I don't know about that. While that system is clearly easier to use, from what I've heard about echolocation it provides much more detail than that system.

If you look at my other post, I linked to a video of a kid who used echolocation. He could distinguish objects - he walked past two garbage cans in the street, and said "Is that a car? clicks his tongue several times No, it's a garbage can."

I used the software I linked to above (I'm not blind), you can download it to a laptop, plug in a webcam and earphones. I could tell the difference between a car and a garbage can with no practice at all. Can he click with his tongue and tell if the picture on the wall is a picture a square or a circle? No, this software can enable him to do that.

I'd like to get his opinion of this: http://www.seeingwithsound.com/

I stand corrected. It's hard to tell from the video.

You wouldn't be able to hear someone walking from behind you, or to your side, or around a corner. This emulates a low refresh rate, very limited field of vision at the cost of reduced hearing. What he's interested in is absolute gains in hearing. I don't think trying to emulate a worse copy of vision fits with his philosophy.