Who Killed PC Audio, and will Soundcards Ever Be a Thing Again?

[Meeho]

I don't agree with this at all, the difference is every bit perceptible and technically plausible considering the variations in amplifier design.

And yet no one is able to prove this in objective comparisons. If an amp colors the sound it's not doing its job properly, it's an amped EQ.

 

[BulletDust]

And yet no one is able to prove this in objective comparisons.

That's your opinion, you're entitled to it.

Every receiver / amplifier I've ever owned has sounded completely different on the same speakers, there is no disputing that fact whatsoever - If you believe there's no difference even though one amplifier is technically a switchmode power supply and one amplifier is purely a linear design and the distortion effects of the different classes of amplifier can be easily viewed on an oscilloscope than who am I to argue?

 

[Charnelrot]

I'm curious, how is the receiver connected? Is it USB compatible? The reason I ask is that Toslink typically only supports 2 channel PCM, unless you are sending the encoded Dolby or DTS streams along it for the receiver to decode.

Do the games actually generate and transmit a Dolby/DTS stream in real time?

I'm curious of this as well. My rig is hooked up to my home theater through my receiver via optical and the only surround I can get is with a Soundblaster Z which does dolby digital live, as my receiver doesn't have 6 channel analog inputs. I'm quite satisfied with the result, however the prospect of true discreet 5.1 from my pc to home theater on the fly sounds mighty tasty...

 

[daglesj]

My current audio setup is Asus X99A onboard into a £30 Fiio Taishan DAC via optical.Set to 16/44.

Sounds great to me. Works a treat.

 

[BulletDust]

I'm curious of this as well. My rig is hooked up to my home theater through my receiver via optical and the only surround I can get is with a Soundblaster Z which does dolby digital live, as my receiver doesn't have 6 channel analog inputs. I'm quite satisfied with the result, however the prospect of true discreet 5.1 from my pc to home theater on the fly sounds mighty tasty...

Can't you pass multichannel PCM to your receiver? Technically speaking multichannel PCM is identical to multichannel analogue, the PC does the decodong and sends the multiple channels to the receiver via an encrypted digital interface - The receiver simply performs D/A and amplifies the signals.

 

[Meeho]

That's your opinion, you're entitled to it.

Every receiver / amplifier I've ever owned has sounded completely different on the same speakers, there is no disputing that fact whatsoever - If you believe there's no difference even though one amplifier is technically a switchmode power supply and one amplifier is purely a linear design and the distortion effects of the different classes of amplifier can be easily viewed on an oscilloscope than who am I to argue?

It's not my opinion, it's what tests show. I'm willing to accept the opposite if it is proven. Until then, it's as real as break in and cable differences.

 

[Zarathustra[H]]

Can't you pass multichannel PCM to your receiver? Technically speaking multichannel PCM is identical to multichannel analogue, the PC does the decodong and sends the multiple channels to the receiver via an encrypted digital interface - The receiver simply performs D/A and amplifies the signals.

Well, that's what I'm wondering. Which interface?

My receiver takes HDMI, Optical toslink, analogue stereo and copper SPDIF.

Maybe it's the copper SPDIF that supports this? Because the optical sure doesn't.

Or is it using the video cards HDMI output?

 

[BulletDust]

It's not my opinion, it's what tests show. I'm willing to accept the opposite if it is proven. Until then, it's as real as break in and cable differences.

Tests show, that using an oscilloscope, there are definite observable differences in distortion between the varying amplifier designs - As stated, it's the reason we don't use amplifiers designed for RF amplification in audio. When it comes to observable differences in DAC's, yes, I agree that most of the time there is little to no discernible difference even on oscilloscope. When it comes to amplifier design however distortion is not only observable and audible, it's taken into consideration at the design stage.

Do you even know how an amplifier works?

 

[BulletDust]

Well, that's what I'm wondering. Which interface?

My receiver takes HDMI, Optical toslink, analogue stereo and copper SPDIF.

Maybe it's the copper SPDIF that supports this? Because the optical sure doesn't.

Or is it using the video cards HDMI output?

SPDIF wont have the bandwidth for any more than 2 channel PCM. HDMI at minimum for multichannel (5.0/1, 7.1) audio.

