Do you want surround-sound in your audio system?

Do you want surround-sound in your audio system?
I want it now!
12% (35 votes)
Sounds like a good idea
14% (40 votes)
I'll wait and see
30% (89 votes)
Not so interested
28% (84 votes)
16% (47 votes)
Total votes: 295

With the proposed DVD-Audio format comes the opportunity for multiple channels of high-quality sound. But would you even consider adding more speakers to your two-channel system?

John Farrar's picture

Properly set-up stereo should be sufficient to create accurate sound-staging and depth. Any thing more is just gimmickery.

Dr.  Lars Bo Henriksen's picture

Come on.....

T's picture

More speakers to a two-channel system sounds useless to me. Maybe more channels too. Bad joke. Sorry!

Joe Hartmann's picture

To this point the only surround I have heard has been too loud speical effects for movies in shops. If this media can enhance my enjoyment of music or make room effects less difficult to deal with then maybe I will be willing to invest the money required.

Thad Aerts's picture

The only benefit I see to this is that it would create some weird acid trip affect only useful when listening to electronic music. Realisticlly, how many times do you go to see a band and find yourself sitting in the middle if the band. This is what having "surround sound" would create. I think this is more or less a marketing ploy for the big guns to rake in more cash.

Sam Tellig's picture

Adding more is almost never the way to enhance quality. Do color movies really look better than black and white? Is stereo all that much better than mono? In America, especially, products have the tendency to become more and more grotesque. Two channels are more than enough. I have only two channels in my video---oops, home theater---system.

tim's picture

Only two ears - you cannot mix music in a studio properly for more than two ears. Stereo rules

steph's picture

If the system is set up properly, all you really need is 2 channels.

Louie Jones's picture

2 ears = 2 speakers

Javier Ortiz, Seattle's picture

I have heard a lot about multichannel systems in various magazines, plus I had an opportunity to hear the high-end Meridian system. All in all, I was very impressed with the demo. The whole idea sounds very intriguing to me. The hardware investment, however, does seem way out of my price range. I guess I'll wait and see if the prices come down.

Bruce Gaddey's picture

I all ready own 5 matching high end speakers.

Louis Peeler's picture

With such a small percentage of current new CD's that are actually great recordings/productions, it is with great hesitation that I court enthusiasm for a new 5 channel "fix" for better and more lifelike sound.

Preston Fairley's picture

Money (and space!) are the only limiting factors in this decision. What can be problematic with adding three more channels? Just route the LF/RF outputs from your Surround Processor to the AUX inputs on your (two channel) preamp. Listen to two channel as you normally would and, with the simple flick of the input-selector switch, listen to multi-channel recordings (which, hopefully, will sound much better).

Chris's picture

Having heard some of the DTS music CD's already available, Multi-channel audio is a promising new technology.

jorge velarde's picture

For the moment I will have a high-end two channel system for music and a separate sound surround for video. If a proven format eventually comes that can clearly improves the two channel system for music I may consider it.

Doug Burkett's picture

Actually my vote is closer to 'never' than 'not so interested'. I would have to hear a pretty convincing demo, then be just as convinced that I could get it to sound as good in my room. And multi-channel sound seems to offer more opportunities for recording errors by incompetent and careless producers. There seem to be very few labels that get it ALL right on the same recording.

Rick Torres's picture

I'll stick with records thank you.

Tom Selnau's picture

I listen through Pro-Logic on some disks now. I do like source direct on some selections (mostly acoustic recordings).

Chris Chenoweth's picture

Never say never, right? But all the systems I have heard with more than two channels (for music reproduction as opposed to home theater purposes) have just sounded confusing. Stick with stereo.

Alan's picture

I actually look forward to the day I can afford to upgrade my two-channel system to 5.1. The biggest down side is obviously the expense, but the up side is the potential for this latest mode of playback for both movies and music. I'm not ordinarily a whistles-and-bells sort of guy, but the fact is, high-end audio needs to remain on a forward track. If the beginning of a new technology doesn't float the audiophile boat, don't snub it! Perfect it! Let's face it, too many audiophiles spend far too much time looking to old technology to transport them to their sonic shangri-la. If we continue to ignore what's new and promising, we're gonna get left behind.

Lawrence's picture

human only get 2 ear how can you drive 5 car at the same time ???

Al Marcy's picture

You guys talk as if mono is dead . . .

Will's picture

First of all, the cost of more channels is prohibitive to most of us. I can't even fathom what I would have to do in terms of speaker placement. And the room required would be huge if we tried to get the same sound quality out of all the channels but I'm still open to see how it turns out. I guess I'm not against the idea as long as it's done well and I see it being very difficult to do it well.

DJG from Cali's picture

I have enough difficulty optimizing a two-speaker setup. Four speakers would be exponentially more difficult. Poorer sound quality is, therefore, the likely result (in my case).

Charles Purvis Kelly, Jr.(DC)'s picture

While all the dust clears on the DVD format in general in addition to the proposed DVD-Audio on the horizon, I think that the third option like a good idea. ("I'll wait and see").

Tim Hart's picture

It would be a tough call to have to spend more money on speakers to get a little more from a recording. The only info that seems to lacking from 2 channel recordings might be some of the rear room acoustics from the the venue that it was re- corded in(and obviously, this only pertains to live recordings) so I would have to have a good reason for wanting that extra bit. I would hope that 96khz, 24 bit recordings would add more of that type of info, along with other sonic benifits, without the added cost of more speakers and different amplifiers. Obviously, home theater enthusiasts would have a different take on this, but us 2 channel people may not bite so readily.

Karl Richichi U.T.  Media's picture

After hearing it 5.1 DTS Sound is the only way to go now..

Marc Phillips's picture

Speaker placement is difficult enough with two speakers! I think dealing with five would definitely push me over the edge!

Steve Dudley's picture

Wife says "NO!"

Alex Chiu's picture

I've already heard the new 96kHz "sound" on a pioneer DVD player, and it's absolutely incredible. There's an audible difference between the 96k signal and the Denon AVR 5600's internal DACs. The difference is both audible and remarkable. I can hardly wait to hear the newly proposed high-resolution-audio DVDs on a separates-based system.