Quote Originally Posted by E-Stat
Agreed. For qualitative determinations, I avoid studio recordings for that very reason. Having said that, I regularly enjoy listening to a wide range of multi-tracked music.
Man!! Your sure are missing alot of music. Just because we have to pan instruments into position doesn't mean its bad! LOL


If the live venue has such an arrangement, then I would agree you would need a multi-channel system in order to accurately reproduce it. I have yet to encounter such, however, in thirty years of concert attendance. I'll go with the 95% solution.
I guess you don't listen to many requiems. Almost all of them require antiphonal parts whether in the brass or chorus. The last two concerts I attended freatured the Berlioz and Mozart requiem complete with perfect placed antiphonal parts. I guess I have had more opportunities to hear these kinds of things than you have.


Independent of technology or preconceived notions, there are unavoidable economic concerns that come into play when you compare two channel to multi-channel. I have heard very good MC and it does some things very well. For a given (non-astronomical) budget, you must necessarily compromise the quality of the individual components in a MC based system. The question then boils down to performance compromises and individual preferences.

I do enjoy my 5.1 HT system, but not for music.

rw
My system does well on both. I planned it that way. I do not believe you have to make a compromise on either music or movies just to put together a system that does both well. And it doesn't have to be as expensive as many of you seem to think.