reluctant about home theater


I'm moving into a new home and starting a new system...........I am an audiophile first and foremost..what I need to know is will a non compromised audio system work well with video or are there different qualities necessary for the best sound from movies etc..i.e. will the sound of a purist audiophile system be optimum for video?
desoto
Well said D. edwards. The "I'm an audiophile" crowd has apparently never heard a well set up 5.1 system, and would probably be stunned if they heard a good (or great) concert DVD - "Gee - I never knew it could sound/look like that", but I keep getting reminded as I read these things that it's about the equipment - not the result or the experience.

Desoto - don't do it - keep yourself clean so you won't have to fret about whether you've compromised your principals. And don't pick up some of the astounding 5.1 concert DVD's that come out constantly.

And Hals den, you're right to do what you did. No need to deal in the present. Just think - if you had come into the hobby 50 years ago, you could still be naysaying the use of two speakers in the front.
A couple of things are required: 1. you must have enough room for correct speaker placement...many people do not. 2. You must have enough knowledge to set the system up...many people do not.

As some of the others mentioned above...If you do things correctly you will be a step ahead (not a step behind)...ie, you can have your cake, and eat it to.

Dave
I don't know guys, I have a decent 5.1 system and I've watched and listened to MANY great 5.1 concerts on it. It still does not have the transparency and purity of either of my other two-channel systems (although if you just listen to the 5.1 by itself without comparing, it sounds quite impressive and decent enough).

What could be different, hmmm, let me think, maybe it's the extra digital processing required for surround sound....

Anyway, here's a challenge for all the multi-channel afficionados. I live in the Tucson area and can get up to Phoenix as well. If anyone thinks they have an exceptional multi-channel set up that competes with an excellent dedicated 2-channel system, well -- I'm all ears...?!
Plato

"I don't know guys, I have a decent 5.1 system and I've watched and listened to MANY great 5.1 concerts on it"

I'm slighty confused...are you saying that: those same recordings sound better when played back in two-channel, rather than multichannel on "that" system?

Dave
I started out trying to buid a audiophile quality HT system. By that I mean I used the same amps, speaker, cable, etc., that I would use in a two channel system. The only exception being the digital processor which didn't have the by pass option like most do today. IMHO it was exceptional but paled from a strictley music listening perspective. The 5.1 and ADVD's were awsome and I really enjoy watching concerts and music videos. However I ended up building a separate two channel system to enjoy just listening to music (redbook CD's and analog). A lot had to do with having the digital processor in the loop and the rest, room setup wasn't the same because of the TV in the middle and the center speaker not to mention the rear speakers. So I would say that a properly dialed in home theater system with excellent components is certainly capable of producing audiophile quality sound. It just won't give you the holigraphic naturalness of a dialed in two channel system. This is just my opion after having tried it both ways. I must add that I set up a two channel room specifically for listenuing to music, so I am obviously biased. The good news is that I can have my cake and eat it to. My wife can watch movies while I can listen to my jazz collection. Life is GOOD.