Why is 2 Channel better than multi-channel?

Kr4,
Are you saying that you don't beleive that multi channel systems as for popularity dwarf the sale of (2) channel systems? Do you not believe that electronics dealers (especially the ones that most people frequent), mainly promote multi channel systems? If I am different, it is because I promote and sell the best sound quality available per dollar invested. I do that by designing (2) channel systems (preferably tube based). Most of the "dealers" that I frequent in my admittedly small rural state, primarily sell multi-channel systems. There displays have Center channel speakers, Effect channel speakers, powered woofers, multi-channel electronics, etc.. My clients NEVER report being previously exposed to or informed about this way of putting together an AV system and are always surprised when I suggest it. Also, my customers are often unaware of "high-end" dealerships (or have a negative impression of them but that could be another forum). I preach the advantages of high end (2) channel systems to people who know nothing about electronics. Elderly women and men, technically intimidated people who happen to have a love affair with Music and Cinema. I see (2) channel audio as a fringe in the overall market place. That doesn't mean that it is not better. I think that it means that consumers are less informed about the possibilities that are out there. I obviously realize that there are numerous high end audio specialists around that also share my enthusiasm for (2) channel & I am probably not much different than those professionals. Ultimately, if my client knows what is available and can determine with greater proficiency what is "good enough" for themselves, then they can buy what is best. Not knowing and or comparing is to proceed blindly.

very disturbed by the BIAS opinions of the 2 channel ONLY crowd. the facts are, would you use a TANK for a drag race? Woud use a porsche in a combat zone? Multichannel was intended for MOVIE soundtracks and VIDEO concerts. To most of us, we would prefer the multi channel approach when using it on it's proper context. Those who claim they'd rather use 2 channel for surround sound? give me a break, it defeats the purpose and sounds like garbage to those of us who like watching home theater. 2 channel designs is strictly MUSIC to recapture a live performance. TWO different setups for 2 different purposes. I DON'T AND WILL NEVER AGREE with the BIASES of the 2 channel crowd. You are comparing apples to oranges. For movies, multi channel is superior, for music, two channel is superior, CASE IS CLOSED! but the truth is SOUND is in the EAR of the beholder not the CRITICS!

Armyscout knows how to shout but not how to think. The beholders and the critics are one and the same. Some of the critics agree with him and some do not. Everybody has an opinion and everyone is correct in stating what they each think. Upper case utilization and assertive tone do nothing to diminish that FACT.

To me this boils down to a value decision. I put greater value in quality - others seem to value quantity (more is better). Both are valid but us quality proponents get more snob points. I may change my position when they get to 21.1 channel and 2 to 200Khz frequency response however.

Cine 100, I was distinguishing between multichannel for music and multichannel for home theater. Without doubt, MCH HT is the volume mover for dealers these days and those that still sell a bit of audio tend to sell stereo.

What is the issue for me is that nearly no dealers set up, promote or, even, acknowledge MCH for music and that continues to support the archaic attitude that music is ONLY two channel. Live music is performed in real spaces and the proper reproduction of the entire event is logically and subjectively better with multichannel. There are, also, books and papers on the topic. Unfortunately, there is nowhere I could direct anyone to hear this because dealers are of no help.

Armyscout 41 wrote: "For movies, multi channel is superior, for music, two channel is superior, CASE IS CLOSED!"

I'll bet you hate broccoli, too. This is a classic example of preference stated as fact. Papers and listening tests contradict this absolutist statement.

Kal

It think the absolute sound quality of a two channel system easily exceeds any surround system (assuming similar dollars spent) that I've heard, but when it comes to the home theater realm, the multi channel provides an experience that simply isn't the same with only two channels.

This may also apply to multi channel recording of live events, but it seems that this is another example where there is an element of experience that may trump absolute sound quality for some.

I've never heard an excellent two channel recording played on an quality system and left thinking something was missing. I've also never heard a multi-channel music recording that really impressed me, but I'm sure there are exceptions that would knock my socks off.

I guess I placed my vote when I purchsased an SACD player that doesn't do mutli-channel.