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
kr4's avatar
kr4
3,678 posts
 
Cost is an issue and so is space. OTOH, the possible increase in sound quality with stereo becomes disproportionately small compared to the cost/space investment after a certain point. OTOH, the increase in sound quality due to the spatial enhancement of multichannel is substantial.

However, if all your CDs are RedBook (all CDs are RedBook, by definition), then the issue is moot to you. Also, if the discussion is about superiority/inferiority, then matters of popularity are irrelevant, as is HT.
edorr
714 posts
 
The multi channel mix of the same source recording will sound better than the 2 channel any day of the week (try this with say a 2L Nordic sound recording - not even close. This tells me all else being equal, multi channel is inherently superior. But indeed a moot point for most, because of lack of content. I'm somewhere in the middle, with about 80% of my budget invested in very good 2 channel, and another 20% in not too shabby center and surrounds. I spend 90% of the time listening to 2 channel, so this is a reasonable balance.
Ag insider logo xs@2x
rebel721
20 posts
 
I agree with most everyone here that agrees that multi channel audio can sound superior to 2 channel if you have the correct setup that is...Here is my current set up which I have just sold off to go to a 2 channel system... ironically because I just wanted to downsize my system. I had over $300k invested in this system and it sounded absolutely spectacular running on Trifield DSP with the subs.

Meridian 861 V8 ( Reference Surround Controller )
Meridian HD621 ( HDMI Processor )
Meridian Sooloos Media Drive 600
Mark Levinson No. 53 Monoblocks ( 2 pairs ) one on my center channel
PS Audio Perfectwave Memory Player ( Redbook )
Oppo BDP 105 - Blu Ray / Universal Player
Revel Ultima Salon 2's ( Front Speakers )
Revel Ultima Voice 2 ( Center Speaker )
Revel Ultima Gem 2's ( Rear Speakers )
Tara Labs Omega Gold Speaker Cables ( on Fronts & Center )
Tara Labs - The Cobalt Power Cords - throughout
JL Audio F113 - Subs ( 2 )
Exemplar Audio Silver Portal ( XLR ) Interconnects
Tara Labs Zero Gold Digital Cable
Stillpoints Ultra 5's ( under all components & speakers ) 48 Total
kijanki's avatar
kijanki
4,428 posts
 
Kr4, many people are in similar situation. It is great if you can spend more money to listen to few multichannel recordings but when most of your recordings are not multichannel then perhaps it is better to invest in better 2 channel system, unless you have $300k to spend like Rebel721.
kr4's avatar
kr4
3,678 posts
 
That sounds reasonable. However, the topic is not affordability or, even, effectiveness of expenditure but superiority (or inferiority) in reproduction.

As for one's collection being predominantly 2 channel, my MCH plays stereo recordings very well and, as time passes, my MCH collection is approaching my stereo collection in quantity.
More to discover