Relative importance of differences in stereo systems

[Allan F]

9 hours ago, STC said:

Only audiophiles facing this problem of getting the sound correct. Not one videophiles would argue that 50s black and white or the 70s color TV was closer to reality compared to the current 8K format. 

 

To those with proper 5.1 setup knows that stereo sound can never  achieve the realism of the former and yet they steadfastly remain loyal to the stereo format. I have lost count of the number of times reviewers telling that with certain equipment they felt like being there in a live performance and yet this search continues.

 

It is not difficult to know where the weak link is but we have evolved to accept stereo sound itself as unique and forms its own flavour which somewhat similar to lover of vintage sports cars. That is, both are inferior compared current standards but they still appeal to some.

 

It is no longer about speakers or electronics. 

 

 

 

 

For a many people, multi-channel is a non-starter because of the space and equipment requirements. While a well set up multi-channel system for music will outperform an equivalent stereo one, that seldom apples to the typical multi-channel home audio video system.

[Allan F]

57 minutes ago, STC said:

It could be true where you live but over here, almost all the audiophiles do have a decent HT system and yet I have not seen any of them attempted to spend a fraction of the time they had spent on their stereo system to improve the HT for music listening.

 

That's my point. The typical HT system seldom has the same degree of investment and optimization devoted to an audiophile stereo system. I am not saying that a multi-channel HT system cannot perform better that a stereo system. It most certainly can. But, in practice, most multi-channel HT systems are not set up to do so. Rather, as entertainment systems, they are more frequently devoted to movies and TV, where sound effects are typically more important than sound quality.

[Allan F]

45 minutes ago, STC said:

 Another weak excuse is space. In the top range audiophile setups, the diffusers, bass trap, reflector take up far more space than the tiny surround speakers in comparisons. Kal is right. It is a psychological resistance.

 

No it isn't a weak excuse. in my apartment living room setup, I don't have bass traps or other room treatments that take up appreciable space. Nor do I have any convenient locations for additional amplifiers and surround speakers, let alone places to run the wires to connect the latter. In any case, I don't see any point in arguing about whether cost and/or space are excuses or realistic practical constraints. I am not knocking multi-channel, but perhaps you and Kal are getting somewhat carried away in your proselytizing for it in making such statements.