Just to be clear...tubes are better than solid state...mono is better than stereo...stereo is better than 5.1 surround...5.1 is better than 6.1,7.1, or 9.2...vinyl is better than CDs, CRTs are better than digital...2D is better than 3D...when in doubt, older trumps newer...any questions?
Actually I go back to the days when stereo first popped its head into the audio scene (late 50's and early 60's). And indeed there were those who (seriously) thought stereo was "unnatural" and "ruined the music'".
I remember one audio critic (can't remember his name) who ranted about the audio and music industries selling out the music (for profits of course) by promoting the "blandishments of stereo" (never forgot those words).
We hear some of that same thing today, when two-channel purists complain about multi-channel.
A few yrs back (the 90s), before AVS, I was a member of a group called the basslist, which was a great source of info. At the time there was another list that focused on tube amps, analog, and for many mono recordings. After a few days of people posting why mono was far superior to stereo (and at the time I had already began my migration to MCH), I realized one audio list was sufficient. Sadly, the basslist is no longer, but I would not be surprised if the other list still a "going concern".
1 - 6 of 6 Posts
This is an older thread, you may not receive a response, and could be reviving an old thread. Please consider creating a new thread.
A forum community dedicated to home theater owners and enthusiasts. Come join the discussion about home audio/video, TVs, projectors, screens, receivers, speakers, projects, DIY’s, product reviews, accessories, classifieds, and more!