Why is 2 Channel better than multi-channel?

Like I've posted on other posts, we as a society have largely "cared less" about 2 channel stereo sound quality, in favor of convenience and content it seems! LP's died, and so did SACD/DVDA. 25 years later, standard old cruddy CD's are still selling in all the major retail stores! However, multi-channel HD DVD disc material is getting better and better. Why? Does everyone need superior sound with their synthetically processed, mixed, dubbed, effect laden DVD movies, as opposed to what's being played in two channel on their home stereos and cars? I guess it does.
I mean, if you want great recordings on yoru 2 channel rig, what do you have to chose from? You can either do select few records on an Table setup, or you have a few silly little choices on SACD/DVDA! How many times can you listen to Pink Floyed Dark Side, or some Spanish Guitar stuff on SACD, and a few other titles? Let's face it, unless you want to go garage sale hunting for records, learn to set up a good turntable and phone cartridge rig, pretty much old CD and a tuner are your only choices!

??? I find few restrictions in any format. I still have a few thousand LPs and CDs but my multichannel SACD/DVD-A collection is also well over 1000 and growing daily.

That said, I will bow out of this thread whose title question I find unacceptable.

Kal

Kr4, do you mean to tell me there's actually 1000+ titles on SACD/DVDA? I never see them! I mean, you can go to any major cd chain store in my neck of the woods, and you might find a few titles of stuff you don't really care to listen to for anything more than once!!!
Wow, I didn't know there was even that many.
Still though, you have to conceed that the SACD/DVDA discs aren't getting much play by-enlarge on the consumer mass market level, yes?

Let's look at the current state of digital sound these days. Basically, you've get everything going to mass Gigabite level medium storage. You've also got Ipods as the latest fad (the new "Walk-man" of the era). Where not talking quality here, but more like quantity and convenience. I presume shortly here, everything will all be storage on a large hard drive, as things already are progressing this way. Again, quantity over quality.
Let's face it, when it comes to music, people would rather have easy convenient access to mass quantity of digital storage, rather than audiophile grade sound qualit. That IS a fact!
2 channel high end is a dying bread really...sadly.

I used to be a strickly 2 channel guy until I upgraded my controller to a Theta Digital Casablanca lll. My system has now converted me to a multi channel listener with everything. Now when I listen to CD's even my old REO Speedwagon "You can tune a piano, but you can't tunafish" it sounds absolutely amazing. The rear channels aren't just a mix of crap from the front anymore. The rear is more defined and precise, of course the newer recordings use better technology and it is more noticable. It is personal preference so I will never tell a two channel guy he is missing out on anything, unless of course, he makes me by telling me two channel should sound better to me, but technology has improved so much with high end multi channel that it is truly amazing. The only thing I don't like is once I fire that beast up and I say that because it uses more power than my A/C unit, it's hard to get me away from it. I have over 1000 CD's so I can sit for half a Saturday listening to them. Don't even get me started on the DVD's. The more I upgrade my multi channel system the more I enjoy multi channel. Even my strictly two channel friend has commented how impressed he is with the quality of multi channel now, but that doesn't mean he is converted. When I had my first mid-fi Carver, JBL set up it was great at the time with movies, but my clock radio sounded better than the multi channel for music. To each his own, whatever someone prefers is what sounds the best. As long as you like it who cares what everyone else says? Just make sure it doesn't hurt my ears when you turn it up, that's all!