A deeper more holographic soundstage.

I also forgot to say that you should look for a Dynaco QD-1 quadapter. They are rare, but not THAT rare. Use Google and one should pop up. If not, contact me. I have an extra one, although I really don't want to give it up.

I don't know what kind of music you are into. However, Radiohead - King of Limbs is a live studio recording. It has some of the best ambience I've ever heard recorded. On an ambient loop system, it is incredible. 

I forgot to mention that it is on DVD.

A lot of good responses already, and many not so good.

In my 45 years as an active audio enthusiast, the biggest single improvement I ever got in soundstage openness, depth and clarity came from having an electrician install two direct runs from our home's breaker box to audio-grade sockets in my listening room. I have spent many thousands of dollars over the years without getting so dramatic an improvement. Cost in my house was $1,200, which is higher than most because it required a complicated run.

Close second was from upgrading the power cords on my equipment. A lot of flat-earthers think this is nuts, but the improvements are NOT subtle. If you're using stock cords and don't have much to spend -- or want proof before spending more -- I strongly recommend Audience's cheapest cord, the F3 at $149.

Compared to stock cords, you will not believe the improvement -- even in relatively humble systems. I got a non-audiophile buddy to buy one for his Sprout100 integrated amp, powering a $300 pair of Elac Debut B2 6.2 speakers, and he said it gave him at least 20% more depth, clarity and dimensionality, revealing much more of what was in the recordings.

And, BTW, an F3 absolutely killed a Pangea AC-14XL, same price.

I use higher-grade Audience cords in my main system, and the Front Row -- very pricy -- is so good I can't believe it. Can hear to the walls of the recording venues, hear the air around and behind the players/singers, much more 3D and much clearer, more focused bass.

This is NOT snake oil.

All this tells me is that you never addressed the acoustics if these were the biggest changes.

A lot of flat-earthers think this is nuts,

Do you kiss your Ted Denney statue before you go to bed? That statement is directly from his moronic Facebook echo chamber. I would be embarrassed to be a member.

The electrical embeddings dimension of the audio system implicate all electrical locations in the house, it is why new audio sockets and power cord among other things will work together for the better to lower the noise floor...

I use my own device at low cost to reach the same goal... (Adding the 2 methods would certainly be better tough )

All this tells me is that you never addressed the acoustics if these were the biggest changes.

But yes acoustical embeddings control are also one very important key, perhaps the more important but not the only one tough....Acoustical controls and treatment cannot replace, and give in S.Q. by itself only, what the electrical grid controls and the mechanical controls will add together in their own dimension to the global S.Q....

Then dont forget even the mechanical vibrations and resonance controls of your audio system they will improve  imaging, timbre and stage too...

I can hear what you hear relatively speaking with very low cost solutions....If i had the money i will do also your change(audio socket+power cord) adding these to my devices... But i am very satisfied at peanuts costs then....😊

Can hear to the walls of the recording venues, hear the air around and behind the players/singers, much more 3D and much clearer, more focused bass.

My best to all....

Hi there roxy1927 - i am pretty new as an audiophile, and with all the responses youve already received, perhaps mine wont make much of a difference. But in any case, in the past year and a half that ive been using more of my ears than i ever had before listening to all kinds of systems, ive found a few tracks with which to gauge how good systems, and then really good systems, sound like, specifically in relation to depth of soundstage, and thought i would share the short list with you to see if it helps at all.

For a really basic but solid foundation, "drum and bell: walk around the mic: test" from dr chesky’s ultimate headphone demonstration disc, provides all the fundamental cues one would need to understand how depth of field can sound in different recordings - i feel its the minimum any system should be up to in relation to depth perception with sound.If you don’t hear the echo change from the track, and feel the sheer depth of that recording, then what you have as a complete system which includes your room, is not up to par. Even on average systems, height differentiation is also obvious.

For height differentiation, referring to how high or low instruments are to each other, a basic track to listen to would be "duelling banjos" by eric weissberg and steve mandell - the guitar is low and inside the right of the left speaker, and the banjo is high, and almost directly above and just edging the left side of the right speaker. The guitar is low and close, and the banjo is not only higher, but also slightly further back.

