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
Yes, Audyssey - or any other DSP room correction/EQ device - is a good tool for helping systems/acoustics out. This is certain. As a final tune for your system, I think these are necessary, particularly in typical small home systems, shared entertainment spaces, and most any situation where you're not dealing with all out fully dedicated and engineered acoustic spaces, sure.
That however does NOT FIX fundamental flaws in initial setup parameters and considerations.
Here's what something like Audyssey WILL NOT DO:

1) account for/fix acoustic "holes in the response curve"!
(place a speaker/seat where there's a hole in the
response, and you'll ALWAYS have a hole in the sound)
2) properly adjust for phase between ALL listening
positions and speaker locations, in relation to each
other and the subwoofers!
3) properly "aim" or "toe-in" your loud speakers for
even coverage and tonality across all seating locations
4) fix for inherently placing loud speakers "too wide" in
relation to one another (causing undefined oundstage,
soft transients, and week overall imaging.
5) teach you to properly place loudspeakers so their not
placed too close together, creating too narrow of a
soundstage, constricting envelopment, and cramping
steering
5) properly place speakers for proper steering and
envelopement
6) Adjust phase between multiple subwoofers for accurate
phase from all listening positions in relation to each.
7) properly address first order refelctions in the room
from listeing positions in relation to speakers
8) accurately adjust and/or deal with "reverb" (rt60) in
the room (you got too much bass and overhang to
replicate a large acoustic space - room sounds "small")
9) accurately predict and adjust for a good crossover
between speakers and subs (Even Audyssey gets it wrong)
10)Help you chose correct gear allowing for maximum focus
impact, dialog inteligibility, resolution, overall
system matching, etc (years of audiophile experience
can't be erased and made up for with Audyssey, sorry.)
11)Can't replace refined equipment, and what it offers,
beyond what EQ'ing can do.
12)Nor can fancy EQ's help you adequatly select the proper
types, amounts, and locations of acoustic treatments
necessary to get the best sound from a room/system.

Basically, Audyssey and the likes helps greatly, yes. Still, it cannot fix foundational errors, and educate someone on how to put together a complicated multichannel system, and expect world beatter kind of results! It's just not gunna happen...unless you get real REAL lucky.
I mean we're talking 7 speaker, a subwoofer or two, multiple seating positions (likely), various acoustical issues to be properly addressed (thes rooms are SMALL), and a myriad of other issues that most novices aren't gunna have a clue about (if you don't know what's doing what, how can you fix it?)
Bottom line, can't replace experience with gadgets..and you can't get me to believe someone who's using Audyssey on their denon, to EQ out their Bose system, has the end-all-be-all system! Um, no
Rockitman:
My test for multi channel versus two channel... What would the band playing live do ? I bet it's two channel ! Save the multi channel for movie soundtracks...
I find this literally incomprehensible. The band plays. What does that have to do with the number of channels?

Kal
I will go multi channel when I grow more ears! :)
I know that this is usually said in jest but, otherwise, it represents a sad ignorance of hearing mechanisms.

Kal
Go to the TacT Audio website and lookup Ambiophonics. With two speakers 30 degrees apart in front, and using their Ambiophonics processor to eliminate cross talk between channels, a smooth continuous image is created more than half way around the room. It's a more natural surround sound and avoids the chopped up images that center and other surround speakers create. It's like a rainbow wrapped around the room instead of red, orange yellow, green, blue, indigo,and violet each coming from different speakers.