Why i feel a 2 channel setup is the best for your average joe and music lovers.
dannylightning
Posts: 233
1. you can spend more money on your main speakers and get a much better set of speakers., so basically if you are on a budget and most people probably are you can buy 2 nicer speakers or you can buy 5 or 7 lower grade speakers with the money you have set aside for your speaker budget... now if you you can afford to buy really nice speakers all the way around in a surround sound set up awesome. In my opinion my 2 channel set up sound excellent for movies and music. i just don't have sound coming from different parts of my room so maybe there is a little magic missing but i would trade that for better sound quality any day..
2 less wires to run. and less money to spend on speaker wires. you could probably spend just say 100 bucks on say 20 feet of excellent quality speaker cable or 100+ bucks on longer runs of the cheaper stuff. allot of people don't think speaker cable makes a difference. i never did either till i got a set of revealing speakers and tried different types now with these speakers i hear a very noticeable difference between my AQ solid copper wire which cost me 100 bucks vs my mono price stranded budget wire which was like 20 bucks for a small spool..
3. with a AVR which is what most people get for surround sound you are paying for several channels of amplification and they are often not the highest quality parts inside., you are paying for all kind of digital processing with a AVR---- now with a good quality 2 channel amp your paying for standard 2 channel amplification that is often made with much higher quality parts inside whith will often result in higher overall sound quality..
here are 2 photos of what you generally see inside of a AVR type receiver.
now here are 2 photos of what you may find inside of a nice 2 channel amp
i believe you can get much better sound quality for your money going with a 2 or 2.1 channel set up vs a 5.1 or 7.1 channel set up.. my current set up sound much better for movies and music than the surround sound systems i had in the past ever did.
my buddys crazy 7.1 home theater set up which was extremely expensive and it does not sound that much better than my 2 channel set up for movies( in my opinion) but when it comes to music i would say mine sounds way better than his. i was never really happy with the AVR's i have had in the past for listening to music but i did enjoy them for movies. i actually enjoy my current 2 channel set up for movies and music better than anything i have has in the past now that i finally have some good quality stuff all the way around. if i were to put the money i have in this setup into a surround sound system i would have bough much lower quality everything..
i personally feel you can get allot more for your money sound quality wise going 2 channel..
2 less wires to run. and less money to spend on speaker wires. you could probably spend just say 100 bucks on say 20 feet of excellent quality speaker cable or 100+ bucks on longer runs of the cheaper stuff. allot of people don't think speaker cable makes a difference. i never did either till i got a set of revealing speakers and tried different types now with these speakers i hear a very noticeable difference between my AQ solid copper wire which cost me 100 bucks vs my mono price stranded budget wire which was like 20 bucks for a small spool..
3. with a AVR which is what most people get for surround sound you are paying for several channels of amplification and they are often not the highest quality parts inside., you are paying for all kind of digital processing with a AVR---- now with a good quality 2 channel amp your paying for standard 2 channel amplification that is often made with much higher quality parts inside whith will often result in higher overall sound quality..
here are 2 photos of what you generally see inside of a AVR type receiver.
now here are 2 photos of what you may find inside of a nice 2 channel amp
i believe you can get much better sound quality for your money going with a 2 or 2.1 channel set up vs a 5.1 or 7.1 channel set up.. my current set up sound much better for movies and music than the surround sound systems i had in the past ever did.
my buddys crazy 7.1 home theater set up which was extremely expensive and it does not sound that much better than my 2 channel set up for movies( in my opinion) but when it comes to music i would say mine sounds way better than his. i was never really happy with the AVR's i have had in the past for listening to music but i did enjoy them for movies. i actually enjoy my current 2 channel set up for movies and music better than anything i have has in the past now that i finally have some good quality stuff all the way around. if i were to put the money i have in this setup into a surround sound system i would have bough much lower quality everything..
i personally feel you can get allot more for your money sound quality wise going 2 channel..
Cambridge Azur 651A
Polk LSi M703
Sonos Connect
Polk LSi M703
Sonos Connect
Comments
-
-
-
PS (and FWIW), this is more along the lines of what I like to see inside an integrated amplifier...