A good track for holographics, which i refer to as all three dimensions of the soundstage, "bubbles" by yosi horikawa does quite well to hear system resolution - in the best systems ive heard, the effect not only occupies the entire frame in front, it extends beyond the sides of the speakers, and every sound effect is distinct and tangible in relation to how far away, how high or low, and how much centre, left or right they are. Some of the sounds are at ceiling level. It is mesmerising.

For better systems, two tracks work well for me - the first being "slice" by five for fighting’s jon ondrasik - between 00.27 and 00.49, the rim shots from the drummer will be in front of or on the same plane as ondrasik’s voice om average systems, and on good systems, they will be well behind his voice. And the second is the track "gabriel’s oboe" from the soundtrack of the movie "the mission" by ennio morricone - at the very beginning, there is a soft roll of drums, which i believe are called timpani - in most systems, the sound is quite ambiguous and vague in location, even if the timbre is well placed; but in the really good systems i have heard, they are so viscerally and clearly located in the hall, seemingly just before the back of the stage, and to the left of centre - after 00.16, sound mixing comes into play with the other instruments, and depth of field doesnt matter much anymore.

All of these can be streamed from spotify, and as lousy a resolution format that spotify is, there is still sufficient information in those files to hear clear differences. Tidal, of course, makes it all definitive.

In friendship - kevin

A good track for holographics, which i refer to as all three dimensions of the soundstage, "bubbles" by yosi horikawa does quite well to hear system resolution - in the best systems ive heard, the effect not only occupies the entire frame in front, it extends beyond the sides of the speakers, and every sound effect is distinct and tangible in relation to how far away, how high or low, and how much centre, left or right they are. Some of the sounds are at ceiling level. It is mesmerising.

Thanks very good suggestion indeed...

And it does exactly which you describe.... But i knew already that my audio system was good thanks to my embeddings controls... 😁

But a feed back can help because the composer is interesting by itself...

My best to you....

Thanks mahgister : ) - I also forgot to say in my comment that it may be many things that contribute to good depth in the sound, but perhaps not as many as I originally believed. So long as a better than average amplifier and speaker system is being used, preferably tubed, because the truly good ss amps usually cost so much more - that the final difference that is made, is precisely in the other ‘lesser’ components of cables, fuses, isolators, dielectrics, room control - all the things you refer to as embeddings. And that difference is so very small and yet so absolutely huge because that tiny elevation of sound quality makes the difference between ‘was that real?’ or ‘that’s recorded music’.

From everything I have heard of some amazing obscenely expensive systems, right down to just above average systems, I have found the totality of the small ‘lesser’ adjustments to make the biggest difference, so long as the basic componentry is not average. It shocked me at first, because like almost how we all started, the primary components appeared to be most important.

But here I have to step a little back from all your remarkable experiments, which I fully understand that you engage in as a work of total passion - I love all you have done, for peanuts, as you tell us all the time, and I have no doubt they work, based on the reading of your posts and nuanced comments you occasionally make, on disparate issues that resonate with my own experiences, and tell me you are indeed hearing what you say you hear - I know how good your system must sound without ever hearing it ; ) - but for me, my passion is less with the tinkering, (I know some will not even consider me an audiophile!) and with the money I have, I merely wish to arrive at the best sounding system my slightly higher budget can buy, without needing to have a dedicated sound room that I might trip over special cow bells, copper ribbons or sponge in! Please understand, it is not my criticism of what you have achieved, only a remark of the limited space and tinkering passion I have : )

When I wrote my post, it was only to state what I think I am hearing, so that if the OP and others either do, or do not hear the same things, we can then discuss very specifically what it is that is either similar or different more objectively, and I might then be able to say what I believe makes the small change that creates a new world.

And I believe also that millercarbon is correct when he says that most recordings do not play so much with depth of field and the most important thing to hear in every single recording is the separation of voice and instruments, and their location in relation primarily to width and height, and not so much depth. Classical music and jazz perhaps, does more than all other genres, in relation to depth.

I have learned so much from reading everyone’s posts and comments on audiogon: there are so many distinct characters here - like some or dislike some, everyone makes this platform interesting for me and helps me to learn, either directly or indirectly. Thanks again : )

In friendship - kevin

Please don't waste your money on hyper expensive cables or power conditioners ... etc. There are only two things that affects the soundstage depth:

• Recording (Production). Use Stereophile test CDs to test the SS depth. John Atkison have done great recording on this.
• Speaker placement - Experiment with the speakers by moving away from the wall behind them. 

