How can you not have multichannel system

realistic timbre has yet to be attained in any stereo system. isn't truth in timbre the essence of music ? isn't the sound of an instrument more important than where it comes from ?

evn if if i have frequency perception loss above 12khz, i can still recognize a tenor sax. i want a tenor not to sound like an alto. one channel is sufficient for that purpose.

I have stereo only SACD setup, but will probably try multichannel in the future...

here's an interesting opinion from one of the users

"After some critical listening, I concluded that good original DSD recording multi-channel SACDs are far better than the CDs, in terms of any attribute in geneal (e.g. naturalness, sound stage or holographic imaging, presence, depth, midrange clarity/purity, bass, trible, atmosphrer/liveness, transparency, dynamic contrast, etc

http://personal-info.bravehost.com/MyAudioSystem.htm
http://www.audioasylum.com/cgi/vt.mpl?f=hirez&m=249373

I'm with MrT on this one. At the point where further upgrades to my 2ch system produce vanishing improvements to timbre, then I'd consider adding mch. But I never seem to arrive at that point. Admittedly, the qualities of timbral accuracy and spatial presentation do occur in different planes of the listening experience. Listeners may prioritize one over the other. But in a 2ch system, upgrades that improve timbre also tend to improve spaciousness, whereas one should not be deluded into believing that the simple addition of more channels improves timbral accuracy. Of course, the overall gestalt of music is what counts, but I disagree with Eldartford that it is relatively easy to obtain correct timbre.

Mig007, regarding Teresa Goodwin's Pos. Feedback contributions, her oft expressed opinions about the inferiority of one source format versus another are dubious, as her points are made purely from the perspective of a budget system. Similarly, the point in your original post regarding superiority of mch is relative to the quality/price of the system. Moreover, it would be important for me to assess any mch system based largely on how it sounds when switched into 2ch mode-- as needed for the majority of LP/CD/SACD sources. And on this point, the majority of mch rigs may fall flat on their faces relative comparably priced 2ch systems.

Its not that hard.

I appreciate Audioholik's excellent research; he found several contributors whose reasons for praising multi-channel sacds were better articulated than mine. All the naysayers keep referring to timbre as the holy grail,or being able to tell instruments apart, but my experience and those of others who directly state, or made reference to, hear the instruments better and thereby easier to distinguish while listening to sacd mc. If done right, sacd multichannel music will best stereo counterparts, every time, hands down. Those who say no have not truly tested that proposition, either listening to the wrong music at the wrong location (i.e., Best Buy), or with the wrong equipment, or refuse to even try it, dismissing it out of hand.