2. home-theater
  3. 1239507308

Two-channel is inferior to multi-channel, no?

I think that 2 channel is inferior, though, of course, my ears and reason may be mistaken.

Feedback please!

The obvious reason, I am thinking, it is that two channels are less representative of infinity (live music) than 3, 5 or 7, etc. This is the case even if the transducers, amps & speakers, and room acoustics, are perfect (dream on...) in the 2-channel mode.

In my own system, two Revel M-20s as center channel, vertically arrayed, with Revel M-50s on either side, there is the occasional CD (jazz is my thing) that sounds better in stereo, than with 5.1 processed sound, but this is rare. Most sound better with the center channel prominent (either in Dolby Standard or Music modes).

It's possible that I simply need better equipment.

But then why do I find that the best sound (in my system) is from digital sources, e.g. DVD, Blu-Ray, SACD, whether the sound reproduces music or movies. Would better equipment neutralize (and even flip) this negative comparison of stereo to multi-channel reproduction? If so, what is the explanation?

What I find in particular (for music and movies) that is that digital sources in multi-channel mode give full breath and focus to the center channel, placing this important sound component exactly where it should be: precisely in the center of the room. And giving the other channels 'room' to shine (though, in my system, given the amplification available, this should not problem).

What am I missing in theory?
pmcneil
Ag insider logo xs@2x
rebel721
20 posts
 
I agree with most everyone here that agrees that multi channel audio can sound superior to 2 channel if you have the correct setup that is...Here is my current set up which I have just sold off to go to a 2 channel system... ironically because I just wanted to downsize my system. I had over $300k invested in this system and it sounded absolutely spectacular running on Trifield DSP with the subs.

Meridian 861 V8 ( Reference Surround Controller )
Meridian HD621 ( HDMI Processor )
Meridian Sooloos Media Drive 600
Mark Levinson No. 53 Monoblocks ( 2 pairs ) one on my center channel
PS Audio Perfectwave Memory Player ( Redbook )
Oppo BDP 105 - Blu Ray / Universal Player
Revel Ultima Salon 2's ( Front Speakers )
Revel Ultima Voice 2 ( Center Speaker )
Revel Ultima Gem 2's ( Rear Speakers )
Tara Labs Omega Gold Speaker Cables ( on Fronts & Center )
Tara Labs - The Cobalt Power Cords - throughout
JL Audio F113 - Subs ( 2 )
Exemplar Audio Silver Portal ( XLR ) Interconnects
Tara Labs Zero Gold Digital Cable
Stillpoints Ultra 5's ( under all components & speakers ) 48 Total
kijanki's avatar
kijanki
4,413 posts
 
Kr4, many people are in similar situation. It is great if you can spend more money to listen to few multichannel recordings but when most of your recordings are not multichannel then perhaps it is better to invest in better 2 channel system, unless you have $300k to spend like Rebel721.
kr4's avatar
kr4
3,658 posts
 
That sounds reasonable. However, the topic is not affordability or, even, effectiveness of expenditure but superiority (or inferiority) in reproduction.

As for one's collection being predominantly 2 channel, my MCH plays stereo recordings very well and, as time passes, my MCH collection is approaching my stereo collection in quantity.
milpai's avatar
milpai
2,326 posts
 
I wish professional audio-reviewers would have supported SA-CDs when they first came around, as they do now to Multi-channel and DACs. We would have gotten a lot more multi-channel contents (with very good mastering) and would have found more audience for multi-channel. It is not that they did not support. But they did not put full weight behind that format, as they do today to the hi-rez downloads and DACs.
But I am glad that they are not sticking to just one format and are embracing to other formats. I am sure they must have learnt this lesson from what happened to SA-CD/DVD-A.
kr4's avatar
kr4
3,658 posts
 
I do not think that anyone culpable for this has learned much and that includes big record companies, equipment manufacturers and reviewers. Each still has a narrow view of the options.
More to discover