2. speakers
  3. 1177210462

MultiChannel too complicated for most...

I've been on the gon for a little while now, posting and enjoying all the spectacular virtual systems. There is one thing I've noticed though. It's that many seem to associate the terms 2 channel and simple, especially when heading and detailing their virtual systems. I don't see it too often in threads, but every now and again it'll show up their as well.

Me being the multichannel guy I am, this small and most times overlooked detail seemed to jump out at me. Its been a passing thought for a while, but seems to be a somewhat valid question.

Now...before I go any further, this is not in insight a riot and bombard the moderators with request to have this thread pulled because it "potentially offends" 2 channel lovers. This is not that kind of posting, but just posing a question that has crossed my mind more times that one.

Do 2channel only audiophiles shun multichannel (discrete or DSP based) because they find it too complicated?

If the concept of thinking in 360 degrees (Multichannel) were simplified, for a lack of better terms, would multichannel be more accepted?
cdwallace
chasmo
12 posts
 
I'm guessing that Multichannel setup is a bit unfamiliar and inconvenient for many veteran audiophiles. It requires more high quality (forget HTIB) gear and a LOT more work to get it "right". Once you've heard multichannel correctly done, it's hard to go back to 2 channel.

Imagine going to a concert and having to stand just outside the open doorway to listen! That is now how I feel about 2-channel stereo! Don't we want to be IN the concert hall?
aball
2,018 posts
 
I don't do multichannel because I don't watch much TV.

I think that setting up a 2-channel system right is already extremely difficult. It has taken me 7 years to get mine right in the room I'm in now.

Arthur
tbg
5,263 posts
 
Chasmo, you are certainly right about how expensive it would be to match the quality of my two channel with at least three additional channels as well as how much more difficult it would be to deal with the proper placement of the speakers and setting everything to proper levels. Then there is the matter of software. I have heard mc setups at shows and in dealers. I heard nothing that interested me. Were it possible to go back and capture outstanding performances in the past in mc, I might be interested. I concede that there have been some efforts to do this.

You suggest that 2-channel is like standing in an open doorway rather than in the theater. I find that much mc is like being in the center of the orchester and having a blanket over your head. You may know the music is all around you but it has no realism.
jmcgrogan2's avatar
jmcgrogan2
6,346 posts
 
Tbg, let me say right on. :)
kr4's avatar
kr4
3,688 posts
 
Tbg wrote: "You suggest that 2-channel is like standing in an open doorway rather than in the theater. I find that much mc is like being in the center of the orchester and having a blanket over your head."

You just have not heard anything representative of what good MCH can do. I can understand the arguments that good MCH is too expensive, too complex (for some) or too bulky but I cannot understand not finding it superior to 2 channel.

Kal
More to discover