why do people like 2.0 channel so much???

[shokhead]

First of all there is a substantial difference between a "chip-produced" 5.1 channel mix and a recording that was designed for 5.1 analog from the start. Take for example Blue-Man's DVD. It was designed from the outset to be a surround sound experience that would give the closest possible impression of their concert experience. While Yes and Pink Floyd really embraced the surround formats and did a phenominal job with their surround disks, the truth is these recordings have been re-engineered to support a surround format, while they were originally written for stereo (some even mono).

The same can be said for most classical music since it was not written for "recording" at all, just for live presentation. So the struggle has been to try and reproduce the live experience as best as possible by the many surround disks made in the last two years. One company (forgot who) even pushed a 3 front channel mix to give the expereince a more realistic feel compared to what someone would have heard at a live concert.

Speaking of concerts, Shock & Dave, there are other concerts besides loud and overbearing pop concerts. If you've ever sat in the front rows of the orchestra section in a well designed concert hall, you'd experience something entirely different from a "rock concert" setting." Personally I don't believe (despite a second mortgage on my house) that I have ever experienced that in my living room. And even pop concerts don't need to be ear-bleeding loud to be enjoyable. I have very fond memories of hearing Fleetwood Mac, Kool & the Gang, The Marsalis bros., the Stones, and Roger Waters live; I just chose to sit a little further back, and as long as I was in the center, the experience was just as powerful. Albeit there is somomething to be said about a quieter audience, typical at a classical concert, IMO.

But there is a place for everything. I do like my movies to sound like they surround me, but for a musical piece, I prefer - and this is just my preference - that the music is well presented in front of me, in a way that most resembles the concert experience. For a musical component to try and immerse me in the middle of the band or orchestra, would seem a little artificial. If Blue Man wants me there, that's great, but I doubt Beethoven did; and while the Stones may try to put me there now, they have not yet succeeded in making me like it.

Did i say someplace about loud and overbearing concerts? I say enough dumb things without any help,thank you?LOL Cat Stevens and James Taylor were two of the better concerts i went to around 69/70.

Kool and the Gang?LMFAO. Did you have a fro and bellbottoms?

[nightflier]

...Kool and the Gang?LMFAO. Did you have a fro and bellbottoms?

Kool in the Gang was pretty awsome in concert, and so was Zapp, Grandmaster Flash, and the elements known as Earth Wind and Fire (to borrow from a movie that really does need to be heard in surround sound...). I think I'm going to pull out my old LP's tonight and see if this 2.0 vs. 5.1 debate is really all that meaningful. I can tell you this, and maybe it's just pure psychology, but I enjoyed my crappy LP's and my Cassettes on a $50 JVC player so much more than I now enjoy my current all-digital-gazillion-buttons-hi-res system. Perhaps I'm just trying to capture that feeling again...

I think we're all loosing sight of the fact that to make a true comparison on the musical qualities of each format, we would have to spend about 2-5 times as much as we spent on the 2.0 system. The fact is that most of us might just barely be able to afford a pair $3K mono amps to squeeze just the right amount of performance out of our self-titled hi-fi stereo rigs, but if you were to ask us to do the same for a 5.1 or even 7.1 system, we'd balk at the extra cash outlay. For most of us, we're just no going to be able to compare a quality seperates stereo setup with a receiver-based 7.1 configuration, never mind all the painstaking setup and fine tuning required along with it.

Also, if we're still talking about music and not movies, we should differentiate between concert recordings and studio recordings. Of course, there is extra value in the "concert experience" but is there the same value in a studio recording in 5.1 surround? This is not to say the studio recording can't be a phenominal recording, but we have to ask ourselves why a studio recording has to have ambiant or even full sound behind us. Maybe it should, I don't know, but we still have to ask ourselves that very question.

Now off to find my old LP player. Last I remember, the tonearm was held in place with a roachclip... 'hope it's still attached.

[DaHaq]

Who needs 5.1 surround when two Bose 901s will immaculately reproduce the concert hall environment?

[Woochifer]

Who needs 5.1 surround when two Bose 901s will immaculately reproduce the concert hall environment?

