What hifi system type do you have set up ?

[OzzieAudiophile]

Hello it will be interesting to find out just how popular (at least out of our bunch of Hifi gurus,
just how popular 5+ channel is, and how much have stayed faithful to the 2-channel.

There should be enough options for you to be in one of them.

5+ channel basically covers every combination "MORE" than 1x pair of speakers.
i.e. 1x pair of fronts plus centre speaker, 1x pair of fronts, plus subwoofer, 4.1 speakers
5.1 speakers, 6.1 speakers, 6.2 speakers, 7.1 speakers, 11.1. etc.

I have a personal interest to find out just how many of you have a "balanced" connection
of your components.

Addition : If you happen to have 3 or MORE systems, please vote in one of the Have both.
I cannot edit the choices anymore.

Feedback is of course welcome.

The poll threads do not allow me to add any more than 10 options. I'm sure this is one of the
fewer ones which give that many.

If you recall a character in one of the Black Adder series, it's just funny the way he says this...

Quote : "Please accept my apo-logies".

[basite]

2 channel for my system only.

if I want to see a movie, I go upstairs and use dad's surround system

Keep them spinning,
Bert.

[kexodusc]

I have both. My stereo system has speakers of significantly higher quality that cost about 3 times as much as the model used in my home theater. Yet I find multi-channel audio to offer a more realistic imaging and soundstage. It's enough that it overcomes the lesser quality gear in my 5.1 system, which sort of makes sense, the speakers in the 5.1 system aren't working as hard and not revealing as much of their limitations as a result. There's also something to be said for the increased resolution the channel separtion provides.

I prefer the 5.1 sound only if we compare mulit-channel audio like SACD to 2-channel audio. For 2 channel comparison only, the stereo wins straight up of course, hi-rez or otherwise.

[Luvin Da Blues]

I recently sold off my 5.2 HT system for a balanced 2ch rig. To be honest, with the presentation and imaging that my stereo rig gives, I don't really miss it for movies or TV. Actually the sound and presentation is more natural for the most part considering that the screen is not 360 degrees. Just my thoughts.

I have my old 5.1 system (non digital) in my bedroom for the odd time I want MC.

[E-Stat]

There should be enough options for you to be in one of them.

You missed one:

**Have both systems and find each does a better job for the specific task

For music, I prefer a well executed two channel system (at least for my budget). For movies, I prefer a multi channel system. I find the requirements for each are different.

rw

[GMichael]

I have three systems.
System one is a 7.1 system. Multi-channel is great for music recorded that way and HT. Other than that it gets used in 2 channel mode. The two front speakers cost me more than the rest of the system put together.
System two is a 6.1 system and gets used the same as system one, although all the speakers are the same.
System three is a 2.0 system and leaves little room for anything else. No TV included. Just a pool table and a few chairs.

[Feanor]

Hello it will be interesting to find out just how popular (at least out of our bunch of Hifi gurus,
just how popular 5+ channel is, and how much have stayed faithful to the 2-channel.

There should be enough options for you to be in one of them.

5+ channel basically covers every combination "MORE" than 1x pair of speakers.
i.e. 1x pair of fronts plus centre speaker, 1x pair of fronts, plus subwoofer, 4.1 speakers
5.1 speakers, 6.1 speakers, 6.2 speakers, 7.1 speakers, 11.1. etc.

I have a personal interest to find out just how many of you have a "balanced" connection
of your components.

Feedback is of course welcome

I'm not sure you ought to be so concerned about balanced vs. single-ended. Most people have both in their systems. For example, I used balance connections between my preamp and monoblock power amps and single-ended connections elsewhere. In my case this make sense because my preamp and amps are both fully balanced. Furthermore the amp manufacturer explicitly states that better performance will be achieved with balanced connections; (he explained why but the explanation is technically too complicated for me to accurately pass on).

In general, (and there might be exceptions), internally single-end components are best joined by single-ended connections. This makes sense because additional ciruitry is certainly necessary in the source to create the balanced output, then (possibly) more needed in the target (depending on its design) to recombined the balanced input. Between single-ended components the extra complexity is only justified in case of long cable runs or in environments with a lot of electrical noise, (because balanced connections have very high inherent external noise rejection).