(not my HF-81 -- the one in the borrowed photo above is considerably prettier than mine inside) -
I look at it this way, when you go and watch a band do they just produce a front soundstage or play in surround sound? I want my music system to recreate the feeling of watching a band play.
Surround sound systems are for watching movies in your home theater.
Apples and oranges...."Make a man a fire and he'll be warm for a day. Light
a man on fire and he'll be warm for the rest of his life." -
2 channel:
Bryston 4B3, Bryston BDA3, Cary SLP05, Shanling CDT1000SE with parts conneXion level 2 mods, Nottingham analogue ace space 294, soundsmith Carmen MKii, Zu DL103 MKii, Ortofon MC 20 MKii, Dynavector XX2 MKii, Rogue Audio Ares, Core power technologies balanced power conditioner, Akiko Corelli power conditioner with Akiko Audio HQ power cable, Nordost heimdall 2, Frey 2, interconnects, speaker and power cables, Focal Electra 1028 BE 2, Auralic Aries Femto, Black diamond racing cones, ingress audio level 1 roller blocks, JL Audio E110 with Auralic subdude, Primacoustics room treatments.
Theater:
Focal Aria 926,905,CC900, SVS PB ultra x2. Pioneer Elite SC85, Oppo BDP93, Panamax M5400PM, Minix neox6, Nordost Blue heaven LS power cables. -
Tube snobs.The best way to predict the future is to invent it.
It is imperative that we recognize that an opinion is not a fact. -
You're comparing the differences between a Ferrari and a Rolls Royce...
Are they both awesome? Yeah.
But they have 2 distinctly different purposes.
A properly set up and calibrated home theater surround system can create ambient noise effects that a 2 channel system has no hope in Hades of recreating.
At the same time, a solid 2 channel system can create a holographic front music sound stage that tends to be muddied by a surround system.
Nothing personal here but if your buddy's 7 channel surround doesn't obliterate your 2 channel system for movies then frankly, regardless of what he spent, it is NOT calibrated correctly or something is severely broken."Some people find it easier to be conceited rather than correct."
"Unwad those panties and have a good time man. We're all here to help each other, no matter how it might appear." DSkip -
Yers is (much) prettier!
(beautiful, in fact)
-
mhardy6647 wrote: »What, like I'm gonna disagree?
I’m not disagreeing either!
Mikey, what is the name of the color on the walls?The best way to predict the future is to invent it.
It is imperative that we recognize that an opinion is not a fact. -
Well put.You're comparing the differences between a Ferrari and a Rolls Royce...
I will say this - I get way less worked up about "soundstage" and "imaging" than I do about instruments and vocal(ist)s sounding real -- which to me is more about tone and timbre than it is about imaging... although a hifi needs to get the size of an instrument correctly.
I vividly remember hearing Magneplanar Tympani IBs' reproduction of a piano. It sounded pretty good, but it was about three times the size, in sonic terms, of an actual piano.
Impressive -- but not right .
(and, not that this is germane to the topic at hand, I personally have zero interest in "home theatre") -
Why not have a decent 2 channel rig and a decent HT rig, do this get the new David Gilmour live in Pompeii Blu Ray listen to it on a 7.2 HT rig and report back. It's glorified Surround sound heaven, of course you can get the David Gilmour live at Pompeii CD and enjoy it on a decent 2 channel rig.Home Theater
Parasound Halo A 31 OnkyoTX-NR838 Sony XBR55X850B 55" 4K RtiA9 Fronts CsiA6 Center RtiA3 Rears FxiA6 Side Surrounds Dual Psw 111's Oppo 105D Signal Ultra Speaker Cables & IC's Signal Magic Power Cable Technics SL Q300 Panamax MR4300 Audioquest Chocolate HDMI Cables Audioquest Forest USB Cable
2 Channel
Adcom 555II Vincent SA-T1 Marantz SA 15S2 Denon DR-M11 Clearaudio Bluemotion SDA 2.3tl's (Z) edition MIT Terminator II Speaker Cables & IC's Adcom 545II Adcom Gtp-450 Marantz CD5004 Technics M245X SDA 2B's, SDA CRS+
Stuff for the Head
JD LABS C5 Headphone Amplifier, Sennheiser HD 598, Polk Audio Buckle, Polk Audio Hinge, Velodyne vPulse, Bose IE2, Sennheiser CX 200 Street II, Sennheiser MX 365
Shower & Off the beaten path Rigs
Polk Audio Boom Swimmer, Polk Audio Urchin
-
Why not have a decent 2 channel rig and a decent HT rig, do this get the new David Gilmour live in Pompeii Blu Ray listen to it on a 7.2 HT rig and report back. It's glorified Surround sound heaven, of course you can get the David Gilmour live at Pompeii CD and enjoy it on a decent 2 channel rig.
