MultiChannel too complicated for most...


I've been on the gon for a little while now, posting and enjoying all the spectacular virtual systems. There is one thing I've noticed though. It's that many seem to associate the terms 2 channel and simple, especially when heading and detailing their virtual systems. I don't see it too often in threads, but every now and again it'll show up their as well.

Me being the multichannel guy I am, this small and most times overlooked detail seemed to jump out at me. Its been a passing thought for a while, but seems to be a somewhat valid question.

Now...before I go any further, this is not in insight a riot and bombard the moderators with request to have this thread pulled because it "potentially offends" 2 channel lovers. This is not that kind of posting, but just posing a question that has crossed my mind more times that one.

Do 2channel only audiophiles shun multichannel (discrete or DSP based) because they find it too complicated?

If the concept of thinking in 360 degrees (Multichannel) were simplified, for a lack of better terms, would multichannel be more accepted?
cdwallace

Showing 1 response by rlwainwright

I've found quite a peaceful co-existence between listening to multichannel and 2 channel thru my system. Multichannel, done right, is downright fabulous - it blows two channel clear outta the water in many ways. However, 2 channel done right can sound awfully darn good and there's enough room in my audio world for both. The key is "done right"....

I spend the majority of my time chasing down superlative source material. That, and the speaker/room interaction, makes more difference in the quality of the reproduced sound than anything else. Nothing upgrades a system better than a great source!

-RW-