Discovering 2-Channel

[GranteedEV]

surround sound 5.1, 7.1, 9.1, etc, is just plain dumb in a home environment.

Oh, really? And you say this from vast experience with true multichannel systems like TLS Guy, Floyd Toole, or Kal Rubinson? You've compared a reference level surround movie mix like the aformentiomed Master and Commander and declared its 5.1 DTS Mix to be gimmicky and inferior to a basic 2 channel setup?

However, 2-channel audio is tried,

Something you apparently have not done much of with respect to the alternative.

tested,

To what capacity?

practical,

Exhibit A:

Exhibit B:

sounds great,

Which is 99% a function of the speaker room interaction before we even get to quantity. Mono sounds great too, according to harman research. Let's go back to Mono

Meanwhile, companies will probably keep adding more and more speakers to surround sound systems to make them as messy and impractical as possible.

Because provisions for more speakers, which 99% of people don't use, are a huge concern for practicality. Most people are fine with 5.1 or so. Is adding more speakers than that generally impractical so long as the discrete recordings don't exist?? Probably, but most people willing to do so recognize that and have dedicated home theater rooms anways which of themselves are anythingn BUT practical.

 

[PearlcorderS701]

I think the point has been made that there's a place for both two channel and multichannel enjoyment -- but to make blanketing statements like "5.1 channel-plus in the home is just plain dumb..." is a bit ridiculous. I agree that these "22.2 channel" (an exaggeration obviously on my part) protocols which are being hinted at are beyond unnecessary, with sixteen height channels and subwoofers in every corner of a room...but a well-designed 5.1 or maybe 7.1 (with possibly more subs) system in a home can be just as exciting as the experience is in the multiplex, without the OP's assumption of the setup being "messy" or "tacky."

 

[GranteedEV]

I'm tellin ya man, even two speakers is overkill. Just some marketing B.S.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VCzi75bhOcI

 

[PearlcorderS701]

Holy LOL...

^^^

Who created this video?

Better yet...

How did you find it?!

 

[manofsteel2397]

I exclusively listen to 2 channel when i listen to cds or radio. When i listen to music unless it was designed for multi-channel audio it doesnt sound right although i dont own any thing to play multi-channel music on cds nor do i desire it 2 channel for music sounds just fine...

 

[zumbo]

I'm tellin ya man, even two speakers is overkill. Just some marketing B.S.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VCzi75bhOcI

Posting embedded link. Brought on mixed emotions.

 

[AcuDefTechGuy]

I'm tellin ya man, even two speakers is overkill. Just some marketing B.S.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VCzi75bhOcI

Love that video.

I believe the consensus here is that Stereo may be just fine for some folks, but discrete multi-channel (not matrixed) is even better when it is done RIGHT.

 

[GranteedEV]

Holy LOL...

^^^

Who created this video?

Better yet...

How did you find it?!

lol someone posted it at parts express

 

[PearlcorderS701]

I exclusively listen to 2 channel when i listen to cds or radio. When i listen to music unless it was designed for multi-channel audio it doesnt sound right although i dont own any thing to play multi-channel music on cds nor do i desire it 2 channel for music sounds just fine...

I agree for the most part Supes, but there are times when matrix techniques such as Pro Logic II Music can derive quasi-satisfying results from stereo material. But most of it belongs in a two channel two speaker arrangement.

 

[PearlcorderS701]

lol someone posted it at parts express

LOL...yeah, but who created this? Was it meant to be serious?

 

[bikemig]

2 channel fan with computer as a source

This is a great thread. I don't have an HT set up although I'm planning on buying one, one of these days . . . . But I love a 2 channel set up for music and I've completely switched over to a computer as a source (with my music ripped in apple lossless). Haven't had vinyl in years (I still miss it sometimes) but gave it after one too many moves. I work a lot at home (my dogs appreciate it) and I put together a system I love for my desktop that was relatively inexpensive (HRT musicstreamer II dac, Audioengine N-22 amp, and Audioengine P-4 speakers). I've had this set-up for four months now and I am still amazed by how great it sounds every day. But there are incredibly easy ways to get reasonable quality music streamed around the house. I have a logitech boombox next to my bed that I listen to as I read. The sound is pretty good all things considered and it's great being able to stream anything I want. So now I just have to figure out how to put together an HT system that will blow away my 2 channel rig for the living room . . . .

 

[class a]

Always loved an analogue 2 channel set up, but I'm a big movie fan too. I only have room for one system so I just pulled the trigger on a Primaluna Dialogue 3 tube pre/pro w/HT bypass and now I've got the best of both worlds. The Linn sondek LP12 and the Mac CD w/a tube sound and HT through the Krell Showcase.

 

[AcuDefTechGuy]

I love the Denon AVP-A1HDCI because it is truly a fully balanced input-to-output digital processor that actually has a class-A analog preamp section inside; talk about best of both worlds.

It sounds sweeter than my Denon AVR-5308CI since it is does not have a class-A analog preamp section nor is it fully balanced from input-to-output.

 

[its phillip]

Again, I am just stating my opinion and not trying to offend anyone on these forums.

An my opinion is: Blu-ray or DVD-A or not, surround sound 5.1, 7.1, 9.1, etc, is just plain dumb in a home environment. However, 2-channel audio is tried, tested, practical, sounds great, and will be around for a very long time. Meanwhile, companies will probably keep adding more and more speakers to surround sound systems to make them as messy and impractical as possible.

Blanket statements like this are foolish because not all homes and rooms and speakers are the same.

I have a surround sound system in my bedroom (5.0 for now, haven't replaced my sub yet) and it does look messy and is somewhat impractical because I do have wires and speakers everywhere. However, I love how it sounds for movies and that obviously matters more to me - looks come second. I also have a separate 2.1 system in the same bedroom which makes everything even more impractical because I have very little room for anything else D:

However, I've been in several other homes that had very classy surround setups - hidden wires, speakers that look like works of art, etc. Just take a look at the member's galleries here or on avs or htshack and you'll see plenty of nice systems in various homes and rooms.

 

[PearlcorderS701]

Blanket statements like this are foolish because not all homes and rooms and speakers are the same.

I have a surround sound system in my bedroom (5.0 for now, haven't replaced my sub yet) and it does look messy and is somewhat impractical because I do have wires and speakers everywhere. However, I love how it sounds for movies and that obviously matters more to me - looks come second. I also have a separate 2.1 system in the same bedroom which makes everything even more impractical because I have very little room for anything else D:

However, I've been in several other homes that had very classy surround setups - hidden wires, speakers that look like works of art, etc. Just take a look at the member's galleries here or on avs or htshack and you'll see plenty of nice systems in various homes and rooms.

Your last paragraph is exactly what I was trying to convey with my response of "debunking" his theory on multichannel systems all being "messy" and generally eyesores; that's definitely not the case for those of us who went out of our way to make the system look professionally put together, or at least neat, with no cables hanging everywhere or speakers all over a room. That was a ridiculously blanketing statement, indeed.