who here listens to movies in stereo only?

Status
Not open for further replies.
:wave:-Yep, that's me.-:wave: 2ch for non-film stuff, 6/7.1 for film... all in the same 13x15 room!

I will end up with a place to put together my mancave with all vintage equipment, and mid-century/60's retro furnishings and accoutrements with a CRT TV (would love a Sony 40" XBR) and 2ch for film sound.

Eh, I have both. I prefer my 2.2 for most movies. My 5.1 and 2.2 both do a good job, though I admit the 5.1 is a HTIB my girlfriend wanted. Even my 36xbr200 tv + a powered sub with 'tru-surround" stereo mode on is just as
enjoyable as the 5.1, without the sometimes annoying 'over zealous mixing' that occurs on some movies.

Ditto on the 40" CRT - I missed my chance to get one on craigslist - I do have a pair of trinitron 30hs420's 30" HDTV and 36xbr200 sdtv. I LOVE when people "upgrade" their hdtv crt's to lcd and I can pick up the crt's cheaply. I'd get more to stock up on if I had more storage room.

I don't disagree that a lot of discrete channels can be a good thing, but the mixing comes from humans and many of the tracks are just at least to me, overbearing. I like the subtle effects more.

I would love to do an ABX testing of what I like more, but the mixing on the 5.1 tracks are often a dead giveaway that I'm listening to 5.1.
 
The vintage amp (pioneer SA-8500, 1974), in the living room gets way more use than the other three stereos in the house. Seeing the whole family using one of my old stereos is priceless.

I run a pair of Infinity Primus 162s and a 10 inch subwoofer through the above amp.
I also think its important to take the signal from the cable box directly into the amp without routing the sound through the TV, same for the DVD player. We often listen to Comcast music channels without even turning the TV on. The clarity and realism of this system is quite pleasing.
 
13 pages...
I enjoy most of my music in 2.0 in the bedroom and 2.1 in the living room. Movies and HDTV are almost always 7.1 'stream direct', where I allow the Bluray to play as intended be it DD or DTS. The statement that: 'When you have good speakers that image well...' is just false for Bluray. The sound to each channel is discrete, that eliminates imaging from the equation. How many theaters have just two speakers? My system was scrapped together over time, most of it purchased used or at deep discounts so little was spent relative to some of the systems I have heard. I did do quite a bit of studying and reading and with the help of Digital Video Essentials HD Set-up Toolkit on Bluray, and an SPL meter I have things tweaked to get the most I can given the limitations of the source material and the limitations of my gear. When someone in my living room flinches as 'something' flies overhead or turn as they hear a whisper from one of those 'extra' speakers I know things are set up to help the director tell his story.
Set-up, Set-up, Set-up! is to HT as Location, Location, Location! is to real estate.
 
When someone in my living room flinches as 'something' flies overhead or turn as they hear a whisper from one of those 'extra' speakers I know things are set up to help the director tell his story.


Here's how a GOOD director tells his story TX. ;) No flybys, no explosions.

477.jpg


051.jpg


483.jpg


movie1.jpg


041.jpg

101.jpg
 
+1 no flybys, no explosions, no bull$hit.

There are plenty of good newer films that do not rely on jets, explosions and what not, "In The Bedroom" and "Precious" comes to mind, great movies of mainly just dialogue, but I find explosions and stuff pretty fun as well, even if it's not truly a great film otherwise.
 
no, no, Tom. I'm sure you are right there hasn't been a good movie made since, since they went all color, and don't get me started with the talkies...in my day we watched our 'good' movies in silence...
Careful your grumpy ole man is showing.
And really, replacing the s with a $ does not make it any less of a curse word.
89grand, see what we did...
 
I'll just say that I listen to pretty much everything as the director intended. Stereo or mono for old films, and whatever for new ones. I'm the same with music. I can appreciate a mono jazz cd as much as a stereo one, or a 5.1 SACD.
I also have a decent sized screen and follow the director's intent as far as aspect ratios are concerned.
 
no, no, Tom. I'm sure you are right there hasn't been a good movie made since, since they went all color, and don't get me started with the talkies...


