Lossless vs Surround

[UFAlien]

Well, I just finished watching Category 7 (very entertaining, btw) and I noticed something - it had a PCM stereo track (along with vanilla Dolby Stereo), and 5.1 tracks in Dolby and DTS - but no lossless surround track.

So I was inspired to set up this poll - for those of us with surround systems, in this case and ones like it, what would you choose? The stereo format in lossless, or the lossy surround?

[Steve]

I'm guessing this is in reference to discs where there is no lossless surround option available?

[UFAlien]

Yes, sorry if that wasn't clear XDDD

[Steve]

No problem. Thanks.

[BIslander]

For movies I will always select lossy surround over lossless stereo. Movies contain discrete sound effects designed for 5.1.

But, with concerts, I usually select the PCM stereo tracks over lossy surround. The PCM audio quality is usually better and ProLogic II provides surround effects similar to most 5.1 music mixes.

[Yeha-Noha]

My choice of always choosing lossy 5.1 instead of lossless stereo on BDs is because the benefit of lossy 5.1 surround outweighs the benefit of lossless stereo IMO. That is my preference for movies and that was how I voted.

However, as for music, concerts, and opera, I sometimes like the lossless LPCM 2.0 track better than the lossy 5.1 track.

[Beta Man]

2 channel over Lossy 5.1

my fronts are capable of incredible separation and detail...... I don't need to have surrounds feeding me the ambient sounds to get sucked into the action on screen.

[Croweyes1121]

I think this is a case-by-case question. For example, the lossy 5.1 on My Morning Jacket's "Okonokos" DVD release absolutely slaughters the lossless stereo option. But that's one specific case and shouldn't be the deciding factor for all other releases. But after hearing that concert in 5.1, I can't imagine listening to the stereo. I've got CD's and vinyl for that.

[Petra_Kalbrain]

I always choose the BEST SURROUND TRACK available on the disc. I prefer an accurate 5.1 sound environment, to a matrixed (a.k.a. poorly faked) stereo track, regardless of its fidelity. The matrixing of a stereo signal is a scam in my opinion. So many people tell me, "I'll just keep downloading my movies and TV shows. I don't need to spend the money just to get the surround track. My receiver does all of the work and turns the stereo signal into the exact same thing." Man, sometimes they are so stubborn that I just want to punch them in the face. They obviously don't understand that the matrixing of surround channels from a stereo signal has no discrete nature to it since the sound coming from the back speakers is just a derivitive of the sound coming from the FL and FR speakers. I try to explain this all of the time, but they are too cheap to hear me. It's as though matrixing has given people an excuse to a) rely completely on the illegal activity of STEALING entertainment content, and b) not bother upgrading their home theatres (as many of these people that I have talked to don't feel the need for anything having to do with HDMI and/or High Definition... except their sports! Can't watch their sports in SD!!! )