Why is 2 Channel better than multi-channel?

When I used to sell audio, I noticed that there were two kinds of customers.....those interested in music and those who seek sound effects. This division seems to have been exacerbated by the introduction of multi-channel.

And Eldartford brings to the forefront an important observation too. Home theater is pretty much car stereo brought indoors.

Regardless of its theoretical potential, HT remains a poorly executed medium. And absurd. Does anyone remember quadrophonic headphones?

Stupid comment - 2 channel is for anyone who uses it. Many people see no reason to introduce the gimmickry and complexity of multi-channel. It is very possible to ignore 5.1 or 7.1 or 11.1 or whatever else the marketeers are able to dream up for you to buy. That doesn't mean they are purists but simply tat they do not respond to every opportunity to buy something new. Maybe they are content or poor or busy elsewhere. Audiophools need to come to grips with the fact that too many of us treat this like a bleeping religion. It's just stuff.
2 channel is for music. Multi-channel is for sound effects.

Kal - Don't forget indifference. Most people could care less. They just want access. No qualitative thoughts ever cross their minds - except maybe brand name. That's where Bose comes in.

This thread has progressed haltingly through nearly nine years of inconclusive debate. During that time much has changed in the world around us and in our narrow area of special emphasis.

My system has changed a lot since I first rendered an opinion on this subject and it is probable that the rest of us can say the same.

At present I have a two channel system comprised of big wooden horns and 15 inch woofers. The frequency response is narrow - (40 Hz. to 14Khz.) but the character and impact are very real and very impressive. I don't feel that I am missing anything.
To me the whole surround thing is an unnecessary gimmick, like 3-D.

Armyscout knows how to shout but not how to think. The beholders and the critics are one and the same. Some of the critics agree with him and some do not. Everybody has an opinion and everyone is correct in stating what they each think. Upper case utilization and assertive tone do nothing to diminish that FACT.

To me this boils down to a value decision. I put greater value in quality - others seem to value quantity (more is better). Both are valid but us quality proponents get more snob points. I may change my position when they get to 21.1 channel and 2 to 200Khz frequency response however.

Blaming Obama is a quick and easy way to demonstrate that you listen to AM radio and late night comedians. Why you would want that known I cannot imagine.

As for multi-channel, sound effect laden, gimmick strewn reproduction, why not? It's as valid as any other form of self-deception. And isn't hi-end audio all about self-deception? Aren't we trying to close our eyes and be there or bring the performers euphemistically "into our listening space? What difference does it make how we go about deluding ourselves as long as we satisfy the delusion.

All of you have my express permission to utilize any form of self-delusion you enjoy, no matter how many speakers that requires. Enjoy it while you still can. Wall Street isn't done with us yet.

My tuner is FM only and I go to bed at 9:00 P.M. so I can't help you out.

Someone put you up to snide asides about your President. I was just guessing who it might have been that so inspired you.

I think Obama likes music more than any President in recent memory.
Bush and company went after The Dixie Chicks for simply disagreeing with a stupid decision in public. Freedom of speech?

Stereo is an illusion supported by our natural triangulation of our ears and the source. This provides location and certain cues (clues) as to the nature and characteristics of the sound source. Our eyes perform similarly to identify size, distance, color, etc. of visual counterparts. More info is not necessarily better. I find it confusing. But, then again, I have no use for absurd special effects in movies. If people leaping tall buildings in order to slap the face of an opponent is your cup of tea, I can see why you might enjoy 5 or 7 or 21 different channels of sound raining upon you from all directions.

To each their own.

Long ago I noted that children make most of their assessments and valuations on a quantitative basis. I'm sure the term gazillion was coined by a child.

As we mature and evolve, we tend to appreciate qualitative distinctions more, even to the point of disregard for quantity. Let's hope that is in your future.