|
Audio Asylum Thread Printer Get a view of an entire thread on one page |
For Sale Ads |
In Reply to: 2 new stereo players coming. posted by Duilawyer on April 07, 2004 at 17:45:08:
I dig 2 channel only as well but I realize that theres no inherent superiority in using a 2 ch player vs a MCH one.1) if you're thinking that 2 ch only players are better componentwise *at a given price point*, it is not so...these players are produced in much lower #s compared to MCH...what happens is that the economy of scale makes the 2 ch players *exponentially* more expensive...make 1 of anything and it will cost you a billion $/ea, make a billion and it will cost you 1$/ea as the costs shift from labor rates to raw materials and equipment rates (much cheaper indeed).
2) if you're thinking that 2ch have better implementation, it is not so...R&D goes into components that sell, i.e., MCH, the 2ch components are derived from the MCH, not the other way around you dont replicate R&D work....
3) the video circuitry is no more or less "polluting" in 2ch vs MCH...today circuit isolation, crosstalk reduction and on the fly defeatable video circuitry makes the issue irrelevant if you go ahead and listen...
4) Ive come to realize that MCH aint bad in and of itself...however the mixing and recording engineer make it or break it (break is the norm curenttly, but well done is a treat)...some MCH tracks Ive heard benefited greatly from a sound quality perspective compare to 2ch...specific titles require MCH for optimal playback IMO. Get 2ch only and you're stuck with that if you ever decide to change your mind, or if you're in MCH mood...
Technically speaking, you're better off getting a MCH player...now a universal may have some compromises...and thats where you should think about simplifying your setup and optimizing component performance/cost...the sonic attributes of DVD-A, its superior processing flexibility, the robust developement of PCM based equipment, and additional video content makes it a no-brainer IMO...competing formats, including SACD, have none of it as you very well know.
Follow Ups:
One, there is not a video defeat in either of the players.Two-I own multichannel, and multtihannel players, one universal, one SACD only. But for my "upstairs" where I do the serious listening, stereo only, please. M\C is fun, and gimmicky, but for the REAL serious listening, stereo it is. Besides, I cannot afford another set of Maggies, and a MacIntosh 252, Cary pre.
my best gear is on the 2 channel rig..just certain tracks and albums in MCH after a few non-systematic comparisons..made me go..hmmm..I miss that bit of the "enveloping sound"...other times when I hear a snare right behind my head thats when i know the recording eng's still have a long way to go...but some are catching on and very well too...its the ART of recording in MCH, they certainly dont lack the techniques, or gear...
tonight and she was floored. "Riders on the STorm". Talk about M\C!
Well, many tracks on Goodwin "swingin for the..", at times are quite involvingEric clapton 2001 Tour "one more car.."
and in spite of a few not so good reviews on this board:
Beethoven symp. 9 Abbado, Deutsche Gram....
The Eric Clapton is extremely well made in MCH (in fact sounds better than 2ch period)
.
This post is made possible by the generous support of people like you and our sponsors: