Multi channel much better than stereo?


If done correctly (ie. using the right pre-amp, speakers ),properly set up, multi channel sound completely blows away any stereo sound out there. Anyone that has "Good" audio experience would have to agree. If you don't agree...well, YOUR WRONG. It's ok to be wrong, alot of people "Think" they have alot of audio experience, but they really don't. Any comments ?
urban
Multichannel has its' place, I admit it makes movie watching more enjoyable. But it is not for serious listening. I recently purchased a used Proceed PAV because I thought it handled stereo much better then even the top current preamp/processors. Also I bought separate amps for stereo listening and home theater. For serious listening I use the stereo bypass on the PAV and a Classe CA-200. When I play movies I can just turn on a Classe CAV-75 in bridged mode for the 3 surround channels. I have not been able to find a multi channel amp that sounds as good as a 2 channel stereo amp, that is why I configure it this way. I know I'm probably wrong URBAN, but I'm used to being wrong. You see I've been married for a long time.
Hello Urban:

You are entitled to your opinion however I would respectfully disagree. When you go to hear an orchestra, are the musicians sitting behind you? I thought not. Ah, you say that 5 speakers recreate the ambience of the hall! Ok, my 2 channel system will do the same, however I suspect it's at a much greater level than yours.

As to HT, I enjoy immensely the effect of 5.1 surround, movies that make proper use of the technology are wonderful.
My HT system uses Infinity RS1's as mains, biamped with stout Levinson amps, and does well at two-channel as well.
However it does not have the same palpability and "you are there" sound of the dedicated two channel system I have using tube cd and preamp, into solid state 33H reference monos.
Urban's respnse:
Ok now we are getting somewhere,thanks for all of good posts. Tireguy I'm sorry about the Adcom stuff (Mis-read an earlier set of posts ) I'm not a jerk who always thinks I'm right. I wanted to make a powerful statement "Your wrong" to get people writing. I would just like the "Stereo only" folks out there to consider this listening approach to music. Truth be told, right now I like my system better in stereo mode because we just moved and I have yet to build my new theater/sound room. (My HT is temporarily set up) My system before I ripped it all apart was, and will be set up soon again I hope, Martin Logans all around, Proceed AVP, Proceed amps, and runco projection. Set in a large room (18'X25') Now gentlemen hear me out, if you try to do both a HT & Audio room, in order to get the HT side to sound right you need to move the front speakers further apart. (About 10' for my system) Once you do this, stereo sound will not image correctly, you must then use the excellent processing ablities of today's newer pre-amps to compensate. Once you switch to the stereo surround mode, the center channel helps to lock down your sound stage, plus with good surrounds ( You should never know they are on while listening to music, so those of you who say the rear channels were annoying were not listening to a properly set up system.) they should add just enough to make the room "Come alive" which to me is exciting, and to all those I've demo the sytem for. If you are trying to listen to a multichannel disc/dvd on a system set up for stereo, of course it will sound terrible. If some of you "Stereo folks" ( I don't mean that badly either ) put as much energy into setting up a multi-channel system as you do with stereo, I think you would be shocked with your results and might just come to the same conclusions I have and will no longer be "Missing out". Now with that said, any further comments?
Hi Urban; after starting such a potentially inflammatory thread (actually two threads), I would think you should at least have the courtesy to follow it with an "IMO" (In My Opinion). But as is, you've sort of set yourself up as the "ultimate authority" on the subject(s), IMHO. That said, I agree with those who've said that multi-channel music does not sound "natural" to them for music. But I feel no need to dwell on this. Further, I'm sure that you're not the only person who has set up "good" stereo or HT systems-- that implication would be insulting to many two channel audiophiles as well as HT enthusiasts, IMO:>) Cheers. Craig.
as a supplement to my 2-channel rig, (completely out of the 2-channel signal-path when not in use, & when it *is* in use), i have set-up in my system an audio-only surround-sound processor - the jvc xpa-1010 digital acoustic processor. this unit has in it 20 programs made from acoustically mapping 20 different venues - concert halls, theatres, clubs, churches, outdoor venues. basically, what was done was to point 4 microfones outwards toward the corners, from a centrally-located position in the venue being mapped. so, what's being played-back is the ambient hall info from the particular venue that was being mapped. there are a multitude of adyustments for reverb, delay, the size of the room the system is set-up in, etc. while initial set-up is time-consuming, once it's done, there's not much fiddling inwolwed, except to switch from one venue to another.

imo, this is the *only* effective type of surround set-up for music. everything else is theatrics, w/no meaningful *real* soundstage info. but, i must say, it is now rarely activated, since i've gotten an excellent tubed preamp into my system - plenty of soundstage/hall info yust running the two main channels! ;~) it is nice for some recordings, like live-recordings, & when recordings were made in a real venue, as opposed to a studio. it is also nice, sometimes, for some less-than optimal fm radio broadcasts.

one persons' opinion, doug s.