2. home-theater
  3. 1239507308

Two-channel is inferior to multi-channel, no?

I think that 2 channel is inferior, though, of course, my ears and reason may be mistaken.

Feedback please!

The obvious reason, I am thinking, it is that two channels are less representative of infinity (live music) than 3, 5 or 7, etc. This is the case even if the transducers, amps & speakers, and room acoustics, are perfect (dream on...) in the 2-channel mode.

In my own system, two Revel M-20s as center channel, vertically arrayed, with Revel M-50s on either side, there is the occasional CD (jazz is my thing) that sounds better in stereo, than with 5.1 processed sound, but this is rare. Most sound better with the center channel prominent (either in Dolby Standard or Music modes).

It's possible that I simply need better equipment.

But then why do I find that the best sound (in my system) is from digital sources, e.g. DVD, Blu-Ray, SACD, whether the sound reproduces music or movies. Would better equipment neutralize (and even flip) this negative comparison of stereo to multi-channel reproduction? If so, what is the explanation?

What I find in particular (for music and movies) that is that digital sources in multi-channel mode give full breath and focus to the center channel, placing this important sound component exactly where it should be: precisely in the center of the room. And giving the other channels 'room' to shine (though, in my system, given the amplification available, this should not problem).

What am I missing in theory?
pmcneil

Showing 4 responses by vicdamone

vicdamone
850 posts
 
I like both. They're so different. I admit to searching for new recordings on vinyl before other forms of media.

The best thing to happen to digital are Gordon Rankin's Wavelength USB DAC's. IMO Mr. Gordon's work in developing the TAS1020B firmware is a digital playback landmark. With more hi-res content showing up on the internet the future now has a chance of sounding much better.
vicdamone
850 posts
 
Hevec asks, "If you are in the group and it is using electronics most have ear plug so they hear in the correct time and so they can be in time with everyone else. If they listen from where they are instead of through the earphones with all the delays and echo's their timing will be off. Is this not correct?"

More no than yes. As a working Double Bassist ear monitoring can be a wonderful tool when your working with a touring sound technician and the room is difficult. It takes a great deal of time getting the instrumentation balances correct (each player selects different balances) which usually takes place during rehearsals. Even then I prefer to hear my instrument and the drums without monitoring. At a casual small club situation it's usually a distraction because of the poor monitoring set up and less need for it.

Yoshi's Oakland is a great venue. As great as it is the best audience sound is up front at the stage and under the house sound. Yoshi's reinforcement was designed by an affiliate of Meyer Sound. The week it opened I heard the best sound reinforcement ever in every part of the room. Today it's all mucked up by people who simply don't get it.

The technology available to the sound reinforcement industry is amazing, unfortunately only a few truly know how to implement it.

You would be amazed by just how good your home system would sound if you had access to pre production media.

vicdamone
850 posts
 
Live music is a monaural+venue experience.

Proper analog two channel playback can come uncannily close to some multi channel SACD recordings. Attaining this level is not a matter of expensive equipment but rather proper setup and tuning. The sonic superiority of many LP's, for one reason or another, simply didn't come across when mastered for CD. The refinement and availability of high resolution 24/192 downloads and or music BluRay (if that ever happens) will defiantly narrow the gap between two channel LP and multi channel digital.

Some are satisfied with the two channel quality they get with a multi channel setup. Putting another speaker between my stereo pair has a drastic effect on two channel sound staging in my system. The cost of five or seven matching high quality speakers and amplification is out of my range and lesser equipment is a definite downgrade which would make multi channel inferior to me. With enough money and the right space I guess one could reach that goal and claim equality between the two, if you can get past the center speaker being in the way.

I do own a separate 7.1 HT BluRay system and while SACD's and multi channel media sound good they simply lack the sonic finesse that my two channel system provides. The two channel system lacks the ability to play a multi channel recordings. Frankly, I like both for their differences.

vicdamone
850 posts
 
Yeah! That's it. Thanks
More to discover