2-Channel just blows my mind!

[john72953]

Hi all,

I know that in this world of multi-channel sound we're all supposed to be wowed by SACD and the various 5.1 Dolby HD or DTS HD soundtracks, but I've got to tell you...good 2-channel sound just blows my mind.

I've been listening to some Pink Floyd, Genesis, George Benson, Stanley Jordan, Steve Winwood and Amy Winehouse for the last few hours and it's stunning.

Am I wrong to think that 2-channel sound can be satisfying?

John

 

[skizzerflake]

Hi all,

I know that in this world of multi-channel sound we're all supposed to be wowed by SACD and the various 5.1 Dolby HD or DTS HD soundtracks, but I've got to tell you...good 2-channel sound just blows my mind.

I've been listening to some Pink Floyd, Genesis, George Benson, Stanley Jordan, Steve Winwood and Amy Winehouse for the last few hours and it's stunning.

Am I wrong to think that 2-channel sound can be satisfying?

John

No. At least not for music. It might take another 20 years before engineers learn how to use 5 channels. For now, 2 will work quite well.

 

[jamie2112]

No you are not crazy. 2 channel is the only way to listen to music for me....not including very good multi channel sacd's which I have heard sound amazing in surround.

 

[sgtpepper9]

I agree that 2 channel stereo recordings can sound fantastic. I prefer to listen to music in the format it was recorded in. So redbook discs, I listen in 2 channel. SACD and DVD-A (especially the Flaming Lips and the Super Furry Animals) I like to listen in surround. It doesn't make sense to me to add processing to a 2 channel recording to make it into a surround signal. For me, it was cool at first but the novelty wore off after a while and after switching back to "Direct" mode I noticed the clarity and imaging were much better without the added processing. Just my 2 cents.

 

[TLS Guy]

Hi all,

I know that in this world of multi-channel sound we're all supposed to be wowed by SACD and the various 5.1 Dolby HD or DTS HD soundtracks, but I've got to tell you...good 2-channel sound just blows my mind.

I've been listening to some Pink Floyd, Genesis, George Benson, Stanley Jordan, Steve Winwood and Amy Winehouse for the last few hours and it's stunning.

Am I wrong to think that 2-channel sound can be satisfying?

John

You are not wrong at all. Good two channel will do the best job for the majority of the world's archived music.

 

[MinusTheBear]

I am listening to 2-channel as I type and it is fantastic! However, the Dave Matthews & Tim Reynolds: Live at Radio City Music Hall in Dolby TrueHD 5.1 surround sound (96kHz/24bit) I thought was outstanding as well. I like both !

 

[j_garcia]

IMO, 2ch isn't the ONLY way to listen. I enjoy a well done multichannel track also, but the vast majority of music I listen to is 2ch, even on SACD.

 

[lsiberian]

Hi all,

I know that in this world of multi-channel sound we're all supposed to be wowed by SACD and the various 5.1 Dolby HD or DTS HD soundtracks, but I've got to tell you...good 2-channel sound just blows my mind.

I've been listening to some Pink Floyd, Genesis, George Benson, Stanley Jordan, Steve Winwood and Amy Winehouse for the last few hours and it's stunning.

Am I wrong to think that 2-channel sound can be satisfying?

John

Yes you are so wrong how can you be satisfied ever and call yourself an audiophile you bring shame on our name.

For me it depends on my mood. Sometimes I downmix other times I stereo.

 

[3db]

Hi all,

I know that in this world of multi-channel sound we're all supposed to be wowed by SACD and the various 5.1 Dolby HD or DTS HD soundtracks, but I've got to tell you...good 2-channel sound just blows my mind.

I've been listening to some Pink Floyd, Genesis, George Benson, Stanley Jordan, Steve Winwood and Amy Winehouse for the last few hours and it's stunning.

Am I wrong to think that 2-channel sound can be satisfying?

John

The only time I do the multichannel thing is if I'm seeing a concert DVD. There, I want to get a heightened sense of the ambience and acoustics of the venue and multichannel does that well. Other than that, its all 2 channel for me as well.

 

[Alex2507]

If you like 2 channel, you're gonna love mono.
Just unplug one of your speakers and listen.
Just kidding fellas.

 

[skizzerflake]

The only time I do the multichannel thing is if I'm seeing a concert DVD. There, I want to get a heightened sense of the ambience and acoustics of the venue and multichannel does that well. Other than that, its all 2 channel for me as well.

