Building a multichannel system. Where and how to spend.

[mkt]

I think the usual problem with multichannel is the exponential increase in price. A good pair of speakers, an amp and preamp and even a subwoofer can get you an incredible sound for a not so massive price. But keeping that quality for multi increases the cost exponentially. Add on top that the electronics for multichannel can and should get better, so even higher cost.

EQ for multichannel has an extra degree of complexity due to amount of sources...

Still, I think Amir and many other people around here are doing the AudioGods work by pushing for better standards, better speakers and more excellence in engineering. Sure, ASR may be far from the largest bullhorn, but it is not a whisper either.

I think you meant a linear increase in price.

 

[birdog1960]

Well, not exactly for the author of this video.
Also one of the comment is interesting:

"The problem with Front Wides is the fact that they even exist in the first place just shows that most people don't actually know how to setup their own home theaters properly. Everyone sets their Front L and R speakers literally on the left and right sides of their TV. You're actually supposed to be setting them to the left and right sides of YOUR LISTENING AREA -- to be even more specific, right outside the left and right sides of the seating area itself. This is how you create a proper soundstage. It's always supposed to be wider and larger than your field of vision. When you place the L and R speakers right up to the sides of your TV, they are effectively just serving as center speakers because they're still in the middle of your auditory sensory field. Think about it: your headphone and earbud L and R speakers don't sit in front of your eyes shooting sound at you from the front, do they? No, they literally go the absolute left- and rightmost positions they can over your ears which gives you a perfect soundstage. So why would you place your freestanding speakers in front of your eyes? If you can see them along with your TV screen in your FOV without moving your head, the placement is wrong! They should only be visible in your peripheral vision if at all. I'd even argue they should be further spread out if you have the room to be completely outside your peripheral vision, all the way to the left and right of the room itself if you can. If people would just set up their speakers properly, there'd be no need for Front Wide speakers at all. So why doesn't the audio industry educate people better on how to properly set up their speakers? Because they make more money selling you more receivers and speakers, of course! That's why every promotional picture you ever see of a home theater setup has the L and R speakers right beside the TV. Because now you think you're supposed to set them up that way and then you feel the need to buy Front Wides when you realize your soundstage is too small and now you feel special as join the audio elite by buying even more expensive receivers that can handle Front Wides and a couple of more speakers. If you still really feel the need for Front Wides, here's a great and relatively inexpensive (well, inexpensive in comparison to buying a new A/V receiver and another pair of speakers to serve as Front Wides) little hack that you can use which is what I do: just use bipolar surround speakers as your front L and R speakers and angle them inwards towards the listening area! Not only is the Front Wide area now covered by the soundstage, you'll always have sound in that area and you won't have to jump through the A/VR settings hoops Ealan showed us in this video."

I discovered this by necessity and trial and error. One side of my tv is close to a gas fireplace. With that limitation I moved around the front speakers to what sounded best and ended up exactly as described, lined up with the edges of the seating area. Empirically, I agree with above.

 

[JoachimStrobel]

Well, please do not get me emotionally wrong here and with all respect: That is precisely the wrong way.
As Stereo is an underdetermined system, it requires huge investments to make it (apparently) sound right. And as each change of equipment changes the sound somehow (as in underdetermined) people believe in it. I hope we agree that expensive turntables and pickup systems are a nostalgia thing. Likewise, expensive CD players too are beaten by high-res streaming. The same is true for Stereo.
Distributing the sound reproduction burden onto several speakers eases the fidelity requirement for each. Amps can have lower power ratings as you have many. The issue is more the cabling and the problems attached with multiple connectors which cries for an AVR. And yes, stuff like Mch-Dirac is the new standard.
I believe that esthetically nothing beats two speaker, a turntable and an Amp with VU-meters. That is like a BMW 6 cylinder. Or a steam engine. Good if you can afford it, but less money buys you more.

 

[Vacceo]

Well, please do not get me emotionally wrong here and with all respect: That is precisely the wrong way.
As Stereo is an underdetermined system, it requires huge investments to make it (apparently) sound right. And as each change of equipment changes the sound somehow (as in underdetermined) people believe in it. I hope we agree that expensive turntables and pickup systems are a nostalgia thing. Likewise, expensive CD players too are beaten by high-res streaming. The same is true for Stereo.
Distributing the sound reproduction burden onto several speakers eases the fidelity requirement for each. Amps can have lower power ratings as you have many. The issue is more the cabling and the problems attached with multiple connectors which cries for an AVR. And yes, stuff like Mch-Dirac is the new standard.
I believe that esthetically nothing beats two speaker, a turntable and an Amp with VU-meters. That is like a BMW 6 cylinder. Or a steam engine. Good if you can afford it, but less money buys you more.

So you argue that diminishing returns with multichannel are steeper than with stereo.

I find interesting to consider, though, if better speakers facilitate an easier EQ of the whole set.

 

[mkt]

Well, please do not get me emotionally wrong here and with all respect: That is precisely the wrong way.
As Stereo is an underdetermined system, it requires huge investments to make it (apparently) sound right. And as each change of equipment changes the sound somehow (as in underdetermined) people believe in it. I hope we agree that expensive turntables and pickup systems are a nostalgia thing. Likewise, expensive CD players too are beaten by high-res streaming. The same is true for Stereo.
Distributing the sound reproduction burden onto several speakers eases the fidelity requirement for each. Amps can have lower power ratings as you have many. The issue is more the cabling and the problems attached with multiple connectors which cries for an AVR. And yes, stuff like Mch-Dirac is the new standard.
I believe that esthetically nothing beats two speaker, a turntable and an Amp with VU-meters. That is like a BMW 6 cylinder. Or a steam engine. Good if you can afford it, but less money buys you more.

If you agree that listening in mono makes it easier to notice differences in speakers, and there is evidence for this, it seems a short step to imagine that more channels makes it harder to notice differences.

In Appreciation of Mono Listening

For the past week, I have been comparing some speakers in my living room. Set up is quite simple - I have two Chromecast Audio (CCA) devices each feeding a separate integrated amplifier. The CCA's are grouped and each play the same music from Spotify. I mute-unmute the amplifiers to switch...

www.audiosciencereview.com

 

[birdog1960]

Well, please do not get me emotionally wrong here and with all respect: That is precisely the wrong way.
As Stereo is an underdetermined system, it requires huge investments to make it (apparently) sound right. And as each change of equipment changes the sound somehow (as in underdetermined) people believe in it. I hope we agree that expensive turntables and pickup systems are a nostalgia thing. Likewise, expensive CD players too are beaten by high-res streaming. The same is true for Stereo.
Distributing the sound reproduction burden onto several speakers eases the fidelity requirement for each. Amps can have lower power ratings as you have many. The issue is more the cabling and the problems attached with multiple connectors which cries for an AVR. And yes, stuff like Mch-Dirac is the new standard.
I believe that esthetically nothing beats two speaker, a turntable and an Amp with VU-meters. That is like a BMW 6 cylinder. Or a steam engine. Good if you can afford it, but less money buys you more.

I would suggest that many reasonably priced components for multi channel currently act like British sports cars; underperforming and unreliable. Perhaps if the manufacturers concentrated on a fewer channels, the products could be higher quality at similar price point. But I'm a relative luddite and am interested in others takes here.