Quote: Originally Posted by
RedGTiVR6 
So let me see if I understand this better. It's reminding me of the new Bose gimmick...with the 3 front speakers that should give lifelike surround sound in ANY room.
basically, it's a theory based on placing speakers closer together than you would in a stereophonic set-up and then you rely on an ambiophonics processor to manipulate the sound.
So, instead of having your L and R speakers out at the points of the triangle creating your stage width while you try and firm up your center image, you would have your L and R speakers much closer together creating your center image and you would have to create your boundaries...quite the opposite of stereophonic sound reproduction. Not sure that made any sense, sitting here talking with my husband it made sense...lol
You nailed it! It's different when you first listen to it and I don;t expect anyone to just say screw stereo, but it sure makes you think. The more you listen you will decide if you like it or not and if you are like me will flip back and forth to compare the two. If you like listening to headphones, but don't like the "sound is trapped in your head" feel, this externalizes it and you don't get that feeling.
Stereo vs Ambiphonics = "They-are-here" vs "you-are-there"
Ambiophonics strives to take stereo,
ambisonics (binaural)/surround sound, mono and combine them for the best of everything. Depending on how far you take it with adding ambient speakers will determine if you increase the stage width from 120 to 180 to a full 360, but this is on a circular flat plane.
www.filmaker.com is experimenting with improving this to a full half sphere around our heads for complete surround sound down via ambiophonics, not dolby although SACD and DVD-A would be perfect mediums to take it past 2 channel.
Then there is the even newer concepts of
VBAP. Not much info on that one, but I think it takes it even one step further. Abmolech probably knows more about that then I do, but I'm trying to understand that as well.