Why is 2 Channel better than multi-channel?

In my experience very few recordings sound completely right with matrix (algorithm) decoding. Regarding cost, a low cost matrix decoder uses the same algorithm as the most expensive unit. The hardware will differ, and (hopefully) sound better.

Kal said it better than I could.

"Following that same logic, makes me wonder why so many claim a mid priced receiver, with sufficient power of course, is all that is needed to get great surround sound."

Actually your description is not a qualifier. It depends which mid priced receiver. The one on my system with the speakers I built to run on it is spooky good for $750. But you can't change the receiver to another brand and expect the same sound. ie. Denon, Onkyo etc.

There is a certain way surround equipment should be setup by the manufacturer or you can forget good sound no matter how much you spend. We live in a software world, the days of the brute force uber faceplate to the rescue solution is over. Smart equipment is slowly creeping in, and taking over. People who build real surround processors don't chat up their WBT connectors and 24/192 UBer DAC's, they point out the processor bank which allows proper speaker setup, room correction and EQ, and other essential setup parameters to be changed to put that unit in your world perfectly in real time.

Software rules, ie your bombs may be bigger but my bombs land EXACTLY where I want them everytime. You lose. :)

"That seems to imply the processor is one of the most important pieces in the chain."

Equal to the importance of the speakers, in many cases.

hi guys
i am not too expierenced with ht.i want to keep it a 2 ch. system,i was wondering if you can help me set it up,i am looking for best sound and picture quality.the system i have is vandy5a`s,quickie4v`s monos.arc sp16l pre,and cary 306/200 cdp,panasonic dvd-35 and panasonic ct-36sx12.by running through the cary does that help with sound.my question is what is the best way to go about this venture with best results.
thank you very much
al

Kal,
I'm still a bit confused. When you talk about the recording engineer deciding what goes to each individual channel, are you strictly talking about multi-channel recordings like DVD-A and SACD? I was thinking more along the lines of regular old redbook CD and running that through the processor for 2,3,5, etc. channel playback.

Thanks
Brad

Yes, exactly. Running Redbook through a processor is highly variable as there are many different processors, only some of which permit user intervention. In fact, I don't really consider that multichannel (well, it is multichannel output but the info is not). Of these, favorite is Meridian's TriField.

Kal (who denies the premise of this entire thread)