I believe Dolby Atmos, while offering the potential for an even more immersive surround experience (subject to the source material’s degree of use of height channels), with its emphasis on 7, 9 or 11 speakers plus sub, has helped distance some people who may have been in the middle ground of music and AV, to put them off entirely, particularly when even 2-channel seems to be going in the direction of lifestyle products that visually disappear into a room. And behind many a budding AV enthusiast is often a significant other who needs considerable convincing to have anything more that a soundbar making its presence felt visually. So I can understand the appeal of a minimalist 2-channel system, and indeed if the choice is ONLY between that and a soundbar, then go for it!
Certainly a 2-channel, one-box set-up would have been a great deal easier than what I’ve had to go through having moved house recently: installing wall-mounted surrounds, feeding speaker wires and long HDMI cable to the PJ, ceiling mounting etc etc and the rats nest of cables behind the AV rack: just plugging in all my speaker cables, sub cable, 12V trigger and interconnects took a fair bit of time.
But as appealing as it is to simplify and go back to 2-channel for music and AV (as I had a very punchy adept stereo system doing both in the past), my argument for doing so evaporates every time I fire up a DTS-MA Bluray and experience a movie or something like Hans Zimmer Live in Prague on my 5.1 system. It‘s just awesome.
it even makes average movies awesome. I saw the Lego Movie 2 the other day. Average movie that made me chuckle a few times, but the surround mix was just jaw-dropping, in a way that a 2-channel system just can’t get close to IMO. Even a less bang-crashy movie like The Walk was just far more satisfying with decent surround capability. I was feeling truly vertiginous when Petit stepped out from the twin-towers, because there was such a sense of space.
it’s just SO much better than stereo for movies, that for me it’s worth the effort. And as a real music fan, my itch is very satisfyingly scratched by my beloved Anthem amp, which is more adept at 2-channel than my old stereo amp, and more adept at multi-channel than my old Pioneer AV receiver. People who say AVR’s don’t do music have clearly never heard an Anthem on full song. And I’m sure other makes exist that can do a similarly adept job at 2-channel.
My answer to keeping the cost down and eschewing the never ending product cycle refresh so prevalent in AV is to buy used and keep a few years behind the very latest developments.
Yes, I’m only running 5.1
- but my argument is that a higher quality 5.1 system will not only be superior to a 9.1.4 system for the same money, but because a higher proportion of my budget has been aimed at the amplifier and main L&R speakers, it makes it more capable for 2-channel too than, say a cheaper sub-sat system with 11 speakers, for a similar cost.
Yes, my display is only 1080p
- but a higher end 1080p PJ gives an overall better picture quality than a lower-end 4K PJ that would have cost me at least another £500. And I spent about the same on my stunning 92” picture than most people spend on a 55” TV (or even less if you went for a higher end TV)
- Yes, my Anthem MRX710 doesn’t pass through Dolby Vision, 4K HDR etc, but it cost me £700 used instead of the £2500+ of its more recent relative.
We all have different tastes and different priorities, but as appealing as a minimalist 2-channel set-up is to some, I shan’t be taking that route any time soon.
Solid article though Ed, and a genuinely big thank you for your consistently insightful reviews. Keep them coming.