Stereo sounds better than 5.1?

For movies i agree 100% but for music i beleive if they could get it right and make it sound natural,which has NOT happened yet that would be great,but no one now can tell if my center channel is on when i play two channel,not even someone with golden ears,and this is with the speaker sitting 5ft behind the other two as i only place the center were it belongs when watching an ocasional movie. There has been no dts,dolby digital ect recorded music that sounds right in the rear channels although there is an intial wow factor it turns to this does not sound right after a while,besides there is a lot less information on dd,dts than there is on cd,not to mention audible distortion.I bought an sacd player a while back and love the sound but multi channel has a lot to prove to me.Ibeleive in the future maybe there will be a viable multi channel format such as sacd,but for now your the one that is wrong IMHO.

I agree with Ears. I have a 5.1 system and movies are great, but as far as music, even the DTS DVD of The Eagles "Hell Freezes over" while it sounds great, it just has the placement of some of the instruments all wrong. instruments all wrong. I have several DD and DTS music videos, and while I very much enjoy the visual/sonic experience, they still do not come even close to good 2 channel stereo for imaging. Unless they standardize on just how to mix a 5.1 correctly, then I don't think you can help but get instrument misplacement just because someone decided it sounded kool there. Then when you are watching the band on stage (DVD) and you hear the lead guitar come from behind you, it just blows the experience. Just my opinion.

Hello urban I am not sure what you are trying to say but everybody has there own opinion and you are not the supreme authority. I am sure you feel that your multi-channel set up sounds better based on your multi-threads started about this subject, how about you post a question with out including an answer you might find that everybody here will be more then glad to give reasons why they feel the way they do about "inferior stereo" maybe you should try to diversify and understand where others are coming from before you start barking audio gospal at us, Thanks a bunch.

Three channel is great for music, but 5.1 is f#^%&#$ stupid.

Follow up:From thread author.
Let me explain further, I'm also saying I would rather listen to the stereo surround version extracted from 2 channel over just the regular stereo version. Notice I said, "If properly set up". The new surround versions out today can drastically improve upon "Normal stereo". I'm not trying to start any fights, just trying to spark some passionate dialog about listening to 2 ch. over 5.1 ch. I'll bet most people that have a high end processer will say the same thing, they listen to the stereo surround version over regular stereo everytime. Ears is right about the center channel, when I listen to a stereo version, I to will swear the center channel is on, thats called imaging and my system does that well, but add alittle to the surrounds and now you have an accurate sound stage, more natural sounding. That's the point here. More comments ?
Anyone agree ? For the Tireguy, I question your experience when you say an Adcom pre-amp is one of your favorite componets. You might as well say you like Bose speakers too. Lets keep it friendly now, I just said I question you experience.