Moved from 2 channel to Home Theatre - Regrets?


I'm moving to a new home and the floorplan is more conducive to combining my 2 channel system and very modest home theatre.

My 2 channel system is Quad CPD99,Aragon 4004mkII,GMA Europa and all Audience AU24,PowerChord cables.

Home theatre is a budget Pioneer DVD,Outlaw 1050 receiver,PSB 4T speakers,Signal Audio cable.

Did you ever sell your 2 channel gear,buy better home theatre gear(so music sounds good too) and regret it?

It would seem like speaker choice would be the most interesting part of this transition,that is why I posted in
the speaker forum.

Thanks - Jack
gooddomino

Showing 2 responses by lazarus28

edesliva - you definitely made the right choice for yourself, then. good points and let me also reiterate one of my points (which you seemed to get): whatever decision you make is the right one, as long as you understand the decision you're making. ie - know the facts, use your *OWN* ears, and then decide. i'm not here to think for anybody, i'm just here to tell you when you're wrong.

:-)

(tongue pressed firmly against cheek)
you are correct in a sense, but you seem to be unwilling to recognize that some of us *WILL* pay the extra to have multichannel done right. i optimized my system for multichannel music, and then added a DD/DTS decoder so i can run movies through it as well. it can be done without compromise. it's all about doing it properly. i still consider my setup to be a music-first setup, despite the dvd player, ld player, cable-box, projector, etc. because that's how i designed it. i just happen to play movies through it as well.

i can't agree with anybody who says they get more enjoyment out of two channel and that's the end-of-the-story for them. to me, a *properly* done multichannel setup with a *properly* done multichannel recording brings forth very substantial improvements in experience and realism.

i'm not talking about applying pro-logic decoding to cd's, either, i mean SACDs and DVD-As that were specifically recorded for multichannel. some are poorly done, true, but when it's done right, two-channel simoly cannot capture the experience as well. much like mono cannot capture depth like stereo can, having more channels expands the possibilities and realism of music. classical recordings take on a realism and sense of space that boggles the mind and more experimental-rock/pop recordings have amazing new options.

i'm sure that there are some out there, but i cannot fathom anybody listening to DSOTM, Avalon, Up, or the Downward Spiral in multichannel being able to listen to the stereo recording of it afterward and proclaiming it better. the same goes for the MLP and Living Stereo 3-channel recordings i have. they sound more real in the multichannel mode.

so, in short - multichannel is more expensive and is harder to properly set-up. this is true. there is a relative dearth of recordings available that truly ulitize the format to its fullest potential. this is also true. but to state that nobody is willing to do it properly is false. and to state that it can't be better than 2-channel is (IMHO) false.

to state that it's not worth the money/effort to you is very well your choice. but i implore you to seek out and hear a setup done well so you know what's possible before you dismiss it entirely.