Why is 2 Channel better than multi-channel?

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!

more is better
bigger is better
this stupid mentality built the Hummer
a thinly disguised red neck monster truck for yuppies and gen x ers alike

since more is better, more speakers is better

no need for audio balance, subtle overtones, etc
let's just throw more in the mix

damn now theres 7.1 processing 7 channel, let me throw away my 5 channel

on and on

could anyone list audio cd's (DVD-A's that get HT setup right)? the few dvd-a's I've heard don't
thanks

Audiotomb....It's too bad that you have never heard a good multichannel audio system. They do exist, and discs to play on them.

If your pursuit is realistic sound in the home, 2 speakers never was and never will be enough. Why do you think Dipoles are so popular! 2 real, 2 virtual speakers 4 channels!

Even if the instruments are only presented in front, without surround speakers you cannot begin to present the entire recorded event. 2 channel is at best amputation of all electronic and real reverb and delay processing and venue. Whether you thinks its important or not...it is anyway.

Ask any Pro Lexicon DSP processor designer, all reverberation and delay effects are modeled as a 360 degree effect. 2 channel 160 degrees at best.

Amputation of the music and the environment around it.