How can you not have multichannel system

i believe that listening to a symphony orchestra is a mon mode experience rather than a multi-channel experience.

listening to small ensemble music is also in mono mode.

in many cases the music is perceived as being in front of you not behind you. the enhanced spatial effects from more than two channels may be pleasant but it probably does not represent most live music where instruments are unamplified.

I agree with MrT that the psychoacoustics of a mch system at even a low level of performance can be addictive-- particularly to unsophisticated listeners. Many years ago I had a good 2ch system set for party-mode, with a second set of L/R speakers across the back wall powered by a receiver. All non-audiophile visitors said this was the best effect they had ever heard. This had nothing to do with realism.

Try listening to Black Eyed Peas Live DVD from Sydney to Vegas on a surround system - the Sydney concert is a good demonstration of what can be achieved. Like two channel listening - what is out there is a mixed bag, however, done well, multi-channel can be immersive and convincing - bringing you one step closer to "being there".

I do not get caught up in trying to be a live performance.
I get caught up in listening to music.
That is what changed me forever in my systems.
Studio recordings sound better than MOST live recordings.

The four speaker stereo systems I have had always sounded
better to me and many others than any 5.1/7.1 system in
listening to music. I actually have seperate volume controls for each set of speakers so I can properly
mix the different recording types. A 1968 Stones CD sounds different than a 2005 Patricia Barber CD. They both sound great on my system.

You do need good equipment. The break is you have a ton
of music that sounds better rather than a few cd/dvd's.

Klaudio, go forward with me and we will smote the philistines