I have both stereo (for music), and m/c (mostly for HT), systems. I "prefer" the stereo only because it has higher grade components: in a perfect world I would have a dedicated m/c system for music with high-grade components.

[blackraven]

I have 3 2ch and a 5.1 minus the rear speaks.

[OzzieAudiophile]

rw. I would of believed the one you recommended was the reason people put two
systems together in the first place.

I guess I should be a little more clear, of the two systems, one is not a new system,
one is an old, un-dissasembled one.

I didn't have enough space on the line to say, 2 seperate systems purchased on purpose
specifically for 2-channel, and 5+ channel.

I highly value your input Mr Stat.

[Glen B]

I have a personal interest to find out just how many of you have a "balanced" connection of your components.

Feedback is of course welcome

You should have included "unbalanced" and "balanced" options for those with separate systems.

I have separate 5.1 and 2-channel systems and run the latter all-balanced, except for the connection between my turrntable and preamp which is single-ended. I prefer the sound of the system in balanced mode, with the added benefit of more secure XLR connections. I have a disdain for locking RCAs.

[E-Stat]

rw. I would of believed the one you recommended was the reason people put two systems together in the first place.

Hmmm. I have the separate systems for two reasons:

1) Allows wife to watch her TV programs while I listen to music upstairs. She is the greater videophile.
2) I am far more interested in audio and the quality of the systems is vastly different.

I discussed this with Sir TtT a while back and we have different thoughts on this. It is my belief that for a given (non-astronomical budget) one must necessarily compromise the overall sonic quality of a MC system vs. an equivalently priced two channel one. He believes the benefits of MC alone counter the required choice of lower quality system components. To each his own.

BTW, I do not use balanced cabling. FWIW, Harry Pearson used to use balanced connections with his main music system in Room 3, but found no benefit with his environment and choice of components.

rw

[OzzieAudiophile]

Hello E-Stat and Feanor, thanks again, as well as to the rest of you guys.

I have hit a bit of a crossroad myself in terms of upgrading my system.

Please view my thread in the amps section, E-Stat, I know you've been there before.

I'll add more comments in that thread regarding Balanced, and how that will either help,
or hinder my final decision in terms of what I will end up getting.

Cheers.

[Ajani]

Hmmm. I have the separate systems for two reasons:

1) Allows wife to watch her TV programs while I listen to music upstairs. She is the greater videophile.
2) I am far more interested in audio and the quality of the systems is vastly different.

I'm likely to end up with 2 systems for those exact same reasons + an inexpensive bedroom system for a third reason...

I discussed this with Sir TtT a while back and we have different thoughts on this. It is my belief that for a given (non-astronomical budget) one must necessarily compromise the overall sonic quality of a MC system vs. an equivalently priced two channel one. He believes the benefits of MC alone counter the required choice of lower quality system components. To each his own.

For a given price point I'd much rather have a good two channel setup than a MC one, as I believe that the increase in quality of the speakers, amp and cd player will outweigh any advantages of MC using inferior quality components.... but clearly MC lovers will feel differently.... in my case, spending my budget on MC would make even less sense, as I own zero MC discs.... so I'm much better off trying to get the most benefit out of my existing CD collection, than building a setup to maximise the potential of SACDs/DVD-As that I don't have.

[JohnMichael]

Two channel and I am a little unbalanced. I have listened to multi channel systems but I did not care for them for music. Since I rarely watch a TV of any size I do not spend money on video. I toyed with the idea of buying a dvd player but then the urge passes. If I am at home music is playing.

[aevans]

I own lots of equipment, but 2 channel balanced is the only thing I have had hooked up in the past 2 years.. just can't do without it..

I can speak for the balanced hook up as having something a little better(different) with my setup.

My equipment is all kinergetics, and they were known for doing some strange things with balanced connections, tossing caps into the lines, little pieces of wire, etc and then using that to filter out those types of sound paterns via the balanced connection.. They even had something similar built into their CD players.. two completely seperate dac's and opamp paths, one running in reverse polarity and then amplifying the differance in the signals in a final opamp.

For the Kinergetics brand balanced mode has huge gains.. I just wish the amps were not so friggin hot.

