How can you not have multichannel system

I have gone both ways, and with pretty well set up 5.1 channel systems (all Wison, BMW, Totem speakers - obviously at different times - all speakers same brand). Various amps (all Krell, Theta Dreadnaught II [aweful for 2 channel], Contrad Johnson and others). Good pre/pros (latest Krell, McIntosh, others). Always REL subs. I guess I am saying that I really gave it an honest effort.

Sometimes, but rarely it was great, most the time it felt artificial. This probably has a lot to do with two things: the material/mixing/peformance and secondly my room. Movies were certainly entertaining, more so than with 2-channel movies.

But in the end, I decided to go back to 2-channel for a more pleasureable music listening experience - when I want to sit down and be immersed in the music.

I now have 2-channel in one room and 5.1 in the TV room (via inwall Polk Speakers, Pioneer Elite receiver and Oppos DVD player). The room looks a lot better, the performance is not as good, but I still enjoy it immensely for movies (which are few and infrequent by me, more common by the family).

Surround is great, occassionally, when it is set up right, but too often I found it less pleasing than with 2-channel.

So I see both points, but to me the greatest weakness in surround is still the lack of quality media.

I think 5.1/7.1 is great for movies and for hearing the audience clapping on concert DVD's. But for music, it is 2 channel more all the way. In addtion, I am in the camp that preaches do you prefer blondes, brunetts or redheads, who cares, I love them all.

Dear Mig007,
Damn, wish I had a Username like that. I have always complained about the limitations of 2-Channel CD/SACD/DVD-Audio, in comparison to Analog Records. I never really was a big fan of Multi-speaker Surround Sound for Music either. I have heard DVD-Audio Surround Sound Downmixed to 2-Channels by a Pioneer DV-58AV. I don't get the nasty Surround Sound Effect, instead what I get is a Soundstage that approaches 95% of what I can get by Record. It almost sounds like a Record. It has Harmonic Content and Decay that seems to trail off into infinity. The images have a very real holographic, fleshed out sound approaching that of a good Record. If the 2-Channel Digital isn't getting the job done when compared to Analog Records, I certainly believe that Multi-Channel Digital Downmix to 2-Channels can provide whats missing. If utilized properly, this might be the way to get all of the Musical content that is missing from 2-Channel Digital. It won't be as good as a Record, but it could close the gap by leaps and bounds. I believe that it is certainly worth pursuing, regardless if you are Multi-Channel or strickly 2-Channel only.

I agree with Tvad and Pettyofficer, and I certainly wished all of my recordings rivaled the very best, but I must say that what I am hearing on the worst and the best of my recordings has improved greatly in the last ten years.

I well remember my first hearing of a Sheffield direct to disc recording and still have thirty or forty direct to disc records, although I seldom listen to them. I have many Shady Dog, Island, half-speed master, etc. recordings and do listen to them occasionally.

Finally, I do wish recording engineers paid attention to having all of their mikes are in the same absolute phase.