Is 7.1 better than 5.1

I used to pooh-pooh the difference between 5.1 and 7.1. Then four years ago I got a 7.1 processor and my brand's matching surround speakers went on sale. Bought the speakers and brought an extra 2-channel amp out of the garage (later replaced by an Adcom 535 II) and there it was. My surround processor will matrix the rear surround channels from any 5.1 channel source, so it *always* fills in the back of the room. Then when you get a video that has a full sound track the localization is great. One example is in the Harry Potter films when they're on their brooms, zooming all around, or just about any film that involves flying, such as The Aviator.

I was able to put in a pair of Mirage OM-RS's (or whatever) for about $300 plus the spare amp I had, so it was easily worth it.

07-14-09: Shadorne
Better YES. Practical NO. Of course it is better but it depends on how willing you are to invest for the small amount of 7.1 soundtracks available.

For me, having a 7.1 source on the soundtrack is nearly immaterial. My AVP can matrix 7.1 from any 5.1 source, and does. It fills in the back and provides a more enveloping sound whether coming from a 7.1 or 5.1 channel source.

7-channel sources are growing rapidly, as just about anything coming out on Blu-ray these days is 7.1. The true 7.1 channel sources *do* provide more discrete rear channel specificity, but even in a matrix where the rear surround channels are only playing the signal common to LS and RS, it still fills in a gap that otherwise occupies the rear third of the room.

If you already have a 7-channel AVP or AVR, the additional cost of rear fill-in speakers and a pawnshop amp is minimal (e.g., I got an Adcom 535 II for $75). The only potential hassle is laying the front-to-back speaker cables.