2. home-theater
  3. 1239507308

Two-channel is inferior to multi-channel, no?

I think that 2 channel is inferior, though, of course, my ears and reason may be mistaken.

Feedback please!

The obvious reason, I am thinking, it is that two channels are less representative of infinity (live music) than 3, 5 or 7, etc. This is the case even if the transducers, amps & speakers, and room acoustics, are perfect (dream on...) in the 2-channel mode.

In my own system, two Revel M-20s as center channel, vertically arrayed, with Revel M-50s on either side, there is the occasional CD (jazz is my thing) that sounds better in stereo, than with 5.1 processed sound, but this is rare. Most sound better with the center channel prominent (either in Dolby Standard or Music modes).

It's possible that I simply need better equipment.

But then why do I find that the best sound (in my system) is from digital sources, e.g. DVD, Blu-Ray, SACD, whether the sound reproduces music or movies. Would better equipment neutralize (and even flip) this negative comparison of stereo to multi-channel reproduction? If so, what is the explanation?

What I find in particular (for music and movies) that is that digital sources in multi-channel mode give full breath and focus to the center channel, placing this important sound component exactly where it should be: precisely in the center of the room. And giving the other channels 'room' to shine (though, in my system, given the amplification available, this should not problem).

What am I missing in theory?
pmcneil
kijanki's avatar
kijanki
3,575 posts
 
Eldartford

"A discrete center. All playback, even that recorded with only two channels, sounds better with a center (derived). This has been known since the earliest days of stereo."

On my 2 channel system I can hear voices at exact positions in the center - how you can improve on that? I had impression that center channel was introduced for the home theater in order to widen sweet listening spot for voices (or center fuzzy image created by cheap plastic L/R speakers).
eldartford
4,262 posts
 
Kijanki...What you are hearing is the very interesting illusion of a "phantom" centered sound source from two speakers reproducing a mono signal. But however interesting, it's an illusion. Real is better.

As I mentioned, the benefit of a center speaker, playing a LEFT-plus-RIGHT signal, was recognized more than fifty years before home theatre was invented.
kijanki's avatar
kijanki
3,575 posts
 
ELdartford - I'm just trying to understand what gets better. My system is far from perfect but I can here "illusion" of person standing/speaking exactly in the center. It cannot get any more exact - if this means "better". I was suspecting that in the theater environment where more people listens sitting often far from the center it is important to widen sweet listening spot. Another suspicion I have is that home theater contains often inexpensive L/R speakers with less than perfect imaging and center channel fixes it (mono for voices?).

I'm just trying to understand since I've never had more than two speakers. I can see need for rear speakers and subwoofer but center channel always puzzled me.
unsound
6,115 posts
 
FWIW, I have truly enjoyed front 3 channel demonstrations, but, have never heard (and at any price) rear channels that didn't sound gimmicky.
eldartford
4,262 posts
 
Kijanki...If you analyse the typical stereo signals you will find that most of the power is "common mode". In other words the Left and Right signals are mostly equal to each other. This common mode signal "deserves" its own speaker, if anything, a better one than the Left and Right.
With true discrete multichannel all the speakers are important. Skimping on the center and surrounds is a common mistake which accounts for much disapointment about MC.
More to discover