2 channel movie lstening;is it worth the sacrafice

I agree that you need full range high quality speakers to be able to get by with two channel for movies -- but -- I also stand by the argument that you're more likely to be able to acquire that type of two channel system if
you don't have to spread your money over five or seven channels. I disagree with the argument that there is too much going on in movies for two channels. If your two channel system can resolve a Mahler Symphony, it can certainly resolve a movie sound track. But, if your taste runs to Star Wars
and Matrix type movies -- then two channel will not give you the same sensation. I just don't find myself watching movies like that. I watched them when I first got my surround system -- and there are about 10 movies that
will really give your system a work-out -- then I didn't go back to them. In
fact, I didn't even watch the entire movies. You end up watching the Pod
Race from Star Wars, the shoot-out scene in Matrix, the first five minutes of
Twister, and a few others. Most movie sound tracks don't even use the rear
surrounds or Sub-Woofer. In fact, when I think about it, there is some irony
in the fact that some people believe that there isn't enough music on SACD
to justify switching -- even though there are some 1,800 titles, while there
are only about 10 movies that really justify a surround movie system. And -- at that -- only a few scenes in those movies. Just my opinion.

While I don't agree at all with most of the posts to your question in a general sense, I do agree with them in your case. I would..if I were you and with the components you now own, upgrade to the highest level of two-channel (with flexability and the future in mind) that I could afford. I would branch-out from there IF or WHEN needed.

On that note: Your room is very important, the playing field is not level and what you can afford is not always what you need. I mention this because throwing money at something does not always get the results that a well thought out system does.

Dave

My opinion is to get the best stereo experience you can and later add on HT components integrate with your stereo system.

Wish I had followed my own advice but hindsight being 20/20 and all ....

Started with a cheap Denon receiver and Klipsch speakers. Music listening was simply painful.

First upgraded the main speakers to JMlab Cobalt 816s and got the matching center speaker.

A few months ago I got a Plinius 8100 integrated.

Now, music listening is amazing. HT is better because the Plinius does a better job driving the speakers than the cheap amp section in the Denon.

The only thing I'm still tweaking is the subwoofer. Trying to optimize its performance for both stereo and HT is a challenge but I'm making good progress.

If I had a time machine I would have had hundreds more to spend on a better integrated or main speakers but them's the breaks.

rsbeck-
Amen Brother! I had a surround system and came to the same conclusion. I now use an integrated amp with two speakers. Most movies that i watch have mainly dialog from the characters. Action movies bore me. Buy an integrated amp and forget all the speakers/wiring etc.

I put together a two-channel system for our tv-watching, and it works fine. Most of the good stuff in a movie happens inside your head or in the dialogue anyway, so a good two-channel does fine. Of course, this is mostly for the kids, and it helps that they were brought up on mono black and white. To them colour with good stereo sound is nirvana.