Because 3D audio allows sounds to be perceived as emanating from different locations, it was considered to be the gemstone for enabling less confusing simultaneous communications between the astronaut, the researcher in-lab with the satellite manual, mission control, and the crew inside the shuttle.  Speakers appeared to be heard at different locations, allowing the astronaut easy in-context understanding of who was speaking. 

Around the same time (late 1980's to early 1990's), many different sound-processing technologies began to emerge calling themselves “3D audio”.  Some of these technologies contained a cheap imitation of true, physically accurate, 3D audio.  The vast differences in these technologies, however, led to much confusion about the actual capabilities delivered.  In an effort to differentiate themselves from one another, the various technologies were sold under different catchy names including positional, direct, localized, spatialized, and surround sound/audio.

But even while “3D audio” designed for gaming had taken the consumer spotlight, advanced technologies were evolving from the earlier more precise and interactive NASA 3D audio.  Unfortunately, when military application developers attempted to incorporate COTS 3D audio technology, they too borrowed the well known but inferior “3D audio” from the gaming industries.  Even using higher-end gaming audio, military designers often ran into difficulties because the systems were inflexible, very expensive, difficult to use and too voluminous (making deployment difficult).  Recent advances in high-end 3D audio have overcome some of the major problems pertaining to versatility, scalability, cost and the significant computing power necessary to perform correct environment simulation, thus making accurate 3D sound a viable solution for future applications.