Why is 2 Channel better than multi-channel?

more is better
bigger is better
this stupid mentality built the Hummer
a thinly disguised red neck monster truck for yuppies and gen x ers alike

since more is better, more speakers is better

no need for audio balance, subtle overtones, etc
let's just throw more in the mix

damn now theres 7.1 processing 7 channel, let me throw away my 5 channel

on and on

could anyone list audio cd's (DVD-A's that get HT setup right)? the few dvd-a's I've heard don't
thanks

Audiotomb....It's too bad that you have never heard a good multichannel audio system. They do exist, and discs to play on them.

If your pursuit is realistic sound in the home, 2 speakers never was and never will be enough. Why do you think Dipoles are so popular! 2 real, 2 virtual speakers 4 channels!

Even if the instruments are only presented in front, without surround speakers you cannot begin to present the entire recorded event. 2 channel is at best amputation of all electronic and real reverb and delay processing and venue. Whether you thinks its important or not...it is anyway.

Ask any Pro Lexicon DSP processor designer, all reverberation and delay effects are modeled as a 360 degree effect. 2 channel 160 degrees at best.

Amputation of the music and the environment around it.

And let's not fixate on the surround or rear channels. The center front is the most important of all.

Eldartford,

Let me state the obvious...it all matters

and you're preaching to the choir