Chris Botti in Boston on BD or Cream at Royal Albert Hall or Dave Matthews at Radio City are 3 other great examples of this as well.
"Some people find it easier to be conceited rather than correct."
"Unwad those panties and have a good time man. We're all here to help each other, no matter how it might appear." DSkip -
Why not have a decent 2 channel rig and a decent HT rig, do this get the new David Gilmour live in Pompeii Blu Ray listen to it on a 7.2 HT rig and report back. It's glorified Surround sound heaven, of course you can get the David Gilmour live at Pompeii CD and enjoy it on a decent 2 channel rig.
Because some of us don't have room for two separate systems, and even if I did, I still wouldn't have two systems.
I'm not so fanatical that I let what I may or may not be hearing in music send me into crazy mode to buy more gear and take my system apart trying to hear EVERYTHING.
I don't/never had locked in preconceived notions that 2 channel is the best, it is simply one way of listening to audio be it movies or music. I had a 2 channel system for years, then I expanded for movies and found a new way of listening to my music as well as movies.
I switch back and forth as the mood strikes. There is no right or wrong way, and there also is no best way. It is whatever you like, want, and can afford.Marantz AV-7705 PrePro, Classé 5 channel 200wpc Amp, Oppo 103 BluRay, Rotel RCD-1072 CDP, Sony XBR-49X800E TV, Polk S60 Main Speakers, Polk ES30 Center Channel, Polk S15 Surround Speakers SVS SB12-NSD x2 -
I look at it this way, when you go and watch a band do they just produce a front soundstage or play in surround sound? I want my music system to recreate the feeling of watching a band play.
Surround sound systems are for watching movies in your home theater.
Apples and oranges....
It depends if you're watching Roger Waters or The Dead , they had holographic sound at their venues.
I'll stick with two channel also.
-
I have 6 systems hooked up, Outside in the main-cave. 1 surround system..( main TV system ) Yamaha with 2 -12" Klipsch subs and Powered towers , powered center and bi-polar surround speakers mounted 7' up. Exc. sound ! Movie wise. I've never tried to do 2 channel on it too much since I acquired the SDA-SRS2's.
1 more surround system in the back room. w/powered sub. Not to shabby either.
5 other 2 channel systems of various costs , ages and purposes. Some EXC., some not to shabby either.
2 systems inside. JVC Surround sound receivers w/sub outs hooked up to powered subs. Exc. sound for TV and movies! The living room JVC is hooked up to Pinnacle Black Diamond surround speakers and a Pinnacle sub. ( the cheap one..) and on music mode, It is BEAUTIFUL sounding. I guess speakers also play a major part in how the surround systems sound with music.
These 15 or twenty year old receivers in the house are so good I've never had the desire to want to replace them with 1200.00 receivers that I own or have owned.
They are JVC- RX-DV31's. Built in DVD players. I have a Blu-ray hooked up to both of them for years now.
I love a holographic 2 channel system where you can sense the artists are in the room with you. I lived long enough to have experienced it many, many times. I love it.
But I love watching movies too. Movies would take my mind off my neck issue too.
A girl once told me about her still being a virgin...
" you can't miss what you've never had "
I have long adapted that phrase to say " you can't miss what you've never heard " Most people just listen to music and watch movies. I EXPERIENCE them. -
If I had the right room I would have a nice system that allows me to go between 2 channel and 7.1 Nothing like having a great Pre Amp with HT bypass..
They are both great and fun to play with... -
Polkaguy58 wrote: »I look at it this way, when you go and watch a band do they just produce a front soundstage or play in surround sound? I want my music system to recreate the feeling of watching a band play.
Surround sound systems are for watching movies in your home theater.
