I get your reasoning, jostenmeat. But I feel the same way about describing how I believe the surround speakers should be placed above ear level and not aimed towards the listeners as you do about describing how you believe the speakers really should be at ear level. That is to say, when I see someone recommending that the surround speakers be placed at ear level, I feel the need to pipe up and recommend the higher placement
I guess you and I will be popping up with our contradictory advice in a lot of threads
Where a lot of our disagreement seems to be stemming from is our difference of opinion of what the surround channels are meant to achieve for movies and TV. When you are describing (or agreeing with Mr. Winer's description) of gleaning accuracy and - I'm assuming - detail from the surround channels, there seems to be a bit of leap in thinking being made to where the surround channels are heard in a way that is more similar to the front channels.
With a direct path from surround speakers to ears, the "wrap-around" effect of the surround channels is lost. Instead, it is replaced with localizable, "pin-point" sound effects that - as I mentioned - can be distracting and draw the viewers' attention away from the screen up front.
In the home setting, it is even more important to prevent a direct path from the surround speakers to the listener's ears due to the much closer proximity to the speakers than you would have in a full-sized theater. It is entirely conceivable that the outer seats on a couch could have the surround speakers just a couple of feet away. If those surround speakers are at ear level or they are monopoles aimed at the listeners, they would become very distracting and draw far too much attention to themselves.
I agree with you, jostenmeat, that monopoles can make perfectly good surround speakers. In fact, in many room types, I recommend monopole surround speakers over dipole speakers because if the room is open at the back or open on one side, the dipole speaker will be unable to reflect its sound in the intended way. But I always recommend that the surround speakers be placed above ear level so that they are never distracting and, instead, create the intended ambiance and "wrap-around" effect.
This is why I also describe it being far less necessary for the surround speakers to perfectly match the front speakers in timbre and voice. You are completely correct that with the surround speakers up high, they will not have the same accuracy or timbre as the front speakers regardless.
I can see how several people who are actually making the recordings might be trending towards a "new school" approach to mixing, however. We have these wonderful, discrete, 7 channel formats now and it does make total sense to consider using the 4 surround positions in a different fashion than the "ambiance and wrap-around" tradition. Basically, more detail can be added to the soundtrack as a whole if the surround and surround back channels are utilized in a new - and some might say "better" - way that incorporates more discrete detail. And that would require speakers that closely match the front speakers positioned at ear level, just as you describe. The problem there is that the listening environment really has to allow for proper placement, including proper distance between the speakers and the listeners. Even with greater detail and discrete effects in the surround and surround back channels, the listeners' attention should still be primarily focused on the screen in front of them.
So I think I have a pretty good grasp on your reasoning. And it does make sense. But there has to be a combination of both a mix that was made with the intention of greater discrete detail in the surrounds plus a home theater with proper speaker placement and distance. Almost all full-sized dubbing studios still make use of multiple surround speakers on each side wall and on the back wall - all of which are above seated ear height. Whether it is a case of sticking with tradition or simply being "held back" by the fact that this is the way virtually all full-sized movie theaters are set up, I do not know. But the result is that the surround channels are still primarily being used for ambiance and "wrap-around" and the diffusion of multiple speakers placed up high remains the standard in full-sized studios and theaters.
Perhaps things will slowly change. The surround music formats demonstrated how discrete surround channels with the speakers at ear level can still deliver ambiance, but also greater discrete detail. But again, proper distance had to be maintained between the speakers and the listeners, and this is a problem in many rooms. For the time being, when a person is primarily listening to movies and TV, and less so to surround format music, I still recommend to them that they follow - what is most easily explained as - THX guidelines. For now, that is still the creation of a diffuse and "wrap-around" soundfield created by placing the surround and surround back speakers up high and sitting in the "null" of dipole surround speakers so that there is, in fact, no direct path from the speaker drivers to the listeners' ears. I'm not saying that can't be improved upon with a newer approach to mixing and an altered standard for speaker placement. But I still find this "traditional" standard very effective. And I actually think it makes even more sense in the home because of the limited space and the likelihood of the surround speakers being quite close to the listeners.
I'm sure we'll continue to have fun debates over this
