Have you converted your two-channel system to surround sound?

Have you converted your two-channel system to surround sound?
No! Two-channel forever!
36% (118 votes)
No, but added a separate video system to our house.
22% (70 votes)
Yes, we've added several speakers.
21% (69 votes)
Will wait for new surround audio formats to settle out.
14% (44 votes)
7% (23 votes)
Total votes: 324

With multichannel DVD-Audio and SACD promised and the increasing pressure to add high-quality 5.1 audio to video systems, has the number of channels in your listening room increased?

Andrew (Croatia)'s picture

When I want to hear high-quality 5.1 audio, I go to the cinema. (I don't want police at my doorstep!)

Bill Mcintyre's picture

Yes, I have converted. Quite honestly, my ears are loving it! The technology out there in the 5.1 mode is just crazy to pass up!

Eduardo Barberena's picture

Besides format and recording techniques issues, I am concerned about the cost involved in additional amplification and speakers. For the same budget, I will have to buy speakers and amps that are half the price. I don't think surround effects will make up for the lack of sound quality coming out of these inferior components.

Mike and Christine's picture

I love what my two-channel system does for me in terms of soundstaging and imaging so much that I will continue to listen to music this way until I have heard better. I do, however, enjoy good soundtracks; for example, The Green Mile.

Anand Kumar's picture

Receiver Yamaha RV1105 Boston Acoustics, 1xCR2,4xCR6 Subwoofer Paradigm 10

Brian Zwaagstra's picture

My five MartinLogans have increased my enjoyment of reproduced music. With appropriate surround settings, the envelope is so much more involving. For me, that IS what hi-fi is all about. When DVD-Audio/SACD gain full digital interconnects, I'll be the first one with my checkbook out.

john's picture

Yes, I have a surround system too. I actually listen to it once or twice a year. (I enjoy 2 channel for hours every day.)

Ted J.'s picture

Key word: Promised.

david a young's picture

as noted in my vote...i have separate systems. i sincerely believe for listening to music nothing is truer than 2 channel. so for me my dedicated "listening" room will always be 2 channel. as for the video system ...the market seems to dictate to us the public what is currently in. for eg not too long ago it was dolby pro-logic with 4 channels now of course its someting else with 6 speakers/channels and ofcourse this number of channels/speeakers can keep going up until ofcourse someone in the marketing side says "there is no more improvement to be gotten out adding any more speakers. I really believe you will always have your 2 camps (1) 2 channel/speaker and (2) multi-channel and expanding the surround channel/speaker camp these folks will use their choice to listen to music and watch movies on their surround channel/speaker system.

Timothy E.  Wasinger's picture

MIRAGE OM6S AS RECOMMENDED BY T.J.N. will be re-subscribing today.

Ned Wolfe's picture

At 62 years old, I may never be the beneficiary of surround-sound stereo, considering that the format first has to settle out before the labels start offering all the classical selections currently available on 2-channel. Besides, I still have my hands full optimizing my present system. My next move is upsampling and other goodies in the digital domain, which should keep me busy for another 5 to 10 years.

geno's picture

Mine's a hybrid. I'm using my regular stereo for the front and the rear channels of Dolby Pro Logic for the rear. No DTS or Digital Dolby yet.

Dan Brauser's picture

Actually, there is enough difference in overall objectives for me to create a separate home theater system apart from my high-end 2-channel audio system.

Dr.  Joseph Lee, Toronto's picture

I have two separate rooms in the basement:one purely two channelled audio, comprising of Krell KPS 25, Krell 650M amplifiers, dCS Purcell and Delius, with Grand Slamm speakers. But I am ready for multi-channel audio in my home theatre room, comprising of Pioneer DV-09, Meridian 861,5 Krell amplifiers and nine WATT/Puppy 5 speakers with two Velodyne HGS 18, Ampro 4600 and 10 feet wide Stewart screen. The sound from DVD such as Eagles's Hell Freezes Over (DTS), 3 Tenors In Concert, Bee Gees's One Night Only (DTS) are glorious, just to name a few. I am waiting for the dust to settle before adding DVD-Audio with upgrading Meridian 861 to MLP. I have not heard any multi-channel 24/96 CDs yet. I am also going to wait. From what I can hear from DVD-video, the future of multi-channel's future is very bright (if recording done properly).

Jason's picture

It's tough enough to get two channels right, plus I don't have enough money to satisfy my two-channel desires, and five+ channels will only make it worse.

John Butler's picture

I'm using my Arcam 10 and 10p for stereo and to drive the main Castle Harlech speakers. I'm using a Yamaha processor and a Castle Keep Centre speaker. I've also hooked up a Pioneer 626d DVD player and the picture quality on a Panasonic 28" widescreen TV is excellent. The sound (with a Tsunami Sub woofer) is also great. And I still can use the Arcam/Castler system for stereo

Haim Ronen's picture

I just listen to music. A pair of speakers is plenty for a pair of ears.

Marcus (Sweden)'s picture

No tham surround shit

PEte's picture

The new pissing contest is now affordable enough to join. I didn't do it with Beta/VHS and refuse to with this war.

Mats Hanson's picture

Multi channel stinks

Wanlop Suthipichet's picture

I love music. All things since CD start, make us to buy old music in new media. I still use my turntable and very happy with LP. More channel is only MEDIA-CHANGING games which not better sound.

Kurt Christie's picture

Audio audio is one thing, video audio is another. For audiophiles, how can the twain meet? One strives for audio perfection, the other for video complementation.