Apples and oranges....
It depends if you're watching Roger Waters or The Dead , they had holographic sound at their venues.
I'll stick with two channel also.
Never saw the Dead live and the only time I've seen Roger Waters live was at a Pink Floyd concert.
My 2.3's do a great job reproducing Pink Floyd however."Make a man a fire and he'll be warm for a day. Light
a man on fire and he'll be warm for the rest of his life." -
For serious music listening, 2 channel is the only way.Political Correctness'.........defined
"A doctrine fostered by a delusional, illogical minority and rabidly promoted by an unscrupulous mainstream media, which holds forth the proposition that it is entirely possible to pick up a t-u-r-d by the clean end."
President of Club Polk -
Concur (FWIW).For serious music listening, 2 channel is the only way.
(although I will confess to using a subwoofer, Philistine that I am)
-
-
mhardy6647 wrote: »
Subs are ok and depending on the mains, much needed.Political Correctness'.........defined
"A doctrine fostered by a delusional, illogical minority and rabidly promoted by an unscrupulous mainstream media, which holds forth the proposition that it is entirely possible to pick up a t-u-r-d by the clean end."
President of Club Polk -
Eh, splitting hairs here. Cathy made a good point though. To have 2 systems with decent quality for both music and movies can get costly.
Having one, that can do both, with better than average front end electronics can be extremely enjoyable, cheaper than 2 systems, and wife friendly.
We all have different needs too, different wallets, different ideas of what good sound actually is. There is no hard and fast rules cast in stone. Simply enjoy your music as you see fit. What was the point of this thread again ? HT SYSTEM-
Sony 850c 4k
Pioneer elite vhx 21
Sony 4k BRP
SVS SB-2000
Polk Sig. 20's
Polk FX500 surrounds
Cables-
Acoustic zen Satori speaker cables
Acoustic zen Matrix 2 IC's
Wireworld eclipse 7 ic's
Audio metallurgy ga-o digital cable
Kitchen
Sonos zp90
Grant Fidelity tube dac
B&k 1420
lsi 9's -
You're comparing the differences between a Ferrari and a Rolls Royce...
Are they both awesome? Yeah.
But they have 2 distinctly different purposes.
A properly set up and calibrated home theater surround system can create ambient noise effects that a 2 channel system has no hope in Hades of recreating.
At the same time, a solid 2 channel system can create a holographic front music sound stage that tends to be muddied by a surround system.
Nothing personal here but if your buddy's 7 channel surround doesn't obliterate your 2 channel system for movies then frankly, regardless of what he spent, it is NOT calibrated correctly or something is severely broken.
Well said._____________________________________________________________________________________________
Ethernet Filter: GigaFOILv4 with Keces P3 LPS
Source: Roon via ethernet to DAC interface
DAC: Bricasti M1SE
Pre/Pro: Marantz AV8805
Tube Preamp Buffer: Tortuga TPB.V1
Amp1: Nord One NC1200DM Signature, Amp2: W4S MC-5, AMP3: W4S MMC-7
Front: Salk SoundScape 8's, Center: Salk SoundScape C7
Surround: Polk FXIA6, Surround Back: Polk RTIA9, Atmos: Polk 70-RT
Subs: 2 - Rythmik F25's
IC & Speaker Cables: Acoustic Zen, Wireworld, Signal Cable
Power Cables: Acoustic Zen, Wireworld, PS Audio
Room Treatments: GIK Acoustics -
If I had the right room I would have a nice system that allows me to go between 2 channel and 7.1 Nothing like having a great Pre Amp with HT bypass..
They are both great and fun to play with...
Yes and I totally agree with what you're saying. But if you significantly prefer on over the other, the other will sacrifice. I like having both to where each one makes me shiver and it is absolutely fantastic!_____________________________________________________________________________________________
Ethernet Filter: GigaFOILv4 with Keces P3 LPS
Source: Roon via ethernet to DAC interface
DAC: Bricasti M1SE
Pre/Pro: Marantz AV8805
Tube Preamp Buffer: Tortuga TPB.V1
Amp1: Nord One NC1200DM Signature, Amp2: W4S MC-5, AMP3: W4S MMC-7
Front: Salk SoundScape 8's, Center: Salk SoundScape C7
Surround: Polk FXIA6, Surround Back: Polk RTIA9, Atmos: Polk 70-RT
Subs: 2 - Rythmik F25's
IC & Speaker Cables: Acoustic Zen, Wireworld, Signal Cable
Power Cables: Acoustic Zen, Wireworld, PS Audio
Room Treatments: GIK Acoustics -
mhardy6647 wrote: »
Subs are ok and depending on the mains, much needed.