Live recordings seem the be the best reason for 5 channel audio because you get that ambience. In most of the 5 channel studio recordings I have heard though, it was apparent that the engineer just didn't know where to place the instruments. Some have placed them so it sounds like you are surrounded by musicians, which is really not natural. Others put them at the front like stereo and then try emulate ambience. That is sucessful to varying degrees, but not entirely convincing. The live ones, however, are pretty good. One of my favorites is Alison Krauss and Union Station's live double SACD. The music is all up front, but crowd noise really brings it alive and puts you in about the 10th row. It's also an excellent performance.

 

[john72953]

I listen to my Concert BD's all the time on a 5.1 system and although I enjoy them tremendously, I don't experience the same connection as I do when I listen to 2-Channel playback on vinyl.

Maybe it's a digital/analog thing for me. I don't know, but I do know what I like better!

John

 

[skizzerflake]

I listen to my Concert BD's all the time on a 5.1 system and although I enjoy them tremendously, I don't experience the same connection as I do when I listen to 2-Channel playback on vinyl.

Maybe it's a digital/analog thing for me. I don't know, but I do know what I like better!

John

I get the same experience. I can't validate my experience by any science but when I listen to a good vinyl recording, even when it has pops and surface noise, it seems as though a thin veil has been removed between me and the music.

 

[maximoiglesias]

Stereo or 5.1

It is all a matter of common sense, like most things in life, if the disc is recorded in multichannel, listen to it in 5.1, 6.1 or 7.1 if it is recorded in stereo then the way to go is via your fronts in stereo mode.

At the same time if your taste is to change a two channel source into 5.1, then go ahead you do what you think it is best for you.

 

[mperfct]

It is all a matter of common sense, like most things in life, if the disc is recorded in multichannel, listen to it in 5.1, 6.1 or 7.1 if it is recorded in stereo then the way to go is via your fronts in stereo mode.

At the same time if your taste is to change a two channel source into 5.1, then go ahead you do what you think it is best for you.

I agree that you should listen to material as it is recorded, source direct if you will (or if you won't).

On an off-topic note, this thread title has me thinking about Adam Sandler's "They're all going to laugh at you" CD, track #8

 

[Pyrrho]

Hi all,

I know that in this world of multi-channel sound we're all supposed to be wowed by SACD and the various 5.1 Dolby HD or DTS HD soundtracks, but I've got to tell you...good 2-channel sound just blows my mind.

I've been listening to some Pink Floyd, Genesis, George Benson, Stanley Jordan, Steve Winwood and Amy Winehouse for the last few hours and it's stunning.

Am I wrong to think that 2-channel sound can be satisfying?

John

I think surround sound can be much more realistic than 2 channel sound. That said, if I have a 2 channel recording, I listen to it as 2 channels (or 2.1 channels). I don't like artificially created surround.

 

[dobyblue]

I always listen to CD's in DIRECT or STEREO, either way it's 2-channel.
I have occasionally experimented with Neo:6 and PLIIx but neither sounds realistic at all.

I do love listening to a good multi-channel mix like Billy Joel's "The Stranger", Dire Straits "Brothers In Arms", NIN's "The Downward Spiral", Toto "Toto IV", etc., on SACD, but the severely limited selection compared to the vast amount of 2-channel selections that are available on vinyl have resulted in a drastic shift back to 2-channel listening for me since I picked up my turntable last year and it is certainly a wonderful experience to listen to records again.

 

[scott911]

I totally agree that playing two channel is the way to listen to 2 channel recorded music.

I think one reason people are drawn to use artificial surround sound is that they were too eager to jump to full surround and didn't invest adequately in their fronts - so they are trying to suppliment the sound by adding in extra channels.

Unless movie enjoyment is a highly dominant goal of the system, I will always recommend that someone starts with a 2.1 system - so it's the best it can be within a given budget - and then add the extra speakers down the road...

 

[skizzerflake]

When I get a new CD, I usually try it out, cycle through all of my receivers synthetic surround modes. Now and again, I do find a recording that really opens up in surround (usually plain vanilla Dolby Pro Logic) but most of the time I seem to hear strange artifacts, like one instrument that really sticks out on a back channel. Sometimes I like the additional space created by the DPL, but it does always seem like the receiver is extracting something that isn't really there.