<I>Stereophile</I> has put its toe in the multichannel waters with Kal Rubinson's <A HREF="http://www.stereophile.com/musicintheround">Music in the Round</A>" column and periodic industry updates. But should the magazine be doing even more in this area?
COMMENTS
There is so little interest (as far as music goes) in multichannel today, why not put your efforts in more reviews of standard two-channel (affordable) equipment and music CDs? What are you going to ask us next, whether you should change the magazine's name to Multiphile?
I'd like to see lots of reviews of high-rez and multichannel recordings, first to reward ones that advance the art, but especially to pillory those that are merely format-conversions masquerading as high-rez. With this feedback, we can have (a little) more influence on industry's behavior.
I have heard only two multichannel recordings that were mixed right. Even so they did not sound superior in any way to good two-channel set ups. Until the recording industry gets past its tendancy towards mediocrity, it does not merit any attention in the audio world. Leave the reviews of quality multichannel sytems to UAV.
Yes, some people will always want to have the latest and greatest equipment. And, they need some space in Stereophile. But I would think your predominant readership is the two-channel market. A preponderance of our source material is two channel. Speaking for myself, I'm not moving in the multichannel direction for the forseable future.
I like the idea of multichannel but is it pratical. In an ideal world a few years ago sony ect would have said all albums we release will be dual layer sacd's and that [when you look at the catloge rights sony alone have] would probaly been the end of the format wars. But we dont live in an ideal world, there are not enough sacd pressing plants or for that matter recording studios equiped to master 2 channel sacd/dvd-audio let alone multichannel to make production on that scale possible, add to that the cost in amps and speakers and it will be 5 or 10 years before I can think of buying into a highend multichannel setup. ps thats if sacd or dvd-audio survives.
Yes, more! This is the future. There are so many issues that we have just barely begun to address, especially all the questions of just what the multichannel array should be: center channel? side channels? rear side channels? rear center channels? ceiling channels? It would also be good to address how the sound should be assigned to them once we've figured out where to put them.
It is good to know about innovations in multichannel because so many audio products are evolving in that direction, but I am put off by the complexity and home theatre-like associations. My interests lie in the relative purity of two channel audio.
The further you go into multichannel, the closer I get to not renewing the subscription. I don't mean this in a cranky way like some of the whiners, but I have next to no interest in multi-channel, and therefore, my interest in this magazine would fade.
Good Lord, you already have an entire column devoted to multichannel nonsense. That should suffice. Most multichannel set-ups I have seen are optimized for home theater and sound muddy when playing music alone. I know someone who spent enough to buy quite a nice car on his HT rig, and then had it THX certified. His rig might do both well. Optimizing for music is toughyou want to get the speakers, including the rear and side speakers, away from the walls to preserve the sense of air and space. Few listening rooms meet this basic criteria. Then there is all the crap which sits between the source and the power amp. Hard to be minimalist in HT. The compromises continue. . . I think I will stick with two channels for now.
| Loudspeakers Amplification Digital Sources |  |
Analog Sources Accessories Featured | |
Music Columns Retired Columns | |
Show Reports | |
Features Latest News Community | |
Resources Subscriptions |
© 2024 Stereophile