 

[Meeho]

Tests show, that using an oscilloscope, there are definite observable differences in distortion between the varying amplifier designs - As stated, it's the reason we don't use amplifiers designed for RF amplification in audio. When it comes to observable differences in DAC's, yes, I agree that most of the time there is little to no discernible difference even on oscilloscope. When it comes to amplifier design however distortion is not only observable and audible, it's taken into consideration at the design stage.

Do you even know how an amplifier works?

On a basic level, but I don't have to know how one works to discern between two in a ABX test. There are often measureable, but not audible differences. We can go on like this forever, but tests show what they show and no amount of subjective reasoning will change that. One is a belief, the other documented result.

 

[westrock2000]

I remember Doom 3 with the X-Fi Fatal1ty (which is still in my main rig) being one of the most amazing audio experiences. You could hear WHERE the enemies were with incredible precision. FEAR was a great game for audio, as well. The physical audio occlusion effects were so cool. I've been waiting for audio to "come back". All of my friends over the years have given me shit for ranting about how fucking awful PC audio has been since the late 90's.

Wait are you saying AAA games do not have on the fly dolby digital yet? That's like what made games like Halo on Xbox Classic soooo awesome. I don't game on my PC, and the "gaming" PC in the house just has stereo set up. I would be pretty surprised to hear that after 15 years, PC Master Race still doesn't have real time Dolby Digital.

 

[westrock2000]

Tests show, that using an oscilloscope, there are definite observable differences in distortion between the varying amplifier designs - As stated, it's the reason we don't use amplifiers designed for RF amplification in audio. When it comes to observable differences in DAC's, yes, I agree that most of the time there is little to no discernible difference even on oscilloscope. When it comes to amplifier design however distortion is not only observable and audible, it's taken into consideration at the design stage.

Do you even know how an amplifier works?

Audio is the easiest form of electronics there is. It's what all electrical engineers start with. If you can't make audio electronics work right then you have no business designing electronics. The only thing easier then making audio electronics is literally a flash light.

 

[4saken]

Havent had an issue with onboard audio in over a decade. That's why.

 

[BulletDust]

On a basic level, but I don't have to know how one works to discern between two in a ABX test. There are often measureable, but not audible differences. We can go on like this forever, but tests show what they show and no amount of subjective reasoning will change that. One is a belief, the other documented result.

I think your point of view considering amplifier design is pure garbage.

But believe what you want.

Audio is the easiest form of electronics there is. It's what all electrical engineers start with. If you can't make audio electronics work right then you have no business designing electronics. The only thing easier then making audio electronics is literally a flash light.

Basic amplifier design isn't complicated, I totally agree. However there's a big step between mainstream amplification products and very basic amplifier design. I'm not in the slightest way convinced the poster in question has the slightest clue how a simple class A or push/pull AB or class B amplifier works.

 

[westrock2000]

I think your point of view considering amplifier design is pure garbage.

But believe what you want.



Basic amplifier design isn't complicated, I totally agree. However there's a big step between mainstream amplification products and very basic amplifier design. I'm not in the slightest way convinced the poster in question has the slightest clue how a simple class A or push/pull AB or class B amplifier works.

Oh that's easy. One gets kinda hot and one gets holy shit that's fucking hot.

I'm putting together a Sure based multichannel amplifier (just the 25 watt stuff) and the freaking boards pull 90mA (per 2 channel board) at moderate volume. It's incredible.

 

[Zarathustra[H]]

Wait are you saying AAA games do not have on the fly dolby digital yet? That's like what made games like Halo on Xbox Classic soooo awesome. I don't game on my PC, and the "gaming" PC in the house just has stereo set up. I would be pretty surprised to hear that after 15 years, PC Master Race still doesn't have real time Dolby Digital.

I don't know what he is saying, but I am genuinely asking because I don't know. While I feel like I know my 2 channel stuff pretty OK, I am brand spanking new to the world of surround sound standards and connectivity.

I have to wonder how weak ass consoles have sufficient CPU power to encode and compress Dolby and the like on the fly, without impacting game performance.

Maybe there is dedicated hardware to do it?

 

[westrock2000]

I don't know what he is saying, but I am genuinely asking because I don't know. While I feel like I know my 2 channel stuff pretty OK, I am brand spanking new to the world of surround sound standards and connectivity.

I have to wonder how weak ass consoles have sufficient CPU power to encode and compress Dolby and the like on the fly, without impacting game performance.

Maybe there is dedicated hardware to do it?

