Back to the OP's issues. I am not ambivalent at all about 2 channel stereo. About 99% of the time, I just do not listen to it, preferring discretely recorded Mch instead. I find that is a much, much closer approximation to what I hear in the hall live at concerts. And, there is no "raised noise floor" with discrete Mch recordings in hi rez. I think that is a bogus issue.
If I listen to a stereo recording, I listen in plain-vanilla stereo. I do not add synthetic Mch. But, some of those artificial synthesis systems are not terrible. I would just rather hear what the engineers heard themselves as they mixed, processed and mastered the recording for distribution, for better or for worse, without a layer of artificial processing applied. I am a purist at heart.
I have heard nothing but good things about Auro 3D discrete recordings or about synthetic Auromatic. But, they are a very long way from being an established consumer market paradigm whose very survival is even assured. They might still be a bust. There are perhaps only 10's, not 100's or 1,000's of discrete Auro 3D recordings.
Auromatic might be the most advanced synthesis tool to date, but I do not plan to update or reconfigure my system to support it. I agree with the premise that we hear live music in 3D, not 2D, space, but adding a third dimension to the 2D 5/7.1 Mch we now have will deliver diminishing sonic returns compared to 2D Mch vs. Stereo. I am in no rush to embrace 3D until its survival as a particular technology format is assured and we have a growing catalog of discrete recordings that use it.
One's music genre interests are a key. There are thousands of excellent 5/7.1 discrete Mch recordings available in classical on SACD and BD. I have > 1,000 myself. But, other music genres are not so fortunate. Hence, even 2D Mch is a tiny niche for music, though it is huge for movies. And, 3D sound is not necessarily a guaranteed success even for movies.
So, I am personally keeping my powder dry for now in a wait and see posture.
