Best multichannel SACDs?

I know there are a lot of excellent two channel SACDs out there of two channel recordings. I've tried some.
However, what about multi-channel SACDs?
I'm looking for some opinions on what you think are good surround recordings on SACD that DO NOT have goofy mixes with instruments and voices in the rear channels. I don't want to be in the middle of the band/orchestra; I want to be in the Hall/room/club with the appropriate ambient sound, as a member of the audience. (remember, that's SACD, not those horrible "compressed" DTS & DD recordings)
I was looking for a previous thread on this subject by doing a search, but there's way too many and I was going cross-eyed. If you know such a thread, point me at it please, or just leave your thoughts here.......Thanks.
There is only one (popular) Orff. The Carmana Burina. Get the SACD version with the dark cover. (Full orchestra and choir).
Bach: The Four Great Toccatas and Fugues performed by E. Power Biggs sounds fantastic. I personally love Pink Floyd's Dark Side of the Moon as well. I have a few other multi-channel discs where "some" of the songs sound better in surround but I prefer the 2-channel overall. I'm not a huge fan of placing instruments behind me and feel thet the surround should be left for "effects" or ambiance. The Police (greatest hits) is tolerable in surround as well but other's like The Who's Tommy, Elton John's Goodbye Yellow Brick Road and several others are best in 2-channel IMO.
Do SACDs really suck that bad?!
Ahem, sorry, I had to put something a little bit inflammatory here to get some action!!
I'd like to thank the few who have replied so far, but I thought there would be more input than this so far, considering all of the SACD vs. redbook threads that get posted around here!
If I don't hear any more, I think I'll start a new thread, perhaps in the digital category, with the heading "ALL SACDs SUCK!!!!" That would stir something-up!!! ;-)
Golden_ears- The problem is most SACD enthusiasts(myself included) are using them in stereo's. Multichannel would cost WAY to much money not to mention needing a HUGE room to make it happen the "right" way. I only know one person who has a high end multichannel system with SACD and he doesn't post here, try or and search a bit or post this subject at either place and you'll get more information. Good luck.
Even those of us who use MCH (SACD and otherwise) would think that Tireguy's suggestions of researching those websites for stuff already posted and praised is a good idea. Anyone's taste is hard to know, so it's best if you glean what suits you from those listings.
Golden ears,

I wanted to clarify that the titles I listed above are the titles I prefer to hear in multi-channel over stereo. I own several multi-channel SACD's but so far I have found the stereo more satisfying than the multi-channel with a few songs sprinkled on a few other discs that sound "better" in multi-channel - but not the WHOLE album. I will admit that I don't have identical speakers all around, although my rear speakers aren't cheap little boxes either. I also have equal amplification all around. I think there has to be a learning curve involved where I have to get used to listening in multi-channel and the producers have to get used to mixing in multi-channel - every now and again it clicks. I think electronic music, i.e. Enigma, Moodswings, or some old Vangelis would be good albums to experiment with in multi-channel more so than "song oriented" albums. My 2 cents. - Tony
Tireguy and Treyhoss: Thanks for the suggestions and clarifications.
I'm familiar with the concept of 2 ch. being better than multi-channel from many of the DVD concerts I've heard. There, you have to deal with DD and DTS "compression" (discarded data) as well as bad mixing of the soundtrack. At least with SACD and DVD-A the sound is good, even if there is aggravating & distracting content in the rear channels. :-)

Kr4; It's not so much a matter of "taste" in regards to musical content; I'm pretty open-minded there. Like I said in the original post, I don't want un-natural placement of voices and instruments in the rear channels. I do realize, however, that some content lends itself to that sort-of thing, like "concept" material from Pink Floyd, Alan Parsons and groups like that. If the artist intended it that way for effect, thats' okay, sometimes. If the rears are playing back stuff put there by so-called engineers for the "Gee whiz" factor, I object to it.
It is a matter of taste. For example, I do not doubt that some of the earlier suggestions in this thread, e.g., Roxy Music, Police, Elton John, etc., are decent recordings (relying on the assessment of others) but I don't care to hear them. Same for Carmina Burana at this stage in my life.

That's why I say that reading a list of recommended MCH recordings, mine or anyone else's, lets you pick what appeals to you. And since such lists and suggestions are rife, you can look 'em up.
Diana Krall. The mix puts alot of stuff in the rear channels, but if your rears are actually on the side, bipole or dipole, with the null facing the listening spot, it is very nice. I'll bet that was the setup when it was mixed. I had my rear surrounds in the rear and it was distracting. Once I moved them, it was pleasurable.
Treyhoss...For the E Power Biggs organ recording, do you refer to the 4 organs in Frieburg Cathedral? That disc is remarkable as an example of what can be done with multichannel playback.
Treyhoss...The interesting thing about this recording is that it reveals the inherent "Antiphonal" nature of Bach's fugues, which I had never appreciated although I must have heard them a thousand times before.