Desire to move toward simplicity

[lsiberian]

As you all know there is so much hype over surround sound and HD that at times it get's on my nerve? Call me nostalgic, but I miss the simpler times of 13 inch tv's, and 2 channel audio.

Advantages of stereo over surround sound.
-More bang for your buck(2 500 dollars speakers will usually best 5 200 dollar speakers)
-Simplicity(HDMI not required simple RCA cables are all one needs. Get a used stereo receiver and you got it made.)
-Saves money in the long run(costs of cables, fancy players, and receivers usually drive the cost over budget. With 2 channel stereo this can be easily avoided.
-Can be put in a listening room instead of the living room. Quiet undisturbed music is the best in my mind.
-No running surround sound speaker cables!

Sometimes all the fancy gadgets take away from just listening to the tunes we all love. Sometimes Stereo is really good enough. Are you in the market for a new system. I say get a stereo system and save yourself a lot of trouble.

 

[markw]

I can't argue with your thinking here.

I spend a lot of time down in my man-cave/office/gym in the cellar. In said man-cave resides my old Marantz 2270, a pair of JBL L-26 speakers (both from the early seventies), a fairly new Marantz CD changer and an old Philips turntable.

Add to that a Toshiba 27" TV and a combo DVD/VHS and we're all set, mostly for the wife's exercises but it does movies real good too, particularly when fed through the stereo.

When "the guys" get together we somehow always gravitate here for drinks and I also do a lot of my personal listening here, reliving my ute. And, yes, I'm still amazed at how good this old stuff sounds with my vinyl. Discounting the additional channels that HT added, I have to wonder how far we've really progressed for music listening in that time.

 

[CraigV]

I’ve been looking to go even simpler - a decent CD player with a headphone jack & volume control + a good set of headphones. Plug it in anywhere, put on the cans & enjoy.

 

[Rich-n-Texas]

My retro-stack

Pioneer SX-251R Receiver
Pioneer PL-400 TT
Pioneer PD-202 CD Player
Pioneer CT-W502R Dual Cassette Deck
Sonic 3-way speakers w/dual tweeters & 12" bass

Soon I'm going to reconfigure a spare bedroom for this complete with black lights, lava lights, incense and well you know the rest...

 

[AcuDefTechGuy]

Does going from 4 stereo preamps + 4 3Ch amps + 30 analog cables + 7.3HT to just one receiver + 4 HDMI cables + 5.1HT count?

 

[avaserfi]

I used to have a full 7.1 set up. Sold it off. Two channels makes me far happier, without a dedicated room it looks much nicer. Plus, with the right pair of speakers, you would be surprised on the imaging/soundstage that can be put out.

 

[STRONGBADF1]

I hear ya but the sub stays!


To complicate things multiple set-ups are mandatory... I do like having multiple set-ups. just for the sake of them sounding different...yes, I'm moody and need different speakers for different moods.

 

[AcuDefTechGuy]

Any minute now, the Room-EQ-DSP-9.2-loving crowd will be voicing their opinions.

I've learned to be flexible and avoid the extremes.

2.0 is great in some cases.

5.1 is great in other cases.

 

[annunaki]

Why not do both??

I have a simple 2 channel set up in the bedroom with my current reference speakers (B&W Signature 7 SE in-walls adapted into bookshelves) with a Stereo Harman Kardon receiver.

In the LR I have 5.1 with multi-zone/source setup.

 

[diegs]

I have split feelings with the op. 5.1 hd truehd, dts master... sound is the real deal for movies and worth the hassle/$ (I think its fun) of setting up and calibrating. Even standard 5.1 is well worth it. Both standard and hd 5.1 are not hype. I don't think equal money spent on a 2 channel setup could ever compare to 5.1 for a movie soundtrack.
However for music I think 5.1/hd is hype and that equal money spent on a 2 channel system would blow away a 5.1 system everytime with music.
Hdmi is awesome for home theater. One cable replacing 3 or 4 is much simpler, less cluttered and cheaper, minus the poor folks with older stuff and hdmi issues.
My system is dual purpose, more geared toward home theater, but handles 2 channel well enough. I do have a desire for a dedicated simple 2 channel system. But the guys I know into 2 channel are spending big bucks and have different terminology. For example a cd player is called a transport and they call dac's by the first and last names of the guy who made it.

 

[Rich-n-Texas]

My HT setup...

Mitsubishi 57732 DLP TV
Yamaha RX-V3800 Receiver
Emotiva LPA-1 amp
PS3 w/Blu-ray
Oppo DV-980 DVD player
BFD DSP1124P
Harmony 880 Remote
B & W Matrix 804 mains
B & W Matrix HTM center
B & W 800ASW sub
B & W P6 surrounds

 

[Patrick_Wolf]

Well at least it seems we've hit a plateau of sorts with the new HD formats. It can't get better than uncompressed... or can it? I'm afraid the next thing will actually be a downgrade; if movie watching moves online with downloads and streaming. But I have doubts about that whole movement.

 

[Adam]

As you all know there is so much hype over surround sound and HD that at times it get's on my nerve? Call me nostalgic, but I miss the simpler times of 13 inch tv's, and 2 channel audio.