Or the room or the optimal placement of the mains._____________________________________________________________________________________________
Ethernet Filter: GigaFOILv4 with Keces P3 LPS
Source: Roon via ethernet to DAC interface
DAC: Bricasti M1SE
Pre/Pro: Marantz AV8805
Tube Preamp Buffer: Tortuga TPB.V1
Amp1: Nord One NC1200DM Signature, Amp2: W4S MC-5, AMP3: W4S MMC-7
Front: Salk SoundScape 8's, Center: Salk SoundScape C7
Surround: Polk FXIA6, Surround Back: Polk RTIA9, Atmos: Polk 70-RT
Subs: 2 - Rythmik F25's
IC & Speaker Cables: Acoustic Zen, Wireworld, Signal Cable
Power Cables: Acoustic Zen, Wireworld, PS Audio
Room Treatments: GIK Acoustics -
mhardy6647 wrote: »
Subs are ok and depending on the mains, much needed.
Yeah, that's where we are here, with basically Altec 515s (i.e., the woofer sections of the 604E Duplexes) in large vented boxes... they are not noted for going very low... but what they do, they do well.
My -- interesting -- subwoofer prototype is pretty respectable, I think (tho' I am no expert); it's certainly much better at reproducing LF in music than was the cheapie powered subwoofer I got some years back (but that's not saying too much, in all candor).
DSC_9751 (2) by Mark Hardy, on Flickr -
Three channel is best, but unfortunately when RCA was recording that in the 50s it never caught on. My three channel SACDs in the HT are sweet.
http://www.elusivedisc.com/RCA-Living-Stereo-Multi-Channel-Stereo/products/1094/
With that said, I spend most of my time with the stereo.Lumin X1 file player, Westminster Labs interconnect cable
Sony XA-5400ES SACD; Pass XP-22 pre; X600.5 amps
Magico S5 MKII Mcast Rose speakers; SPOD spikes
Shunyata Triton v3/Typhon QR on source, Denali 2000 (2) on amps
Shunyata Sigma XLR analog ICs, Sigma speaker cables
Shunyata Sigma HC (2), Sigma Analog, Sigma Digital, Z Anaconda (3) power cables
Mapleshade Samson V.3 four shelf solid maple rack, Micropoint brass footers
Three 20 amp circuits. -
I think that the discrete three channel format (common in the 1950s in better recording studios) was generally upstream of the final product -- not that some folks didn't have three-channel systems (Sinatra, e.g.)... but it wasn't really a 'mass-market' format.
In the early days of home stereo, it wasn't common to find some sort of center channel output on consumer stereo integrated amplifers (Sherwood, Scott, and EICO, to name a few with models that offered either line or loudspeaker-level "mixed to mono" center channel outputs).
Col. Paul W. Klipsch was a proponent of a 'derived' third channel (mixed-to-mono) in the center for his loudspeakers... he advocated a Cornwall in the middle of a pair of K-horns, or a Heresy in the middle of a pair of Cornies for the low-rent crowd.
I think this says more about the Heritage Klipsch loudspeakers' imaging deficiencies than it does about anything else, though.
-
mhardy6647 wrote: »PS (and FWIW), this is more along the lines of what I like to see inside an integrated amplifier...
(not my HF-81 -- the one in the borrowed photo above is considerably prettier than mine inside)
I dunno Doc i think you need bigger doorbell transformers. Those look a little weak -
Polkaguy58 wrote: »I look at it this way, when you go and watch a band do they just produce a front soundstage or play in surround sound? I want my music system to recreate the feeling of watching a band play.
Surround sound systems are for watching movies in your home theater.
Apples and oranges....
The Dead , they had holographic sound at their venues.
Sorry but that was the acid.....
