least one case (Classe), their 2CH preamp (CP-45) fared much worse than their processor of the same year (SSP-1) (45% of value, vs. 58% for the SSP-1).

Given that I see as much on SACD in the 2CH fora as I see about 7.1 in the HT fora, why do you believe HT users are more susceptible to leaping before things become established? Moreover, when your thread implies that I (and other A'gon) users are soft-mindedly being manipulated by mfrs/advertisers to make that leap and we were following like so many sheep, it seemed like an insulting stereotype to me. If that wasn't what you were implying, perhaps you could restate your point.

As far as the ENRON diversion goes, I fail to see what it has to do with HT. And, frankly, I haven't said anything about it, so to be paraphrased by you is, at best, rather disingenuous. If you really want it, I'll lay it out for you, even if it is irrelevant. I, rather cynically, believe that CEOs act in their best interest. Generally that self-interest is also impacted by fiduciary duties to shareholders, so increasing share value (i.e., caring about shareholders) is usually viewed by most CEOs as a good thing. Does it always work? No. Is ENRON a fiasco? Yes. What's the relevance to HT?

Don't congratulate yourself for being slippery. Making unsupported statements and then failing to engage on the merits doesn't make you a forensic genius.

First: Refrain from specific name calling it only weakens your point of view. You accuse me of specifically calling Audiogon'ers sheep. Not once did I! You seem to be pleading for an audience with emotional pleas to them to "get this guy see he does not like you" rather than sticking to a discourse. I suspect this is a quick way to end a thread and if that is your intent you may have succeeded. Isn't it just as likely I think Audiogon'ers think like me and all I am doing is wondering if they feel the same way? There is 2 sides to every coin, at least if you stay out of Vegas.

Now back on track: Somebody is being a sheep but who it is was not identified. I am only questioning the clear evidence of more HT processors being turned in faster than their 2ch preamp counter parts. Your selecting, at random or purposely, classe preamps, particularily the CP-45 is a little like comparing the value of a Toyota Camry to a Pontiac Grand Am. Classe makes fine gear but aside from a few models their preamps are not among that list. I am comparing a wide range of gear and value. I wonder if you can thing of just one HT processor that is 6-10 years old that is still in demand? Maybe there is, just a question.

Regarding SACD titles. Well of course there is more coming out now for the very reason I cite above. The SACD hardware is not selling like Sony wants and with their introduction of sub $1000 units they and others are putting SACD titles out to sell the hardware. Software and hardware sales are not always proportionately equal.

I was not sure what you meant by conspiracy theory. Hence my mentioning of ENRON. Maybe you were referring to something else. I can take a stab again at what you meant. Don't you think the HT community were reluctant to release 9 speaker requiring technology when most everyone's home living environment had 2 speakers. I am suggesting they are just playing with how far they can take the purchasing spiral. So far they seem not to have reached the limits of the American public (by the way, if all Audiogon is all Americans (check my threads that is who I refer to) then maybe you have a point. Please calm down before writing again life is too short to get upset over this. Or put another way, like a thread commentor above said, if you don't like the movie turn it off. Maybe that is best.

I see I left off the point about variety of movies. Of course there are good even excellent movies being put out. But it is rare that the best have the biggest budgets to support the 7.1 or whatever HT technology that would justify needing that level of expense on the hardware side. Several actors, I believe Robert Redford is among them, have complained about the limited door for creative ideas to get into Hollywood and more seems to be fashioned more with around safe formulas. Art and creativity go hand in hand. Engineering and formulas likewise go hand in hand. I argue most movies are engineered and more today than before. And those movies that are not engineered are not as likely to be equipped with the HT technology to exploit capabilities of HT equipment. I heard it once said of many things in life: Great ideas come when you are hungry not when you are fat and happy!

Once more into the breach.

Do you appreciate music more with a high end 2CH rig? I'd guess. Could you still appreciate music even if you didn't have a high end 2CH rig? I hope so. Do you listen to nothing but optimally recorded 2CH taking full advantage of spatial potential and dynamic range? God I hope not. Do I appreciate HT more with a high end HT rig? Sure. Do I have to have a high end rig to appreciate HT? No. Do all movies I see take full advantage of 5CH capabilities? No. Where's the difference?

Look, I did re-read the whole thread. Take your statement:

"birds of a feather flock together and tend not to challenge each other about alternative views. I would rather raise challenging questions about the validity of purchases to the very ones doing the purchases."

If you didn't intend to say A'gon readers are the problem, at least you can see how this could be misinterpreted?

As far as my citation of Classe, its not hand picked or purposefully cited for some nefarious reason. It was just an interesting and glaring difference. I'd hoped to avoid the kind of accusations you raised by sticking to the same company and year--Classe made both the CP-45 and the SST-1. In the 10 min. I wasted in the blue book, it wasn't the only company I looked at--checked ARC, Krell, and some others. Perfect apples to apples comparisons are pretty hard to come by, but at least I tried and didn't selectively edit bad results out--I even said I found HT gear was lower as percentage value by a couple of points or so. But, the difference is not "disposable technology" for HT versus "value long term investment" for 2CH. "Clear evidence" you say, and a "wide range of gear and value." What evidence? What range?

"Upset"? Hardly. At this point "bored" is more like it. It could have been an interesting thread. I'd like to hear what people would have to say about whether the prevalence of HT will change the way movies are made. Maybe 5CH equipment for moviemakers will become less expensive due to volume demand, techniques for 5CH will become better, and there will be more software out there that takes real advantage of the possibilities.

Much better dialog here! Thanks! Now regarding if I appreciate music on hi-end rig yep on the car radio yep, anywhere is fine. My choice of hi-end 2 channels has had no affect on the companies of boom boxes. My argument is that constantly changing the field of play by the big corps in HT does affect other companies and dramatically. The connection then becomes clear between tactics of globalization of anything. HT is limiting our options also by greating the idea in younger people's mine that sound from all directions is equal to good sound. To me anyway, that is the message from the TV ad and magazine ads. Discrete channels in SACD or whatever multichannel if it stays static and recordings are made well not just a lot of them could be real exciting but not if it becomes a monopoly. Regarding the birds and feathers stuff: A certain percentage of people will be in the feathers given the big audience of HT but I do not think it is a very big percentage on audiogon (and I am not saying this to win votes). But of those in the feathers I was wondering if they ever thought about the interconnectiveness of choices made today and possible conseqeunces.

I do think it is interesting to know if 5 or 50 channel HT will change the way movies are made and if it would be for the better. I believe HT as currently constructed in terms of the hardware and movies allowed to made to exploit it is greatly limiting our choices, perverting what is good sound to an audience that may never have an alternative viewpoint, is a great example of how large corps can limit the flow of money to a smaller sphere of players and the manufacturers of that equipment will hardly be worried about fair labor practices such as the likes of Audio Research need to adhere to. I am very dismayed that Americans not only fail to see the connection between issues but go out their way to avoid educating themselves. Nothing amplified this more than the rush to learn about the "outside" world than did 911. Quite a sorry state that monsters must be the motivating force and not the joy of being aware and, hence, alive.