Also be aware that some speakers do represent the soundstage depth more accurate than others. One example for exceptional soundstage is  Sonus Faber Stradivari 

My speakers are 60 inches into the room from the front walls and 19 inches into the room from the side walls.  My chair is located 8 feet from the speakers. It took months of trial and error plus blue painter's tape to get everything tuned. My listening chair was picked for it's height and comfort. I'm pretty lucky to have a dedicated room (22'x14) and a supportive Wife.  Every measurement is important, where and how the rack and equipment is located, floor and wall treatments. 

@kevnThanks for those tracks! My system passed with flying colors, especially with the “mission” That one gets saved into my “audiophile test” playlist. 

From everything I have heard of some amazing obscenely expensive systems, right down to just above average systems, I have found the totality of the small ‘lesser’ adjustments to make the biggest difference, so long as the basic componentry is not average. It shocked me at first, because like almost how we all started, the primary components appeared to be most important.

Your observation must be printed in gold before any other thing said in all audio forums...

It is also my experience i summarized in 7 words:
Dont upgrade anything before embedding rightfuly everything....

I will only add that my experiments are there only for inspiration in others... You are right and i know that it is not all people who can experiment in a dedicated audio room with  non-esthetical devices...But my ideas can be realized many of them in a living room, and some can be replicated more esthetically by others with better craftmanship than me. The point is small cost good system can sound "relatively" like high end modulo embeddings controls...

This is important for people to hear that, then, instead of throwing money or being frustrated, they can became more creative and less conditioned by the false dogmas circulating in marketing and audio reviews...



Thanks kevn for you astute mind reading me and kindness toward me.... 😌

From everything I have heard of some amazing obscenely expensive systems, right down to just above average systems, I have found the totality of the small ‘lesser’ adjustments to make the biggest difference, so long as the basic componentry is not average. It shocked me at first, because like almost how we all started, the primary components appeared to be most important. 

Do you believe everything you have read?  I can assure you, this is most definitely not the case, with the exception of speaker placement, but that is hardly a lesser adjustment, that is pretty major.  The next big one is room acoustics, and again, that is really major.

However, if you follow what everyone is trying to sell, and what everyone is trying to justify they bought, then yes, you may convince yourself that the small details matter, and you can ignore the big stuff. You can't. Talk to actual acoustic engineers, people who build concert halls, etc.

The fastest way to get there is a small room is with monitor speakers and a nice little tube amplifier. Remember that not all tube amps are created equal. Soft dome tweeters are as edgy and good for a small room. Lots of air around the speakers is important, price is not. Yes you need a recording that has ambience to hear ambience, Get the basics first. 

Hi, thanks for an interesting discussion.

My hifi equipment is now at such quality level (but by no means exclusive/very expensive) that decent cabling makes a difference. I have just changed all power cords ensuring all are plugged-in correctly phase-wise, and deployed a cheap power filter/conditioner. The difference is audible giving me more punch and holographic sound image.  

That said, I have already perfected speaker placement using quite a few different methods. One of the most educational was "The Art of Rational Speaker Placement" found here https://youtu.be/84Pf0ycbyBM. I even contacted the presenter, and bought his written guide.

Since then, I have diverged from this speaker placement, but following his process gave me insight into what is possible with speaker placement. Especially, careful backward-tilting of the speakers mentioned in the end of the video and guide, is the icing on the cake: it opens up the stereo image submerging the listener into the sound.

Maybe, careful tilting could give you the extra depth and height in your stereo image. 

The short answer is to move your chair closer to the speakers. Measure from tweeter to tweeter, multiply it by 0.83, and use that number to determine the optimal distance from the right tweeter to your right ear. (Jim Smith’s method, it works)

The longer answer involves optimal ear height (often a foot or so higher than the tweeters on two-ways, easy to check), optimal speaker distance from the rear and side walls (different depending on speaker type and room layout, and much harder to get right), and not using that questionable super-toe-in method that’s become popular for reasons that escape me.

It’s also worth bearing in mind that if the room has no opening to release pressure the long bass frequencies will create a mess of reflected sound and the midrange will suffer, which is where the holographic magic happens.