Why is 2 Channel better than multi-channel?

It's not necessarily better. HT is needed for movies, otherwise, you may have difficulty hearing the dialogue at times. What's nice about the HT preamps for stereo recordings, is you can add effects like time delay, which make older recordings sound better. The sub bass adds more bass -- it all depends on what you like to hear.

I agree with Chadnliz. Bottom line is that without HT you'll have trouble hearing the dialogue at times, it makes no sense to swear by two channel for moives. On the other hand, there's no need to make it into a Zen event, please just listen with our ears.

Interesting thread. After having full HT system (Lex DC1, Logan QuestZ fronts, Logos center, SL3 rears, pair of 15" Velo FSR15 subs, etc............

I have gone back to straight two-channel. Why is it I have no trouble whatsoever hearing dialog in movies? Do tell.

Best,

Paul :-)

I dont know, but to each his own I guess.

In my opinion 2 channel movies might as well be mono, compared to multi-channel for movies, that would be my take on this topic

2 channel movie= Mono
multi-channel HT= stereo
To me it is that big of a diffrence
I wond if a few decades ago people did this with AM-VS-FM?

I'll tell ya why MOST PEOPLES 2 channel system might be better. For one, they're more likely to get lucky getting 2 speakers setup well than 6 or more!!! You couple that with the "ill-placed/setup" subwoofer situation, mating with the other speakers(amoung the other acoustical challenges), and you've got a "hodgepodge" of compromises going on! Really, most people can't get 2 speakers setup for great sound, let alone multiples.
Also, most multichannel recordings are probably thouroughly mixed together, as opposed to pure 2/3 channel mic recordings. Then you add the need for more processing/decoders, and so on, and you get the idea...