Why is 2 Channel better than multi-channel?

velocity,

Keep the debate civil. I am not criticizing your views. I'm simply stating another perspective. I'm sure that you have the best equipment but I'm not interested in knowing that. My opinions are mine alone and I'm not really out there trying to convince you or anybody for that matter. I'd rather settle and listen to a scintillating 2 channel pure stereo sound and when I finally become inattentive, I will turn on my BRYSTON 9B SST amp, just for some diversion.

Mdhoover,

Thank you for your cerebral commentary on the the topic of 2 channel stereo. Often, the purveyors of snake oil run out of justification and falsification and in the process develop a self promotion strategy that portrays them as better because they are bigger, stronger, etc. In this particular case, someone with a "better system" has now developed scholarly credentials to "bring us up to speed". In a quintessential sort of way, we, stereophiles, 2 channel traditionalist or whatever the moniker, should be greatful that in our midst someone with a "better system" will finally show us the way to listening bliss.

Most people that have opinions on multi channel sound have for years enjoyed the joys of a stereo 2 channel sound system. The well known illusion of a sweet spot can only be effectively realized with a stereo sound. Multi channel sound somehow disrupts the nature of the sweet spot with the extraneous signals from the center and surround channels. Multi channel sound also affects the soundstage and depth of a musical presentation. The presentation of a sweet spot and a 3 dimensional sound is replaced by the sense of being in the midst of a musical rendering when listening to a surround system. For movies, the extraneous sound from the other channels may prove exciting and in some cases necessary to enhance the vocal presentation of dialogues amongst performers. There is no need for a sweet spot to be maintained but rather move the sound where the action is at various times throughout the movie presentation. Most audiophiles that I know of who have a surround system also have a dedicated two channel, stereo only system. The sweet spot is a phenomenon that stereophiles experience with stereo sound and arguably contend that it is a better sound.

velocity,
I agree with you that surround sound is very misunderstood but above and beyond that it is also over rated. Although one can meet all the required parameters in setting it up properly, there is no guarantee that the recorded multi channel signals will consistently adhere to your perceived proper set up. There are just too many signals coming through. One will also take into consideration the limitations of the listening environment. Are bigger rooms better for surround sound or a small, regular size listening room be just as effective? The idea of being able to adjust the sweet spot to your liking hints at creating imbalances within the system. To do this one has to achieve an equalization of signals to achieve the sweet spot phenomenon. I don't know of many audiophiles that routinely go through the equalization process to achieve a traditional sweet spot.

Eldartford,
I think that you are thinking along the same lines as I do in terms of the perception of the sweet spot, and I hasten to add that the sweet spot also contributes immensely to the dimentionality of the perceived sound. You certainly can discern the soloist in the middle but also the attendant musical instruments that provide the beat and rhythm of the music. Because of this dimentionality the depth and width of the soundstage is also perceived. The presence of a center speaker only serve to stabilize the central location of vocals and dialogues because it is really meant to synchronize with the image on a screen. From a musical only perspective I am convinced that 2 channel sound is superior to any multi channel sound because of the central phantom image that it delivers. Multi channel sound delivers plenty of great sounds but sadly with minimal cohesion. It tends to be a slam_bam_thank_you_mam presentation.

Eldartford,

But why fool around with a center speaker if it has the potential of degrading the sound of a recorded material? What purpose does a center speaker provide then other than more clarity of oral discourse or dissertation that is in synch with the performers on the screen? Why would one even consider the images coming from between L and C and R with the use of a center speaker in a matrix modality? Good to excellent soundstaging of one's 2 channel system will give you all those images without muddying it.

velocity:

WOW, the condescending tone just rattles on.... in full surround!!!! I'll post more later on.

velocity,

The violin is a very musical instrument and it is not the same as the human voice enunciating words on the screen. If surround sound is all around us, as you claim then the point of owning a surround system becomes moot. Don't you agree?

velocity,

Thank you for your somewhat more benevolent tone. The reality of it all though is; how many listeners or devotees to multi channel sound have or will ever have a system like yours? You are talking about a near perfect if not totally perfect system which you are fortunate to own. The premise of the original debate I believe was based on a system that is more available to the masses. It would have been simpler if you had stated at the very begining that there is a system that is way beyond the mainstream surround system and you happen to own it, instead of vociferously proclaiming that you have a better system. Thank you for giving me some insight into your professionalism, expertise and your passion for recreating a perfect sound in the home environment.

velocity,
Thank you for your most enlightening response. Please ignore the two emails that I sent to you. I'm sorry!!! You know who you are and I now know that. Conflict sometimes bring out the best for people and I know that I have benefited from it. I know that you are a dedicated professional who has brought me up to speed. You have my respect for steadfastly defending your position on surround sound/multi channel system. You were not only defending from a standpoint of research and science, but also from years of hands on experience and of course, your passion. One has to have passion in their work to achieve the ultimate outcome. You obviously have that passion and I truly applaud you for it. I hope that all of your work will soon come to fruition in a way that surround sound will be regarded as the prime system to truly enjoy recorded music and works of many great and talented musical performers in the privacy of our homes.

Eldartford,
Well HT is multi channel, but I can understand your fondness for the center speaker. I have somewhat found its use to be problematic and effective at times and as such have used it only selectively with music. You have pointed out that a more careful selection of that speaker will yield effective results and perhaps even enhance the well talked about "sweet spot". The challenge I believe, is to be able to find that speaker quite readily. Having said that, would it be wise for enthusiasts to demand the sale of a third speaker that is exactly the same as the two being sold as a pair? That way blending is optimal and degradation of sound is minimzed or totally a non issue.