[OzzieAudiophile]

JohnMichael, it just sounds a bit funny

You said "Two channel and I am a little unbalanced." - they have some pills for that lol.
(just kidding)

I'll add the necessary point in the thread, I thank you all for making additional
recommendations for this poll, however if you have put a poll up on this site, you are
permitted to no more than 10 choices.

[JohnMichael]

JohnMichael, it just sounds a bit funny

You said "Two channel and I am a little unbalanced." - they have some pills for that lol.
(just kidding)

It was meant to be funny and I hope you enjoyed it as I enjoyed your response. Welcome to AudioReview.

Good thread and poll.

[thekid]

Good question.

Thankfully with the help of this community I am a little better off than I was a couple of years ago system wise.

Initially I got into the whole HT 5:1 due to the allure of surround sound/DVD experience. Thought my Bose 201/161 set-up worked just fine for movies and music. Added 2 more HT systems to the house (MB and son's room) and thought I was set.

Bought some vintage speakers that changed my mind about listening to HT for music. Got into vintage 2-channel about 6-months ago and have not looked back. Still listen to music on the 5:1 set-ups when listening for short periods of time because the integrated amps have sleep timers.

[OzzieAudiophile]

Here's lookin at ya kid ? (Boghart).

I have been told that some models of Bose speaker system permits you to set up 3
"sweet spots" in a room. Can your Bose system do that ?

Thanks for Welcoming me aboard JohnMichael. I feel like part of a fine soldier of
Caesar's Elite Legion.

JohnMicael... sounds like a figure that was pulled from the Gods above.

aevans - sounds like a nice setup. I'm curious are any of your components balanced
to balanced cables are over 1 metre ? Or are they all 1 metre or less ?

[aevans]

All less than 1 meter, it's more a function of the equipment than your regular noise reduction stuff.

[Pat D]

Our main music system is 2.1 with excellent monitor speakers and a quite capable subwoofer.

Our HT system is also 2.1 with some very good monitor speakers and a small subwoofer. We use an A-V receiver so we could do surround sound. Whether we prefer 2 channels is an open question.

[thekid]

[QUOTE=OzzieAudiophile]Here's lookin at ya kid ? (Boghart).

I have been told that some models of Bose speaker system permits you to set up 3
"sweet spots" in a room. Can your Bose system do that ?

Oz

Thanks for asking but no, when I mention my Bose set-up I am referencing that I have 201's for my fronts and 161's for the rear and a VCS-10 center channel. That set-up has now been relegated to my MB HT. It is fairly decent for 5:1 but musically I have moved past Bose.

My current main HT is actually a mismash of some of the vintage speakers I have been picking up in the past year. My mains are a pair of RtR Series IV's a Sony center channel and a pair of Infinity RS.4's for the rears. The RtR's image amazing well and they provide a large sweet spot for the viewing area. I am not sure if it is dumb luck or a testament to the Auto Set-up feature in my Pioneer but this diverse group of speakers sounds very very good for HT.

[OzzieAudiophile]

Well from the votes so far, it appears we have peeps that have a preference more for
2-channel than for 5+ channel.

Please if you read this read, do vote. Take pride in your babies, tell me about your system
as well. So far I've heard some nice setups. 30+ years ago, a good proportion of us would
of shared the same systems. Now it's most likely no one would have the same setup.

Pity we all live so far away from each other, we could bring some components over to
each other's houses, hookem up and compare/find out how it's like. Some components
brands go very well with others.

A lot of us you will know you want/need to change/upgrade your system. The USA and
Europe peeps have been blessed to have more choice of brands/components. The bad
part is that even though there's more cream, there's also more rubbish. In my part of
Australia, we have much less of both.

I've seen/heard lots of appealing features in one brand or another, it's nearly never the case
where most of these nice features all exist within the same component.

[aevans]

If you are from australia check out these guys: http://www.bursonaudio.com/
I have the buffer that they sell, makes cheap sources sound like 5k setups. The cost to ship and the current exchange rate make them cost prohibative for me, but I plan on using the preamp that they offer once the american dollar gets back on it's feet. Even with the shipping cost it's one of the best deals I ever got based on price performance.

[OzzieAudiophile]

Cheers aevans.

I'll check it out, added it to my favourites.