No thanks, I'd rather do without the "Mono Everywhere" sound!

[thepogue]

Kool in the Gang was pretty awsome in concert, and so was Zapp, Grandmaster Flash, and the elements known as Earth Wind and Fire (to borrow from a movie that really does need to be heard in surround sound...). I think I'm going to pull out my old LP's tonight and see if this 2.0 vs. 5.1 debate is really all that meaningful. I can tell you this, and maybe it's just pure psychology, but I enjoyed my crappy LP's and my Cassettes on a $50 JVC player so much more than I now enjoy my current all-digital-gazillion-buttons-hi-res system. Perhaps I'm just trying to capture that feeling again...

I think we're all loosing sight of the fact that to make a true comparison on the musical qualities of each format, we would have to spend about 2-5 times as much as we spent on the 2.0 system. The fact is that most of us might just barely be able to afford a pair $3K mono amps to squeeze just the right amount of performance out of our self-titled hi-fi stereo rigs, but if you were to ask us to do the same for a 5.1 or even 7.1 system, we'd balk at the extra cash outlay. For most of us, we're just no going to be able to compare a quality seperates stereo setup with a receiver-based 7.1 configuration, never mind all the painstaking setup and fine tuning required along with it.

Also, if we're still talking about music and not movies, we should differentiate between concert recordings and studio recordings. Of course, there is extra value in the "concert experience" but is there the same value in a studio recording in 5.1 surround? This is not to say the studio recording can't be a phenominal recording, but we have to ask ourselves why a studio recording has to have ambiant or even full sound behind us. Maybe it should, I don't know, but we still have to ask ourselves that very question.

Now off to find my old LP player. Last I remember, the tonearm was held in place with a roachclip... 'hope it's still attached.

now go pull that roachclip and let...boogie-nights...

Pogue

[shokhead]

Kool in the Gang was pretty awsome in concert, and so was Zapp, Grandmaster Flash, and the elements known as Earth Wind and Fire (to borrow from a movie that really does need to be heard in surround sound...). I think I'm going to pull out my old LP's tonight and see if this 2.0 vs. 5.1 debate is really all that meaningful. I can tell you this, and maybe it's just pure psychology, but I enjoyed my crappy LP's and my Cassettes on a $50 JVC player so much more than I now enjoy my current all-digital-gazillion-buttons-hi-res system. Perhaps I'm just trying to capture that feeling again...

I think we're all loosing sight of the fact that to make a true comparison on the musical qualities of each format, we would have to spend about 2-5 times as much as we spent on the 2.0 system. The fact is that most of us might just barely be able to afford a pair $3K mono amps to squeeze just the right amount of performance out of our self-titled hi-fi stereo rigs, but if you were to ask us to do the same for a 5.1 or even 7.1 system, we'd balk at the extra cash outlay. For most of us, we're just no going to be able to compare a quality seperates stereo setup with a receiver-based 7.1 configuration, never mind all the painstaking setup and fine tuning required along with it.

Also, if we're still talking about music and not movies, we should differentiate between concert recordings and studio recordings. Of course, there is extra value in the "concert experience" but is there the same value in a studio recording in 5.1 surround? This is not to say the studio recording can't be a phenominal recording, but we have to ask ourselves why a studio recording has to have ambiant or even full sound behind us. Maybe it should, I don't know, but we still have to ask ourselves that very question.

Now off to find my old LP player. Last I remember, the tonearm was held in place with a roachclip... 'hope it's still attached.

The roach?

[dontbhatin01]

I agree with just about everything sir terrance has said throughout this tread.With that being said, I think if everyone listened to a well mixed 5.1 album, then they would all think what the hell have I been waisting my time on this 2 channel borefest for.I dont care weather it's clasical, jazz, performance art , pop,rock what ever else there is. Multi channel has more potental, and is a hell of alot better in my book.

[Arturo7]

I saw Kool & the Gang this past August, they kicked butt! I was blown away.

Some pretty good arguments here for "state-of-the-art" 5.1. The center channel has merit. I'd love to hear some of the RCA stuff that was mentioned. I'm not sold on the rears, even if they are just putting out ambient, or "room sounds." I think my living room is going to sound like my living room no matter how many speakers are in it. Plus, I'm a bit of a less is more type.

