Why is 2 Channel better than multi-channel?

Could it be all the digital processing circuitry which degrades multi-channel sound? I recently bought a "top of the line" Bryston SP1.7 multi-channel (pre-amp/processor with analog bypass) to use with my Mcintosh MC501 monos and driving Apogee Duetta II's. I compared it to a Cary SLP-98P tube pre-amp in 2-channel mode. The bottom line - the Bryston is up on Ebay right now. The Bryston is certainly one of the best mutli-channel units out there, but it did not perform better than the 2-channel Cary... my 2 cents...Bob

I listen to two channel sound (w/Sub)for critical listening and use the front three channels (w/Sub)for "enjoying the music". There is a difference to which is better due to the fact that some recordings are better suited for different systems.

System is Mcintosh MX 132, Mcintosh Mc402, and MC202 (Bridged for Center Channel). Speakers are M/L Aeris I with Cinema Center. Sub is Martin Logan Depth (I have it hooked up for two channel sub as well as LFE through Processor.)

System is very smooth. While in three channel mode the Air Blends somewhat, the smoothness more than compensates. All in All, a great system either way. the two channel provides more of the audiopyile music listening experience with the seperation of instruments, tight tuneful base, etc, etc, etc.

Could not be happier with the Mac Amps. The extra power on the M/L is greatful on certain recordings.

In my world for sound quality, I do not spin analog. My terrain is listening to 2 & 4 track factory pre-recorded open reel tapes. This is the way music was and is recorded.
And I don't care how many channels you have, 4,5,30... nothing will beat the sound of a 7&1/2 two track tape.....nothing. When I invite friends who listen to my system the first time, they look at the acoustic side pannels and think that they are speakers. Extra speakers means that your system needs the extra drivers to fully image, mine doesn't.

i listen to two channel only for music, have a linn 5140
set up aktiv with 5120 aktiv middle, but only room for 5110 for rear. run cary dvd 6 for both music and movies. when i bypass the processor, rotel 1098, i get very good 2 channel sound, but when i am at my office i liste to a 8 rear old ATI Little boy amp and a old denon hdcd cd player with variable ouput straight in, thru a pair of totem
arros. both sytems sing and are sifferent. hte stage and imaging in my minimalistic office system is great, and the depth and room filling sound at home is fantastic. frankly,
I haven't had too many bands play behind me, so the multi channel stuff isn't too interesting to me. I get the room affects that one would expect without using extra speakers. actually, 5 channel stereo and matrix souurounds always sounded better to me, but for parties only.

I like the arguments for and against however, and if i had the big dough, I'd jsut have a few rooms to my liking and just create each one, but you do what you can.

For what it's worth...

When I listen to music I have to have it coming from in front of me. It just seems artificial to think I'll have musicians behind me. The band, orchestra, etc, is always in front of me. So, for me personally, I just can't listen to music on a surround type setup - it just seems fake... I'm not knocking the folks who do - I'm strictly speaking about myself - I just can't enjoy the music unless it's from a 2-channel setup... I'm sure it's psychological but I've never been able to think of it any other way... It doesn't matter how good the surround system is - in my brain it computes as fraud so my listening ears just write it off as something "other than" authentic... That in no- way means it doesn't sound good - it just doesn't sound authentic...

Just my 2-pence worth...