I went back to my 13" monitor (for video and audio) two weeks ago when I was waiting for my new TV to be delivered. Given that, I'll say this - you can have my 50" plasma and 5.1 surround when you pry them from my cold, dead hands.

 

[adwilk]

Obviously there is no right or wrong. Wouldn't most of it depend if you were mostly a music guy or a movie guy. I wouldnt recommend a dedicated movie guy in any room to consider 2.0. That in my mind makes no sense. If a serious music needs help, then 2.0 or 2.1 would be a nice recommendation.

All that said, I'll never do the 7.1 thing again in a non dedicated room. 5.4 is plenty.

 

[shadyJ]

For me, a two channel system will always beat a equivalently priced five channel setup for any application: movies, games, or music. Depth, clarity, and dynamics are sacrificed for a greater sound field, and to me this is crazy and upside down in priorities- it's quantity over quality. It's even crazier considering you can get a very good sound imaging from a stereo system if it is setup right. Ideally, no one should ever even have to have a center speaker in any kind of multichannel setup- the front left/rights should be taking care of that business! The center channel should NOT exist.

I will grant you that a properly set up stereo will not match a five or seven channel system as far as a rear sound stage, but there are still acoustic cues used by stereo recordings to image sounds laying behind the listener which do a good job and are still very convincing. And consider the amount of recorded material which takes serious advantage of the rear speakers- very little with respect to all the two channel material out there.

To me, five channels are not really necessary, and seven is an absolute scam.Talk about diminishing returns; there are so few recordings that actually use seven channels, and so few rooms and listening situations which benefit from all those sources of sound, it becomes apparent to me that it is nothing more than justification for charging more money from audio companies. They say you NEED to have all these extraneous channels to watch movies these days, so they can stuff more features into your receiver and raise the prices.

Walking through Fry's, I was struck by how many more seven channel receivers there were than five channel. And two channel? forget it, they only had two or three of them. Seven now seems to be the standard, even though there are hardly any seven channel soundtracks. What a waste!

To sum it up, two rear speakers in 5.1 are arguably overkill but does enhance some situations, but the center is utterly exorbitant and superfluous, as are the two sides in 7.1. It is all marketing hype designed to separate you from your money.

 

[shadyJ]

Rereading that post, it sound like I am an old man ranting, and I am sure most of you have heard it all before, but hopefully I can stir some discussion and get at least a few people to recognize that two good speakers are better than five middling ones (although I do not expect to turn the trend of needlessly overpriced home theater sound systems).

 

[Rob Babcock]

Isn't one HDMI cable simpler, neater & more less cluttered than two RCA cables?

 

[diegs]

Really?
People really think a hd 5.1 movie soundtrack sounds better on a 2 channel system priced equally to a 5.1 system?
I have a hard time swallowing that pill.
However for music, 2 channel is the way to go.

 

[BMXTRIX]

Simplicity is what people make it, and can't be counted by the number of speakers or the amount of money spent.

As someone said, a good set of headphones and a CD player can outperform multi-thousand dollar systems and can do it far simpler than anything else out there. Hook up an iPod with lossless audio and some headphones and you have days of music listening with great quality.

Yet, audio is an experience to be shared, and home theater and music are two very different beasts. The avid music listener can swear by two channel audio, but completely miss out on the specific enveloping nature of a lossless Blu-ray presentation of 5.1 or 7.1 audio.

For those who just love their music, by all means, set up 2.0 or 2.1 for your specific tastes.

But, for those who love the complete audio/video experience, then simpler and better don't necessarily go hand in hand.

I would say though, that a great deal of the pleasure of home theater comes from the social experience of forums, of going out and listening to different gear at stores and at friend's homes. The knowledge that comes along with seeing how different projectors can look and seeing how good your system really can be.

A system is often only complex once... When it is set up. Once you have run those 8 wires in your room to speakers, and some wires to the display location, you are often done with the hard part. But, it is almost disappointing... the hard part can be the fun part with it. Yes, simply enjoying the audio is great, but for many, it is the audioholics experience to not just enjoy the audio, but every aspect of setting up and configuring a system that uniquely meets our own personal love of audio and video.

2.0 or 9.4? That's not what makes it complex or simple. It's our own personal tastes and influences into our setups which makes it complex and simple, and most of all, enjoyable.

 

[MidnightSensi]

I agree that some of the technology has become a bit overbearing, loosing some of the character of the original hobby. New receivers are the worst culprit I think, with all their modes and features that seem to be added just to add more features.

On one hand, I'm a self-admitted tinkerer. I love messing around with my main system, with cables and modes and gadgets and settings and whatever.

On the other hand, I really enjoy my 2.1 computer system at home. Pair of studio monitors and a little subwoofer, plus a massive, instantantly accessable library of music. Nice to sit down, surf the web and listen to tunes.... hard to do in front of my main system (although possible I guess).

Even simpler, I sometimes throw on my Shure or Beyerdynamic headphones and an iPod before bed. I like listening to spacious, ambient music on headphones... and the simplicity really can't be beat.