2. speakers
  3. 1148220925

Pick your poison...2-channel or multi?

This post is just to get a general ideas among audiophiles and audio enthusiasts; to see who really likes what. Here's the catch!

If you were restricted to a budget of $10,000, and wanted to assemble a system, from start to finish, which format would you choose, 2 channel or mulichannel?

I'll go first and say multichannel. I've has to opportunity to hear a multichannel setup done right and can't see myself going back to 2-channel. I'm even taking my system posting down and will repost it as a multichannel system.

So...pick your poison! Which one will it be, 2-channel or multichannel.
cdwallace

Showing 3 responses by cinematic_systems

cinematic_systems
282 posts
 
Don't you mean a $6000 multichannel system and a $14,000 two channel system?

That is a more fair distribution of $20K in this contest.

See the 6K/14K causes a real problem because with some luck I could sell my $14,000 two channel system to some unsuspecting noob, for $7,000+ easy, thus I could then buy a $7,000+ surround system, which is even better than the $6000 surround system....am I off topic? Can I change the rules mid thread?, because I think the question is too easy?

OK, I'll shut up now, I'm voting surround.
cinematic_systems
282 posts
 
Let me help out a little with this thread,

First of all if you want a mediocre surround system, build it from the left and right speakers. Its not how you do it. You can sell it that way but you don't design it that way. The processor is almost as important as the speakers, yes really.

Strabo don't be so cryptic, what was your $6K surround system? And what is your $10K 2 channel system?
I think that could be quite enlightening to us and help us understand your experience.

BTW when people refer to rear and side channels as "Gadgets" and thinks their listening room can effectively be used to create surround...you're not going to be able to explain anything, you will just have to wait until they have an experience like your's CD.

I think with these kind of threads you get more information on the wrong way to do things than the correct way. Simply the wrong approaches mentioned above. They sound "logical" but they don't work out at all. Which is why the ones explaining all the obstacles to surround in the end say two channel. Hmmm, now that's the only thing that makes sense to me :)
cinematic_systems
282 posts
 
Absolutely!:)

Funny thing unlike many, you pretty much own the right equipment, except the SF center channel does not work like it should BUT its serviceable.

If you brought the rears back and afforded me a GP Homie for a center channel, I am CERTAIN that your opinion would change quickly and absolutely. Your VAC100's would be a likely looking for a new home. Heck you don't even need that expensive Denon, rip that out too. Cambridge DVD87 will fill in nicely.

BTW, we're not talking about using multi-channel recordings we are talking about all your 2 channel CD's playing on a level that your current more expensive two channel system can only hint at. Using Prologic II. Trust me if I was afforded the opportunity to show you what that Anthem can REALLY do, you'd bang your head against the wall because you've had it all this time. (Even with the homie Center!)

Promise. My insurance is the Anthem is so good as a processor, I can probably make your multi-channel playback sound just like your current two channel system...if you REEALLY wanted it that way. :)

Thanks for the extra info, I appreciate it.
More to discover