Vote

Anything by Jimi Hendrix!

I've yet to hear an example of a surround system sounding competitive to a similarly priced two channel system.

Surround sound is Quadrophonic sound reincarnated. The finest listening moments occur with a QUALITY two channel system. When such a system is put together, taking into account the choice of electronics and front end, listening room acoustics and speaker positioning, one is "surrounded" with the sound of sweet music -- not 5.1 channels of noise.

I ain't got no room for 6six speakers and, most importantly, no $$$ to upgrade my stuff.

Multichannel has nothing to do with serious high end audio.

Nothing captures the ambience of a performance better than surround sound does. Be it in the concert hall, recording studio, you name it, the surround channels could naturally reproduce the reverb and other acoustic properties of the place. Also, the applause in live performances would sound more natural when heard from AROUND you rather than in front of you (as is the case in a two-channel mix). But, of course, I would HATE hearing instruments actually played BEHIND ME . . . . Surround should not be over-used.

Get back to the psychedelic era. Maybe the Chambers Brothers "Time Has Come Today" would be good, or anything with that swimming drug-induced mix would be perfect for multi channel audio. As for the great stereo recordings leave them ALONE!

Any live jazz performance. Almost all the best jazz recordings are recorded live in intimate clubs, where performers hit a groove with the audience that takes them to greater heights of improvisation. This type of music lends itself to multichannel reproduction more than any other genre. I would like to be part of the audience in those clubs, including venue acoustics and audience sounds. There is not the same level of audience feedback influence in live classical performances, although many audiophiles may also appreciate the in-hall experience that would come with good surround ambience. Pop/rock music has the opportunity to develop a new level of artistry at the engineering level through inventive panning of performers/sounds reminiscent of the ping-pong effects of early stereo. While these won't appeal to me, that's just my personal bias. I'm sure there will be music lovers who will appreciate such efforts.

Who Cares?

Anything by either the Lawrence Welk Orchestra or Tupac Shakur in surround sound would be bitchin'.

I'll wait untill recording engineers have perfected technics in recording multichannel.

Rap music seems like the perfect fit for surround sound. Turn up the volume and chill! I can't wait! What will the marketers think of next? I have an idea! Why not make really great recordings using the existing formats? Oops, my fault... then we couldn't sell any more new superfluous hardware to the gullible masses... what was I thinking?

I think anything by Pink Floyd would sound great in a multichannel format. Especially with some mind enhancers!

Malher's Eighth Symphony. I have never heard this work in any format that was able to capture the music without over load. I have not heard the music live, unfortunately. Next for me would be Beethoven's string quartets, because I know the music so well live that I can judge the success of the format.

Why ask which ones should be released? I would like them to release all the current CDs so everyone could pick which ones they want.

The idea of setting up surround sound properly tires me. The speakers, the cables, the amps ugh. I've worked hard to get my two channel setup where it is and I enjoy it immensely. I'm just going to enjoy what I have for a long time and not worry about what I don't have.

Pink Floyd- Dark Side of The Moon

Homer & Jethro's "Coll Crazy Christmas" -- a timeless, and nearly impossible to locate classic. Oh, and the soundtrack of "The Adventures of Buckaroo Banzai Across the Eighth Dimension" soon to be re-released on video.

Pink Floyd's DARK SIDE OF THE MOON has got to be a candidate for a DVD-A/SACD surround release.If done right . . . this could be a great listening experience!

Classical. Live jazz. Live Blues. No PA systems!

Live performances, any type of music.

CELINE DION....JUST KIDDING HOW ABOUT DARK SIDE OF THE MOON PINK FLOYD. ACTUALLY ANY PINK FLOYD WOULD HAVE TO BE A SURROUND SOUND EXPERIENCE. ALSO MAYBE SOME OF THE OLD MOODY BLUES, YES, KING CRIMSON OR EVEN BUCK OWENS...KIDDING AGAIN

Todd Rundgren A WIZARD, A TRUE STAR -- simply because the album is a wonderful trip.

Surround is for movies! At a live performance, the only time I am surrounded by the music is when I am in the choir. Otherwise the sound is coming from in front of me with room reflections from the other directions. Just like I get at home with 2 channel audio.

I would only be interested in surround sound if the surround channals are used for ambience extraction. I have no desire to hear a Sax or any other instrument coming from the side or rear of my listening room. When you go somewhere and listen to music being performed live, the band (musicians) are in front of you. Placing instruments any where else defeats the purpose of reproduction with a high degree of fidelity to the original. Reproduction with a high degree of fidelity is what this hobby (obsession) is all about.

Pink Floyd

not made for small or average size rooms.An awesome two channel set-up will give an illusion of three channels but with more air and space but will also have weight like three channels.

Good music. I don't care what the genre is, as long as it's good.

Boston's debut album would sound AWESOME in 5.1 channel surround. Bring it on!

THE PINES OF ROME's final movement with the antiphonal brass could be really dramatic.