Home General Asylum

General audio topics that don't fit into specific categories.

Why is surround sound not "high end"?

Why? Whenever someone talks about a "high end" or "good" system its always 2 channel. I'm not talking about a hunk of junk like a Bose lifestyle system or any other generic HTIB. or a $120.00 sony receiver
which can barely put out 25 waytts in 7.1 mode if you havent paid at least $300.00 or thereabouts for your reciever or amp than you are not getting anything that will run decent speakers....

I'm talking about a legitimate Name brand, system made of components that are of decent quality components. A Rotel Receiver hooked up to five B&w's or a system made up of a naim 5.1 DVD/receiver combo or a similar system from linn or cyrus with matching brand or other speakers from a respected speaker manufacturer should be considered an audiophile system.

I may indeed upgrade to some "better" speakers (in the eyes of audio snobs) for my surround sound (still keep the old-school fronts as AUX/rock N roll speakers...

I know my Sony SSB-3000s need to go... I'm setting them outside or giving them to someone else.....


This post is made possible by the generous support of people like you and our sponsors:
  Michael Percy Audio  


Topic - Why is surround sound not "high end"? - Raymond Leggs 21:27:41 07/14/12 (67)

FAQ

Post a Message!

Forgot Password?
Moniker (Username):
Password (Optional):
  Remember my Moniker & Password  (What's this?)    Eat Me
E-Mail (Optional):
Subject:
Message:   (Posts are subject to Content Rules)
Optional Link URL:
Optional Link Title:
Optional Image URL:
Upload Image:
E-mail Replies:  Automagically notify you when someone responds.