Yes, I would assume so about dedicated hardware. And outside of licensing, I don't see that realtime Multichannel would be that much harder from stereo. Instead of saying "play monster noise in left" you say "play monster noise in right rear".

 

[BulletDust]

Oh that's easy. One gets kinda hot and one gets holy shit that's fucking hot.

I'm putting together a Sure based multichannel amplifier (just the 25 watt stuff) and the freaking boards pull 90mA (per 2 channel board) at moderate volume. It's incredible.

Awesome stuff! Love it!

 

[Zarathustra[H]]

Yes, I would assume so about dedicated hardware. And outside of licensing, I don't see that realtime Multichannel would be that much harder from stereo. Instead of saying "play monster noise in left" you say "play monster noise in right rear".

I think that is true for multichannel PCM.

Dolby - I understand - is a compressed standard though. So it would be the multichannel equivalent of trying to compress stereo mp3's in realtime, but 3 times more intense, I'd imagine due to having 6 channels (well, 5.1)

Or I could be completely wrong.

 

[Meeho]

I think your point of view considering amplifier design is pure garbage.

But believe what you want.

Again with the projection. It's not a belief or POV, it's science.

 

[sleepeeg3]

Asus Xonar Essence STX here. No reason to upgrade after that. Unrivaled(?) SNR. You can really hear a difference in the highs with music. You are missing out if you are suffering with onboard junk.

 

[sleepeeg3]

Creative killed the sound card market when they decided to engage in lawfare against Aureal. A3D had 3D audio technology that was superior to Creative's EAX in every way. A3D actually modeled soundwaves as they reflected and propagated off of various objects in game whereas EAX was just a glorified MIDI effects processor that was only good for doing things like reverb. Rather than competing, they filed BS lawsuits against Aureal bankrupting them from the legal expenses.

I remember selling the Diamond Monster Sound with A3D back in '98 at CompScrewUSA. That was truly a game changer. Too bad it has been abandoned.

 

[Zarathustra[H]]

Again with the projection. It's not a belief or POV, it's science.

He likes what he likes, and is under no obligation to prove anything to you or anyone else.

Now if you want to convince him that what he likes isn't worth it, the burden of proof is on you And as mentioned before, since we are using the word "science" and all, lets stick to scientific papers and not clickbait articles on audio/pc hardware sites describing in vague terms that they did some sort of experiment.

My personal philosophy is somewhere between the strict objectivitists and the strict subjectivists. (essentially, I piss off all sides in an argument )

As an engineer by trade, I am naturally inclined towards objective measurements, but I have also heard differences between systems that can not be explained in measurements alone. My theory is that we simply are not measuring everything needed to quantify sound as of yet.

I'm also very cognizant of the role of bias when it comes to the human brain, so I don't entirely trust my own, or anyone else's subjective experiences either.

As far as this goes, I appear to be in good company, as Jason Stoddard, one of the founders of Schiit Audio (a company I admire) has expressed very similar views in his "book" about the founding of his company on Head-fi.

As far as science goes, I don't think anyone is saying that there are subjective qualities that can never be measured. That would be anti-science. What is being suggested - however - is that maybe there are things that we are not yet measuring that can explain some of the subjective impressions that the typical measurements can't. If you read the post I linked above, you'll see the pains they go through to measure and spec their stuff. You'd also see him describe certain things that he just can not describe in measurements. He briefly mentions a test of theirs which includes multi-tone distortion. He doesn't have enough of a statistical sample size to prove anything yet, but he suggests it correlates very well with the subjective impressions of his trusted listeners, as well as helps find flaws in equipment that otherwise measures very well.

As a Quality Engineer I do a lot of measurements and statistics, and I'll be the first to admit that even on well understood subjects, we don't understand and know how to measure everything.

Sticking with one set of measurements and being closed to the possibility that there might be other ways to measure things isn't science. That's dogma.

But let's assume you are right. Lets assume for a moment that the difference is all placebo and wasted money, and he believes that taping $100 bills to his forehead improves his sound, and when he does he actually experiences an improvement in sound (due to placebo), who are you or anyone else to tell him he can't, or shouldn't?

 

[BulletDust]

Dolby is a codec, Dolby TrueHD is lossless. I believe the only reason why any compression happens at all is due to the benefits of decompression and the effect it has on dynamic range (similar principle to Dolby, DBX and Adres in the day of audio cassettes and certain encoded vinyl records).

