These forums are so much fun.
It’s great to read about contributors "immersing" themselves in new experiences and willing to share those results with a high degree of enthusiasm. However, putting personal stamp of approval on a concept is a bit different than proclaiming that functioning adults should abandon their fundamental beliefs in system architecture and budgetary considerations and follow THEIR lead.
Coming from one who spent decades designing and installing 2-channel and multi-channel systems:
As I mentioned in a previous topic/thread, "the suspsension of disbelief" is the goal of a sound reproduction experience in the home. That is to say, for a moment in time we cease to believe that we’re listening to a fascimile of a live event, artificially created in our space. But, rather, in the room WITH the performers/performance. Many have found 2 channels (done right) provides our ears (and, brains) with enough information to render an accurate enough image to become believable as a "live" performance. It’s been happening for quite a long time.
Back in the day when we were putting together some pretty decent HT systems, a common objection we heard was: "My room isn’t big enough for surround sound." So, I was motivated to design and install a 5.1 system in a 30" x 30" replica of a British phone booth. (B&W mini monitors mounted in a custom ceiling with JL Audio thin profile subs in the floor. Outboard electronics. Control via the antique-looking pay phone). Doing the math, it was the functional equiviant of a 150" image in an "average" living room, delivering 4,000 watts of power. It was an effective demo for the "small room" customers. Our store was in a college market and the highlight was when two coeds decided to see if they could both fit in the phone booth together. It was summer, and it was hot, and they were dressed "appropriately" for the weather conditions. I wish I would have videoed their attempts to egress the space. I could have gotten a sponsor and made a small contribution to my retirement account.
But, here’s where I take the side of 2-channel for the ultimate reproduction of music. Assuming 7-channels vs 2, that’s 3.5 times the number of speakers and amplifier channels. Using the "2x rule" as an example, when 2x the investment is placed in a piece of audio gear, "stuff" happens. Price considerations are relaxed and better/robust parts are used on the inside (and, chassis/cabinet integrity -- on the outside as well). The results can range from "very significant" to "mind-blowing" depending on a number of factors. In short, much higher resolution, accompanied by a reduction in musical artifacts, sypathetic resonances, microphonics, etc. Our brains have more/better information to process and less "false" information to take away from the experience (including reduction of listening fatigue). Now, substitute 3.5x as the variable and the comparision in the delivery of accurate music into the space is, well, no comparison.
The other element I’d like to introduce is that different social interactions require different environments for many. Music is quite personal to some. Shared for others. Different spaces. Different agendas. Different hardware, software, friends, and refreshments. One size/technology does not fit all.
OP, thanks for the post. Good comments by all.