Why is 2 Channel better than multi-channel?

As long as the mass market goes and buys HT-in-a-box setups audiophile recordings in MC will not be very accessible. Joe Best Buy likes to turn his head around when his cube shaped speakers play behind his head and say "Wow this sure sounds better than my old Techincs table!" For the very few who are able to afford good identical speakers all around and a room that has good acoustical treatments and size there will always be some great recordings available in SACD or DVD-A but those people don't buy enough to fuel a charge for high quality MC audio discs, especially when those that don't know better are still willing to spend and extra $5 over the cost of a regular CD to have a poorly-mixed MC recording. Give me VINYL! Acousticsounds.com can get virtually any album worth listening to and with a high quality turntable, a good amp, a good pre, and 2 good speakers you have the best sound you ever need. I don't want to be in the middle of the musicians, I want to sit in front of them and hear them play; unfortunately people like me are the minority so MC recordings that use the surrounds for ambiance are few and far between.

Bmw328iproject...Take a look at my post "Multichannel and why". Your reaction to multichannel is typical of people who have not experienced the full potential of the media, but have been exposed only to stupidly mastered discs.

Multichannel will succeed, if only because of automobiles, where rear speakers have long been standard equipment.

I do my part by buying every "audiophile" multichannel disc that I can lay my hands on.

As an avid car audio competitor I have to disagree with your thoughts on multi-channel music in cars. Even if the technology is released at a reasonable price for the car, it is still necessary that a center speaker be installed (which is normally a pretty hard install job that is very expensive) so unless tons of cars start coming off of the line with DVD-A or SACD players and compatible speaker setups it won't really take on. Also consider that DTS and DD5.1 decoders have been in cars now for 3 years but most people who have them still don't have the center channel. Why mix this perfectly to suit the car customers especially when the average car has pretty bad acoustics compared to home? Even if 10 years from now SACD or DVD-A multichanel audio is standard in all cars will most people use it? Will people care that their car could play a DVD-A disc when it can also play cheaper regular CD's? With more and more people downloading music and DVD-A and SACD unburnable will people really spend $20 and up for something they can get in 2 channels for free? Will these car audio setups be good enough that people require the new MC discs to be mixed well? Will artists spend even more time in the studios to ensure that their music is mixed properly in 5.1 when mixing in 2 has been hard enough already? 5.1 and up will all survive for movies but music is just not necessary and most people don't care enough about the mixing of MC music for it to ever become a true audiophile format. It will always be dominated by the best buy crowds who think it's cool but who wouldn't know stereo imaging if it hit them in the head.

What Eldartford is saying is correct in that gen x-y ers are growing up in automobiles and that is where they are cutting their " audio teeth". They spend gobs of cash on car systems and the sense of surround is mandatory and the progression to dvd-a discs will be the next rage . This is where dvd-a will take off . I am in the sacd camp however and hate to witness this fight .

I'm joining this thread a little late, but have some thoughts on how the recording industry could properly use surround channels to optimize music recording. This is based on the idea that music has been historically recorded in 2-channel formats, and I'm including some thoughts about recording. I'm not sure if anyone is familiar if any of this has been tried or is being done, but would be curious to know. Let me preface all of this by saying I am no expert, so if some of my terminology is not accurate, please forgive me.

When sound is recorded, microphones are used. One of the simplest ways to make a stereo recording is with a "coincident pair" of microphones. This involves placing a pair of microphones at roughly what the listening distance would be away from the sound source in a criscross patern. One mic feeds the left channel, the other the right. Pretty simple. The next thing to do would be to add "room ambiance." In many pop music recordings, this is done with electronic signal processors to the recorded signal. However, if one were to, say, record a string quartet with a coincident pair in a small auditorium (left and right channel) and then place two additional microphones, one on either side of the rear of the room, could these not be used to provide "surround" information for the rear channels? I suppose additonal mics could also be placed for "back" channel information in a 7.1 setup. Not really sure what to send to the center channel, though.

Anyhow, I just wanted to throw this out there.

Cheers,
Mike