Multichannel PCM is raw data, no different to a CD. The CD is encoded in multichannel PCM and that raw data is sent as 2ch PCM to the amplifier/receiver via digital SPDIF to be converted to analogue via the D/A converters in the amplifier.

Many early Bluray's were actually encoded in pure multichannel PCM.

 

[sparks]

consoles killed true sound in games. All you need is BIG LOUD BOOMS nothing else matters, no positioning no quality just sound.
On board sound can never be as good as a quality sound card, but try to tell it to the people who have only heard on board sound.
ITS GREAT
yep loud is great....sure it is.

Aureal knew what they were doing, they sued creative and it was cheaper to buy them than to settle. That was the start of sound cards going down hill.

 

[Zarathustra[H]]

Dolby is a codec, Dolby TrueHD is lossless.

Ahh, ok. The more you know... I really should learn more about the different surround standards.

I believe the only reason why any compression happens at all is due to the benefits of decompression and the effect it has on dynamic range (similar principle to Dolby, DBX and Adres in the day of audio cassettes and certain encoded vinyl records).

This makes no sense to me. Are you sure you aren't confusing bitrate compression with dyunamic range compression, like one might do with a Dynamic Range Compressor to make sound volume more uniform?

That, and wasn't the old Dolby noise reduction on cassette tapes that removed hiss, nothing but a simple (in modern terms) low pass filter?

Many early Bluray's were actually encoded in pure multichannel PCM.

This I did not know.

How do receivers typically identify multichannel pcm? I have no input option for this on mine. Most of the time just leaving it on auto correctly identifies the proper mode though. I would be curious to see what it looks like when it gets some multichannel PCM.

 

[westrock2000]

consoles killed true sound in games. All you need is BIG LOUD BOOMS nothing else matters, no positioning no quality just sound.
On board sound can never be as good as a quality sound card, but try to tell it to the people who have only heard on board sound.
ITS GREAT
yep loud is great....sure it is.

Aureal knew what they were doing, they sued creative and it was cheaper to buy them than to settle. That was the start of sound cards going down hill.

Consoles have real time Dolby Digital. Have had it since Halo 1. It's a beautiful thing.

 

[BulletDust]

When it comes to gaming I don't find the present method of audio positioning works at all.

Sure, there's positional sound, but it's literally in no way linked to what's necessarily going on in the game. The amount of times I've thought an enemy was close by in Battlefield when they were actually a fair distance away and to my left or right is just ridiculous.

 

[westrock2000]

Ahh, ok. The more you know... I really should learn more about the different surround standards.



This makes no sense to me. Are you sure you aren't confusing bitrate compression with dyunamic range compression, like one might do with a Dynamic Range Compressor to make sound volume more uniform?

That, and wasn't the old Dolby noise reduction on cassette tapes that removed hiss, nothing but a simple (in modern terms) low pass filter?



This I did not know.

How do receivers typically identify multichannel pcm? I have no input option for this on mine. Most of the time just leaving it on auto correctly identifies the proper mode though. I would be curious to see what it looks like when it gets some multichannel PCM.

On mine (a denon) it just says "multichannel in" when the source is doing the decoding (like Xbone). But if I watch a movie that I ripped with Dolby Digital it will actually say Dolby Digital.

 

[BulletDust]

This makes no sense to me. Are you sure you aren't confusing bitrate compression with dyunamic range compression, like one might do with a Dynamic Range Compressor to make sound volume more uniform?

That, and wasn't the old Dolby noise reduction on cassette tapes that removed hiss, nothing but a simple (in modern terms) low pass filter?

Old school Dolby wasn't a low pass filter, low pass filters were generally used on turntables to eliminate rumble (the noise of the motor). What Dolby essentially did was compress the dynamic range of an audio track to enable it to be stored on cassette (which had fairly limited dynamic range), upon playing the cassette back the Dolby decoder was enabled which essentially expanded the dynamic range back out in effect allowing for a dynamic range (the difference between the quietest part of a track and the loudest part of a track) that technically speaking the medium wasn't capable of resulting in a measure of noise reduction.

Here's an awesome video that explains, and proves, the concept perfectly:



If you've ever watched a movie and struggled to make out the vocals from the background noise even though everything is configured perfectly you've experienced issues with poorly encoded movies and dynamic range.

This I did not know.

