Which is better at same price point: 2.1 or 5.1?

[fouad]

Hi,

For my TV room of 13ft X 13ft (ie. 2nd hi-fi system), I have a budget of around £1,200. Currently my ... trusty Denon 2-channel (CD receiver, 2 X 20W) mini is linked to the TV (pls do not laugh!). The Denon is heroic and does a great job, believe it or not (a 10-yr old icon IMHO! Came with Mission small speakers).

So I want to have more powerful sound with my TV. BUT how can a 5.1 systems sound better than a 2.1 if the price is the same? Would it? A 2-channel purist, I would also like to avoid clutter. But I am also confused when I read 5-star reviews of great new Onkyo, Denon AV receivers. Initially, I was thinking of a Marantz PM7003 and BD5004 (I think) with KEF iQ5SE (each approx. 1/3 of my budget). However, even if I upped my budget to, say, 1,500 for a 5.1 channel, (to add 3 more speakers), would that be better than a 'great' 2.1 system? Would a clear and 'punchy' 2-channel system not create a sense of surround sound by itself? Is the Marantz 2 X 70W not enough? As I say, I am confused ...

Notes: (a) I have yet to listen to the Marantz mentioned (so feel free to suggest others) and (b) the sub will be added later (ie. budget above excludes sub - and TV, of course).

Thanks a lot for your usual help!

 

[dave_k]

Look for the AVI Neutron 5 2.1 system. It has a subwoofer containing digital inputs, DAC, and amplification for sub and 2 satellites. As long as your sources have digital outs, it looks like it would fit the bill and budget...

 

[Dan Turner]

All things being equal a 2 channel system will perform at a higher level of quality than a 5.1 channel system of the same price - stands to reason, the available budget has been concentrated on getting the best quality from fewer features. It's also worth bearing in mind that you could (and if 2 channel is what you're concentrating on, probably should) get a good quality stereo 'hi-fi' amp, and if yo want to have a sub-woofer then connect it via the high-level 'speaker' connection.

 

[shafesk]

A 5.1 at the same price would not sound better than a 2.1 setup. simply because you will be paying extra for the 3 speakers. If you dont want surround sound a 2 channel setup with a stereo reciever usually sounds better a LOOOOT better with music. Look to spend equal amounts on your amplifer and your speakers. If you decide whether you want to spend on a 2 channel or a surround setup let me know...then can help you further

 

[professorhat]

I don't really understand the answer that a 5.1 will not sound as good as a 2.1 system since it depends what you're after. Yes, if you're after a system that mainly provides sound for TV watching and
music listening (i.e. generally stereo), then of course, the best 2.1 system is
going to sound better than the best 5.1 system of the same price for the reasons outlined - it stands to reason that your money is being concentrated into providing a better stereo listening experience.

However, if you're after a system that provides mainly surround sound during a movie then a 2.1 system will make a very lousy surround sound system! So naturally a 5.1 system is going to sound better for this, even one which is the same price as the 2.1 system.

From your description, it sounds very much like you're after a system purely for TV watching and, unless you have Sky, Virgin or Freeview HD / Freesat, you won't be getting any channels with surround sound (and even then, not many will be broadcasting surround sound). You also describe yourself as a 2 channel purist, so it very much makes sense for you to just go for a decent stereo setup (I wouldn't even bother with the subwoofer or .1 to be honest). However, it does mean that, when watching a movie on the BD5004, you won't be able to experience surround sound.

fouad:But I am also confused when I read 5-star reviews of great new Onkyo, Denon AV receivers.

Well, the 5 star reviews are comparing these receivers to other AV receivers, not stereo amps, and are judging them mostly on their surround sound experience (as this is what they're designed for), as opposed to their 2 channel ability. 5 stars for an AV receiver means it's probably good for 2 channels compared with other AV receivers in that price range, but won't be anywhere near as good with 2 channel as a dedicated stereo amp of the same price.

 

[jiggyjoe]

As this system is for your tv room i would go for a 5.1. It sounds as if you already have another system for music.

I would go have a demo of some decent av receivers around the £600 mark from onkyo, marantz etc.

Try them out with a surround package from the likes of monitor audio, b&w etc.

This will give you the best sound for movies and tv.

 

[fouad]

Thanks to all for your answers. Really appreciate you are taking the time to help! I should have pointed out that I already have a great 2-channel / hi-fi system in my living room (Primare + B&W CM7)! This is why I mentioned 'TV room'. So this is only to watch TV and even then only with DVDs. And, despite being an audiophile, I do like good sound with the DVDs... Maybe I also could start with a good 2-channel set-up and then later (say, in 12-18 months) add a processor and a 3-channel amp (if required) ... Of course, then the budget will probably double but I would also have more time to save. And the choice of 2-channel would have to allow this upgrade path. I think a visit to my favourite shop (UNILET) is looming on the horizon.

 

[professorhat]

If you're looking for 5.1 down the line, I'd get an AV receiver now rather than a stereo amp and look to upgrade it with a processor later - there are very few processors around these days and your choice will be rather limited. You can get some very good AV receivers at the £500 - £600 budget now like last years' Denon AVR-2310 or, if you like the Marantz sound, maybe the Marantz SR5004 or NR1601.

And looking around, I've just seen the Onkyo TX-NR905 (same as the one I have) for £700 - an absolute bargain at this price!