Why is 2 Channel better than multi-channel?

OH! So what you are saying is that you like it better. That's quite different from offering a theoretical reason why it *is* intrinsically better, which is what I took you to be offereing when you said 'Music arrives at our 2 ears from all directions. Five channels gets it lots righter than just 2', as an apparant explanation of why 5 channel is better than two. That explanation would go just as well (or badly) for 10 channel rather than 5, 17 rather than 13, and n+1 rather than n.

Anyway, if you are just saying it sounds better, maybe so. But that doesn't answer or even address the OP's question at all. It just contradicts its implication.

Rnm4

TYVM, Lazarus. It started as a 2-channel audio system; I added the multichannel stuff for movies, but the multichannel classical and film music sounded SO good--natural, spacious--that my in-remission audiofoolia reared its ugly head. I replaced the universal-disc player, the preamp, ALL (about a dozen, I think) speakers, all 3 poweramps, all the IC and speakercable, etc.

It's now the best-sounding AUDIO system I've ever heard...but I don't go searching for hi-end audio systems to listen to. :-)
.

Rnm4, that was deeeeeeeep man!
I'm a simpleton, and eat Cheerios and such. Could you repeat all that again for me in "simpleton terminology" I'm not sure I got all of what you said there.
I only read your post once however. Maybe that's why...duhu!

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.