213 Cobra
"in music fidelity terms you've got nuthin'"
So unwise, your choice of words. Harvard's School of Medicine and Bell Labs disagree, they say we've got more fidelity and musicality. They said it not me...like in the 50's and 60's
CDwallace is trying to tell you that he's heard differently, and if you read carefully what you "think" now is no different from what he "thought" before his experience.
See he strolled into a situation he wasn't prepared for, and you also would not be prepared for either. And he embellishes in the comparison as the surround system was less than $10K and the two channel systems $15K+, 30K+....hmm. Some pricey lambs.
I can tell you have very little surround experience;
Know where you went wrong,
"You can also have better vocal clarity than any center channel speaker can provide you."
I'm sorry, you're just plain wrong. Even the physics is against you on this one. And this extra clarity is not at the expense of a uniform deep soundstage, just incase you were wondering.
It appeared also that you trying to tell us what we can use for a center channel? I suppose I MUST have a BIG TV in this system to satisfy your vision of this system too? You can't make me have one!:) If you burden us with what you think a surround system is, of course you would be correct about its sound quality. But I must say your imagination is not quite up to the task of outlining what you are missing, it certainly has nothing to do with things behind you as most would incorrectly assume. Although the rear channels are critical and must be on, they do so much more than just make noise in the back....much much more.
Just so you know; any speaker designated as a "center channel" should not be used in a music surround system if it can be helped...there are some exceptions to this rule but just a few.
Two channel is the sonic degradation, but I know the masses of musicophile's opinions are overwhelmingly on your side.....for just a little while longer. But keep an open mind, "cause times they are a changin'" :)
"in music fidelity terms you've got nuthin'"
So unwise, your choice of words. Harvard's School of Medicine and Bell Labs disagree, they say we've got more fidelity and musicality. They said it not me...like in the 50's and 60's
CDwallace is trying to tell you that he's heard differently, and if you read carefully what you "think" now is no different from what he "thought" before his experience.
See he strolled into a situation he wasn't prepared for, and you also would not be prepared for either. And he embellishes in the comparison as the surround system was less than $10K and the two channel systems $15K+, 30K+....hmm. Some pricey lambs.
I can tell you have very little surround experience;
Know where you went wrong,
"You can also have better vocal clarity than any center channel speaker can provide you."
I'm sorry, you're just plain wrong. Even the physics is against you on this one. And this extra clarity is not at the expense of a uniform deep soundstage, just incase you were wondering.
It appeared also that you trying to tell us what we can use for a center channel? I suppose I MUST have a BIG TV in this system to satisfy your vision of this system too? You can't make me have one!:) If you burden us with what you think a surround system is, of course you would be correct about its sound quality. But I must say your imagination is not quite up to the task of outlining what you are missing, it certainly has nothing to do with things behind you as most would incorrectly assume. Although the rear channels are critical and must be on, they do so much more than just make noise in the back....much much more.
Just so you know; any speaker designated as a "center channel" should not be used in a music surround system if it can be helped...there are some exceptions to this rule but just a few.
Two channel is the sonic degradation, but I know the masses of musicophile's opinions are overwhelmingly on your side.....for just a little while longer. But keep an open mind, "cause times they are a changin'" :)

