Vote

I'm waiting for a good, affordable all-formats disc player. Then I'll think about the preamp.

My system, although modest, is set up for the maximum price-to-perfomnce ratio. Part of that ratio is efficiency. One more back box, several more cables and another power cord to me, is just NOT efficient. I would much rather have a set of analog pass thoughs for an SACD than a dedicated preamp for it. The SACD format just doesn't have the available softwear. I would be happier w/my old vinyl records. Besides primacy in learning dictates that I would more than likely be happier w/them.

I can't have all those speakers in my room.

Three problems persist. First, at issue is the quality of the software. Engineers have yet to provide a soundstage that infuses multichannel with the realism of two-channel live music. In a stroke of brilliance, an engineer would have to land on THE mix that convinces the listener it's preferable to sit "unnaturally" in between the musicians. Second, at issue is the cost of building an audiophile multichannel system. It's prohibitive. Enough said. Third, at issue is the raidly changing landscape of the "front-end." The digital landscape changes daily. The risks associated with replacing an existing system with a new audiophile format that may not last is completely prhobitive to a rational individual. My surmise is that multichannel will be relegated to an audiophile's "B-system" at best.

So I have to throw away my top notch two channel pre amp, power amp, and speakers in exchage for mid-fi multi channel? I don't think so.

Why would I want multichannel audio? When was the last time you went to a concert and sat there surrounded by the band or orchestra on all sides? If you like that sort of imaging, just get headphones. Actually, I take it back—good headphones image more naturally than 5.1 or 6 channel audio. Seriously, there's just no need for more channels unless you either A) want it to sound like you're being surrounded by a mob of musicians, or B) want almost all of each channel except the front two or three to go unused. You'll always get far superior results by accomodating a stereo signal to your own environment, regardless of how many speakers you want to use, than by relying on a studio mixer's lowest-common-denominator guesses of how 5.1 or 6 channels are going to be placed. Seriously, I see no benefit to more than 2 audio channels. Sound quality would be far better improved to devoting all that space on DVDs or SACDs to increasing bit rate and frequency range for two channels, or maybe two channels and a dedicated sub channel, than in all this useless surround gimmickry.

I'm just a two-channel kind of guy!

It is almost impossible to get two channels to work in my house, multichannel is not an option.

Yes, indeed! Stereophile has given the Sony TA-P9000ES a Class A rating—six channels for only $700 ($600 at Crutchfield)! At that price, it's even worth using as a two channel preamp. But it's a "provisional" rating—what does that mean? I'd sure like to know.

Investment, complextiy, home environment, preference

I'm quite happy to stick to 2-channel, thanks.

It's nice to see the market offering these products for audiophiles who have the desire to use them. I can barely afford to feed $$$ to the two channels that I have right now—let alone five or more discrete channels. So I'll stick with the "bang for the buck" two-channel setup, for now. Later when multichannel recording mixes have matured to the point we enjoy with two-channel today, I'll probably buy a mutlichannel analog preamp then, used. So yes, I'm interested, but not at this time. Though I hope they sell a million. That way when I'm ready to adopt, I can buy a used one from one of you guys at a discounted price! Buy, Buy, buy!

Perhaps I'm being a bit too simplistic about multichannel, but I only have two ears

An agreement was announced recently for FireWire digital stream for multichannel audio/video. So now there is no need for analog multichannel anymore.

I still prefer quality of sound from two loudspeakers than less quality from 1000 speakers

I only foresee adding a preamp to my stereo receiver for the purposes of DVD surround; I may eventually want a preamp that also does multi-channel analog, but I think my sound system will always be hooked up to my TV.

I am curently using a multichannel a/v reciver from technics with built in dsp and a quad decoder for my old 4 channel lp's I would like to see a pre amp with as many options for suround processing

With a limited budget I need multipurpose equipment.

No way. I will purchase more music (on vinyl) and better two-channel components instead. Good two-channel music and a good two-channel system actually do manage to make me both sad and happy. Just as live music can.

I want high end sound. I cannot afford high-end and multichannel. Neither do I have a room big enough for all the speakers

Until the format wars are over, and I can figure out how to afford a multichannel system, I'll pass. I will scan the reviews to keep an eye on how things are going, but a purchase for me is a long way off. I have spent over 30 years getting my sysem to it's present point, and still have improvements in mind. So until I finish my two channel system, will that EVER happen, or I win the lottery, multichannel is out for me.

LOOKING FOR A LOW COST HIGH-END PRODUCT UNDER $3000.00 IS THE SUCH A THING YET?

too many speekers cables and amps needed for multichannel sound. Two channel audio sounds good enough for me.

Home theatre is a small part of my hi end, two channel system. While I feel two channel is superior, I still have a love for movies and enjoy my hi end theater as well. This type of preamp will never replace my 2 channel preamp but I do have a separate shelf for one.

I am looking forvard new "totally digital" technology to start with high resolution audio formats in multichannel. The main reasons are the costs (of couse:) and attempt to avoid some "state of the art" improvements in the recent analogue devices that are pretty arguable (IMHO).

From what I have heard with my own ears so far, it is my view that multichannel, in whatever form, is a complete waste of time (for right now, anyway). Ninety percent of the multichannel mixes that I have heard sound gimmicky at best and do not present a more "real" musical experience to me than good quality two channel. The few multichannel mixes that I have heard on SACD and DVD-A that do sound pretty resolute are fairly impressive but again, they don't really give us any better quality than a well recorded JVC XRCD or a Reference Recording HDCD and that tells me that if SACD and DVD-A can't supply audiophiles with much more than we already have with good cd DAC's and quality CD upsampling, Why are we wasting our time pondering these formats? I wish that SACD and DVD-A would either get their shit together, or just go the hell away.

I allready have enough dough tied up in two-channel. Surround demands twice as many speakers plus a sub, plus double the speaker cables and related accessories. Forget it!

Listening to the sound of any instrument coming from beside me or behind me interests me not at all. I want the listening pleasure I get when I'm seated in the audience, not the chaos I might experience sitting in the middle of the band on stage. If someone gave me a multichannel preamp, I would likely shoot it.