surround processor?

How do you like being told surround is crap?

An irrefutable statement like that is unhinged.

Sure, not everyone is going to like home theatre, especially those trapped in the stereo past from last century, but the insistence is dreadful.

Comes across as a god statement.

How many movie theaters have sound only coming from the front?  Not sure what else there is to argue about. 

That's just plain stupid.

Home theaters are based around Dolby surround and any decent modern movie theater should be the same.

An economical way to give surround sound a try is to get the old Dynaco Quadaptor. You hook it up to your power amp's binding posts, and it creates a left minus right (L - R) signal, which is sent to a rear channel amp and speakers. The L - R signal simulates the random phase information contained in recordings made in large spaces (cathedrals, music halls, auditoriums, etc.), primarily in recordings of large ensembles (orchestras, choirs). In addition, some such recordings already contain out-of-phase information.

The Angstrom 200 I mentioned earlier contains L - R circuitry---along with a delay, as well as more sophisticated processing. The 200 also contains a decent DAC and analogue pre-amp. All from the fertile mind of Mike Moffat, and built like a tank (in the "horrible" State of California ;-) .

I have separate audio and video systems (the main speakers are shared and I just swap the speaker cables from one power amp to another).

I have a fairly decent Marantz AV preamp and have listened to stereo through it. It is pretty decent but it still isn't up to what my stereo only system can put through the same speakers.

Assess what your priorities are and go with your ears.