How do receivers typically identify multichannel pcm? I have no input option for this on mine. Most of the time just leaving it on auto correctly identifies the proper mode though. I would be curious to see what it looks like when it gets some multichannel PCM.

My AU version of the movie Blood Diamond is encoded in Multichannel PCM, it states on the rear of the disc if it's encoded in Multichannel PCM. In the case of my own Pioneer Elite receiver when decoding a PCM stream 'PCM' is simply shown on the display along with the number of channels available.

Who's listened to Music encoded in DTS 96/24? I've got a Peter Gabriel DVD that sounds spectacular in 96/24, not to mention The Eagles live - Gawd damn that sounds good.

 

[John721]

That's your opinion, you're entitled to it.

Every receiver / amplifier I've ever owned has sounded completely different on the same speakers, there is no disputing that fact whatsoever - If you believe there's no difference even though one amplifier is technically a switchmode power supply and one amplifier is purely a linear design and the distortion effects of the different classes of amplifier can be easily viewed on an oscilloscope than who am I to argue?

Level matched and comparably set up? It may be time to take Richard Clark's amplifier challenge. Maybe after 26+ years, you may be the one to win the $10,000.

http://tom-morrow-land.com/tests/ampchall/index.htm

Anyways, as far PC audio goes, I've long since moved on to a receiver plus book shelf speakers and a sub of my own choosing via hdmi out. There's really no going back.

 

[Zarathustra[H]]

Level matched and comparably set up? It may be time to take Richard Clark's amplifier challenge. Maybe after 26+ years, you may be the one to win the $10,000.

http://tom-morrow-land.com/tests/ampchall/index.htm

Anyways, as far PC audio goes, I've long since moved on to a receiver plus book shelf speakers and a sub of my own choosing via hdmi out. There's really no going back.

I've read up on the Richard Clark amplifier challenge in the past. He eq:s the hell out of the setups he is having people compare to make them sound the same so no one can tell, which in my opinion completely invalidates the point he is trying to make.

 

[BulletDust]

Level matched and comparably set up? It may be time to take Richard Clark's amplifier challenge. Maybe after 26+ years, you may be the one to win the $10,000.

When it comes to hometheater everything must be calibrated to 75 - 80db (DD vs DTS with or without THX) with the dial on the receiver set to 0db.

When an amplifier works on completely differing electrical principles things are going to sound different. It's the reason valve amplifiers sound different to solid state devices, valve amplifiers use output transformers in their output stage changing the characteristics of the audio they produce considerably.

Once again, if there was no difference in sound output we'd use amplifiers designed for RF amplification as audio amplifiers - We don't do such a thing with good reason.

Most subwoofer amplifiers are class D designs, as we feel sub bass more than we actually hear it (depending on crossover levels) and AB amplification gets very hot with sub bass where sound purity isn't necessarily an issue, class D is far more efficient in relation to heat output as the transistor is switched - The issue with switching is an electrical phenomenon called 'switching distortion' which is very real and definitely audible.

 

[Mchart]

I'm not familiar with that model. Was it like a beefier version of the MT-32 that would connect to the midi port?

One thing that used to irk me back in the day with my AWE32 in MT-32 emulation mode was the number of titles in which you had to choose either MT-32 and get great music, but no PCM sound effects, or Sound Blaster and get PCM sound effects, but FM synth music.

The better titles had a separate configuration for sound effects and for music, but a surprising number didn't.

Pretty much. The SC-88 was the best, but I prefer the sound of the 55 for most games.

 

[Nihilus1]

I have to read through all of these comments, but the video was very enjoyable. I kind of felt like those guys were making fun of the people on these kind of forums. $400 for a liquid cooling system to get a couple of extra frames, constantly comparing screenshots for minuscule differences, etc. Thousands spent on graphics cards while using crappy audio. Then there is the other side of the coin. The audiophile snobs that won't accept anything under $700. They are snobby towards people that are starting to care about audio again, which turns them away. All of it very interesting.

 

[Zarathustra[H]]

I have to read through all of these comments, but the video was very enjoyable. I kind of felt like those guys were making fun of the people on these kind of forums. $400 for a liquid cooling system to get a couple of extra frames, constantly comparing screenshots for minuscule differences, etc. Thousands spent on graphics cards while using crappy audio. Then there is the other side of the coin. The audiophile snobs that won't accept anything under $700. They are snobby towards people that are starting to care about audio again, which turns them away. All of it very interesting.