So, as 2 channel fan am I, "stuck in the past?" Maybe. There was a helluva lot of great music recorded in the past. My very modest collection of LPs and CDs barely scratches the surface. I think I'd rather spend my money on building my catalog of these mostly 2 channel recordings than on extra speakers and amps for a very limited number of high quality 5.1.

Plus, what could 5.1 possibly offer for Glenn Gould's Bach recordings?

Art

[thepogue]

I agree with just about everything sir terrance has said throughout this tread.With that being said, I think if everyone listened to a well mixed 5.1 album, then they would all think what the hell have I been waisting my time on this 2 channel borefest for.I dont care weather it's clasical, jazz, performance art , pop,rock what ever else there is. Multi channel has more potental, and is a hell of alot better in my book.

The flip side of the coin...
I'd say that if someone listened to a correctly set-up two channel system (room treatments, synergy bla bla bla) of mid to higher end and used a MoFi Vinyl disk...you'd know why it's not at all a "waste of time" or a "borefest"...but an enjoyable art form worth pursuing!

Peace, Pogue

[topspeed]

The flip side of the coin...
I'd say that if someone listened to a correctly set-up two channel system (room treatments, synergy bla bla bla) of mid to higher end and used a MoFi Vinyl disk...you'd know why it's not at all a "waste of time" or a "borefest"...but an enjoyable art form worth pursuing!

Peace, Pogue

I have every intention of building a music room in my next house. This will be for a dedicated two channel system and drum sets for myself and the boys (or whatever instrument they want to play). I'm looking forward to building the system and have already started imagining what pieces I'd like. Hmmmm...ARC?...no, maybe BAT...no, no GCA250 w/ a BAT pre...YEAH, that's more like it!

Maybe building a two channel rig is like restoring an old car; it's simpler, there are less computers involved, and you go with what you know...you know? I can state uniquivocally that the finest rig I've heard was two channel, not multi. This is not to say multi won't be the future, it's just that the vast majority of software available isn't close to good yet. Eventually, the engineers will come to grips with it, just give 'em time.

BTW, Pogue:
Are you still collecting vinyl? An associate of mine is looking to unload about 1000lps he's collected. No, I don't know what they are but there's likely a helluva lotta jazz in there. PM if you're interested.

[thepogue]

Let me end by saying...I'm sure that all in all I'm holding on to the enjoyment of vinyl and two channel more for the joy then the thought of getting the best sound. Please don't hear me saying I think it's NOT the best...but dollar for dollar the furture is something other then simple stereo...but until then...you've got a PM!!!


Peace!!! Pogue

[nightflier]

The roach?

I found the record player in the garage. Still looks good, but the plastic tone-arm is busted. And the roach clip is nowhere to be found.

Back to 2.0 vs. 5.1, here's something that will bake your noodles. A couple of years ago I helped a guy in South county set up a (what I would consider) pretty expensive hi-fi setup. I hardly knew what SACD was back then and was still using ProLogic II in my TV room. But he was convinced SACD was "the future." But get this, folks, he only set up three speakers across the front; three identical Vandersteen speakers on their own monoblock amps. We also set up two subwoofers (some off-brand I don't remember) but I remember distinctly wondering why anyone would need two subs. And after it was all set up he was raving about the fact that you could be sitting anywhere in front of the speaker "array," as he liked to call it, and you would hardly notice the difference (kind of what Wooch was describing). He also tried to point out the sound-quality differences between his SACD's (he only had a few) and his older CD's, but I couldn't really tell, probably because I didn't know what to listen for.

I haven't talked to him since, so I'm sure he's added rear speakers by now (he had plenty of $ to burn), but the whole setup certainly seemed weird to me. Of course, this was someone who was convinced that SACD's were the last nail in the coffin for LP's...

[thepogue]

Of course, this was someone who was convinced that SACD's were the last nail in the coffin for LP's...

Please contact him....and please have him send all his vinyl to me @

thepogue
128 free vinyl dump Dr
LA LA Land Virginia


thanks and God Bless you one and all

Pogue