Originally Posted by mdavej
I can't imagine anybody not wanting at least 5.1 sound unless they're deaf in one ear.
Even if you are deaf in one ear, the ability (if your hardware allows it) to emphasize the center channel, which should contain most of the dialog, could be a very big thing, especially if you sometimes have trouble understanding that dialog.
Perhaps the opposite effect is also preferred by some - e.g., I know people who disagree with the opinions of certain sportscasters, who might prefer to silence them - though I don't know if any of those events are broadcast in 5.1.
Originally Posted by Hetfieldjames
It's 2020 and we are now into lossless sound.
There is no such thing as lossless sound - especially in the digital domain. When you digitize - i.e., go from an infinite number of levels to a finite number of levels, that is a loss. When you go from continuous time to sampled data, that is a loss. (E.g., among other things, if I have thought this through correctly, even if you meet the Nyquist criteria, pitches can be out of tune, or you can broaden the spectral signature of a note - things that many musically inclined people notice a lot, though they may be less important to some in the general public. Again, sampling can theoretically increase or decrease the degree of simultaneity of specific sounds.) If you allow a loud frequency to block coding or reduce coding accuracy of soft frequencies, that is a major loss, especially if you can't hear the loud frequency well due to limitations of your ears or your audio hardware.
There is such a thing as truly lossless data compression, or no data compression, but AFTER some or all of the above losses have already occurred.
There is also such a thing as perceptually lossless sound - but that could vary from person to person.
As difficult as this is to believe, perhaps there is also be such a thing as hype.