I wonder if technology since '02 could have changed the answer to this question a bit. I always thought that 2 channel would be better for fidelity than multi. In general that does seem to be the case with my stuff and most of my music. I do on the other hand have lots of electronic (gasp MP3's) that frankly sound pretty bad in 2 channel mode. I have found that for the bad stuff it sounds WAY better on my system to run my receiver in Extended Stereo mode and fake it to 5.1 channels. Maybe someone can explain it to me but it really helps. I wind up switching between 2.0 and 5.1 regularly. Mind, I'm not sure if this was a typical option in 2002.
Why is 2 Channel better than multi-channel?
I hear that the music fidelity of a multi-channel AV Receiver/Integrated amp can never match the sounds produced by a 2 channel system. Can someone clearly explain why this is so?
I'm planning to upgrade my HT system to try and achieve the best of both worlds, I currently have a 3 channel amp driving my SL, SR, C and a 2 channel amp driving my L and R.
I have a Denon 3801 acting as my pre. Is there any Pre/Proc out there that can merge both worlds with out breaking my bank? Looking for recommendations on what my next logical steps should be? Thanks in advance.
I'm planning to upgrade my HT system to try and achieve the best of both worlds, I currently have a 3 channel amp driving my SL, SR, C and a 2 channel amp driving my L and R.
I have a Denon 3801 acting as my pre. Is there any Pre/Proc out there that can merge both worlds with out breaking my bank? Looking for recommendations on what my next logical steps should be? Thanks in advance.