Yeah, we've gotten kind of heavily sidetracked since then (you know how it goes) but I agree. Very interesting video.

 

[BulletDust]

For what it's worth I use a set of Edifer 2.1 speakers and DAC/Amplifier with my various PC's (the Edifer's have a number of inputs) and they sound great.

When I really want a listening session though I fire up the track on the Hometheater.

 

[Ripskin]

I'm not too sure where people get the 'onboard sound became the same quality' analogy from?

Onboard sound is literally DAC's decoding work done by the processor, usually fairly cheap DAC's at best. Whereas dedicated sound cards were all about custom chips performing the sound decoding with better quality DAC's and in many cases their own onboard ram.

It wasn't a case of onboard sound getting better, it was a case of processors getting faster. I don't think many here really realise just how hard computing devices worked in the day decoding a simple MP3.

I didn't say it was the same quality: "when the on-board was nearly the same quality for nice gaming headsets"

I agree with you completely, my sound-blaster was a higher end model, it was amazing at what it could do. It was a crazy jump over the basic one I had before it which was a huge jump over its predecessor as it supported multiple audio channels.

However my point is that when most players are / were using 30 to 50 dollar headphones on-board audio is perfectly fine and has been for some time since gold plating and a great decoder is not really going to change the response, ability and enjoyment of such an end listening device when coupled with a CPU and chip-set from the last decade or more. Older systems could not handle a lot of things like sound, networking, I/O so add in cards were vital.

As the technology advanced the on-board quality improved a lot, is it perfect? No but unless I'm using my audiophile cans for video / audio editing I have no concerns with my on-boards abilities. My gaming headset is good and sounds great for what most games deliver. Add to that a huge number of players using USB driven audio now and for me, that is why the dedicated cards faded into the niche.

 

[BulletDust]

I didn't say it was the same quality: "when the on-board was nearly the same quality for nice gaming headsets"

I agree with you completely, my sound-blaster was a higher end model, it was amazing at what it could do. It was a crazy jump over the basic one I had before it which was a huge jump over its predecessor as it supported multiple audio channels.

However my point is that when most players are / were using 30 to 50 dollar headphones on-board audio is perfectly fine and has been for some time since gold plating and a great decoder is not really going to change the response, ability and enjoyment of such an end listening device when coupled with a CPU and chip-set from the last decade or more. Older systems could not handle a lot of things like sound, networking, I/O so add in cards were vital.

As the technology advanced the on-board quality improved a lot, is it perfect? No but unless I'm using my audiophile cans for video / audio editing I have no concerns with my on-boards abilities. My gaming headset is good and sounds great for what most games deliver. Add to that a huge number of players using USB driven audio now and for me, that is why the dedicated cards faded into the niche.

Very valid points, cheers.

 

[Nihilus1]

Audio in general went down with the introduction of MP3. Most people thought is was cooler to have an ipod stuffed with 10,000 songs of crappy quality then 'only' 1000 songs of good quality audio. I never considered myself an audiophile, but somewhere in that narrow valley between utter crap and ultra high-end. Many of my friends back in the day burned MP3 audio CDs with 100 songs on them, and I couldn't stand it. I had to have actual CDs played through my aftermarket midgrade car audio system. I can also remember buying a $200 Sony 5.1 surround system when I was 16 that always blew my friends away. The opening sequence of Gladiator was amazing. Even then, I see very few of my friends with anything but the TV speakers being used with their new 1080p/4k tvs all these years later.
Audio has been in a black hole for the last 15 years I would say. The problem is, unlike video, audio quality is hard to quantify. Everybody KNOWS a 1080p tv is better than a 480i TV. You also have things like screenshots and Best Buy displays. Sure, audio has things like dB SNR, but since it is logarithmic, the average person doesn't understand what a huge difference there is between 90 dB and 110 dB. "Why should I pay 50% more for a slight increase." Perhaps if they converted it to watts, people would wrap their heads around it better. Other specs like 24-bit audio are never sexy either. Also, marketing blemishes like Monster cable (and Best Buy!) trying to sell them $100 RCA cables while optical cables had been out for some time, left people all kinds of confused on where to spend their hard earned dollar. I could go on and on about why audio continues to fail against video/picture.
Photography saw a degradation with the number of megapixel wars but it only lasted a short while when people actually started to care about the quality of the pixels. Maybe VR will cause people to wise up in regards to audio as well.