A few of our customers have followed our advise to do something
similar, which is to add a three channel amplifer and processor to the
system, when can be switched on and off when needed or not. That does
just what you suggest, but most movie people simply won't pay for a
stereo system if they have a five channel receiver and most music
people won't pay for a five channel receiver if they have a stereo.
The more well heeled tend to buy both, why not if they have the space?
I just it impractical and wasteful unless you are going to have them
in separate rooms, which also means a dedicated pair of speakers for
the stereo system. What I find even more curious is people upgrading
the power sections of cheap receivers. I suppose everyone's situation
can be somewhat unique given theier surroundings, funds and usage.
- Bill


This is basicaly what I did. In my opinion, stereo music is the real challange
to reproduce. Trying to duplicate the live performance in ones home, has it
ever been truly done? At any budget? But for home theater, movies, the audio
is exagerrated which I don't state in a negative way, but movies are not about
realism, it's about the total experience. I mean we don't complain about cars
that explode in a fiery Napalm ball upon the slightest impact.
I started with a two channel system that I liked. tried to do the best
that I could within my budget. B&K, Vandersteen and then added additional
channels for home theater. I chose the B&K pre amp based on 2 channel sound
quality but also only looked at multi channel home theater controllers. I
added M&K center and rear speakers based on theyr dynamic sound, overall sound
quality, size, mountability etc.

Do I like the M&K speakers for music? Their ok but no where near as smooth and
natural as the Vandersteens but for home theater they rock Open, dynamic, and
with a big sub the whole house rocks when the movie calls for it.

Jon




http://www.jonlayephotography.com