Oh, I credit some color pictures; The Adventures of Robin Hood, The Searchers, Ben Hur, South Pacific and West Side Story come to mind. Rio Bravo. And The Godfather.

IMO there hasn't been a picture made since The Godfather that equals it and damned few come near it.

In any event you haven't addressed my point: surround sound is way down on the list of things that make for a good movie. In the shots I posted you see directors telling a story with acting and mise-en-scene; you know the mood and a great deal about what is going on just from the image. I maintain that surround sound is way WAY down on the tools used to tell a story. I'll be so bold as to say that any movie that is improved by it has some serious weaknesses up on the screen. My opinion.
 
Last edited:
I am not stuck in the B&W era. I like plenty of new movies. However, I do not need surround sound to enjoy them, or enhance them. :smoke:
 
Never heard a center channel speaker that was worth a crap - most sound dreadful.
Unless you are using 3 identical speakers for the L-C-R, I would never attempt to put a center speaker in the equation.
Just my opinion.
 
Haven't read the whole thread, just 3 or 4 pages.

I don't watch much TV or many movies at home. Most often I use the built in crappy speakers on the Olevia 37" flatscreen. Sometimes I'll route the sound through my stereo, the speakers flank the screen anyway. I have to crank it up a lot louder to hear the dialog for some reason. Anyway, it's plain old stereo for me. I might consider a more modern system at some point, but I haven't the room for it now nor do I put a high priority on watching movies.
 
I personally don't mind if some people prefer to watch movies through a mono 2" speaker transistor radio, as long as they don't claim it's better than a full blown 5.1 or greater setup.:D
 
I personally don't mind if some people prefer to watch movies through a mono 2" speaker transistor radio, as long as they don't claim it's better than a full blown 5.1 or greater setup.:D

A great 2.0 system easy makes it better than a great multichannel system.
Reason: No real great multichannel systems can be purchased at less than 5 times the price of similar quality 2.0 systems.
And furthermore the best 2.0 system (in the whole of the universe :) performs better than the best multichannelsystem.

"dolph"
 
Last edited:
I personally don't mind if some people prefer to watch movies through a mono 2" speaker transistor radio, as long as they don't claim it's better than a full blown 5.1 or greater setup.:D

"better" is a very subjective term. Like I said earlier, I do not need 5.1 to enjoy a good movie. So for me 2 channel sound is better, because I just saved a bunch of money by not buying that 5.1 system. :D
 
"better" is a very subjective term. Like I said earlier, I do not need 5.1 to enjoy a good movie. So for me 2 channel sound is better, because I just saved a bunch of money by not buying that 5.1 system. :D

This may just be me, but I find 5.1 or whatever, movie/tv audio does not require near the same level of equipment to enjoy it compared to music in 2 channel.

If it did, I may be less inclined to commit to it also.

With music, even though I don't have great high dollar stuff (just pretty good sounding stuff), I'm a pretty critical listener. With my 5.1 HT setup, I don't analyze the dialog, explosions or whatever else for complete accuracy, near to the same level. As long as it seems to sound mostly realistic and gets loud enough I'm good, therefore I didn't need to spend a bundle on it.

For those that have one system for both, yeah, it'd be much harder to do.
 
I personally don't mind if some people prefer to watch movies through a mono 2" speaker transistor radio, as long as they don't claim it's better than a full blown 5.1 or greater setup.:D



Since audio is a subjective hobby it doesn't bother me if someone claims a transistor radio is better than what I use. If it's what they like then for them it IS better.
 
"better" is a very subjective term. Like I said earlier, I do not need 5.1 to enjoy a good movie. So for me 2 channel sound is better, because I just saved a bunch of money by not buying that 5.1 system. :D

Well, to me "better" in this context is the function, not word games about personal value decisions.
 
Since audio is a subjective hobby it doesn't bother me if someone claims a transistor radio is better than what I use. If it's what they like then for them it IS better.

In the short time I've been here, I've noticed you are not short on opinions (nor am I saying you should be), but on this particular topic you seem to be suggesting you are completely neutral in general...and I find that a little odd actually since you generally don't seem to be.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top Bottom