Has anyone heard the BACCH-SP "purifier" 3D audiophile imager?


I can't post a URL here, but you can find information about this device on the Theoretica Web site.

Robert Harley, John Atkinson, & .other celebrity reviewers (Andrew Quint in TAS as recently as last January) have given this box high praise.  Apparently, it's some sort of DSP that allegedly creates a breathtaking holographic 3D soundstage from two-channel content.

Yes, virtual surround processors have been around since, jeez, at least the 1990s, but this one purports to be a truly high-end device, including an audiophile-grade (whatever that means) DAC, 31-band equalizer, binaural recording capabilities, & ADC.  But for 25 grand, I'd expect it to also clean your records & wash your socks.

I'm kinda skeptical at this point, but better ears than mine have heaped high praise indeed.  Has anybody here actually heard a unit work on their own systems with familiar 2-channel content?

 

 

cundare2

Showing 2 responses by mahgister

What gear are you all using with the BACCH? Mahgister is talking about a $1000 system??

There are reports (some quite credible) that one can obtain much of the benefit of the $30-50K BACCH products by moving speakers close enough to create a mostly nearfield listening experience. That’s suprrising to me b/c if merely eliminating acoustic crosstalk is the goal, why wouldn’t headphones do exactly the same thing? (OK, I can guess why, because hps eliminate the normal reflections that our brains use as imaging & soundstage cues. I think.) And I realize that it’s simply not possible, or even desirable, to sit that close to speakers in many setups. But if I had more time on my hands, I think that trying that out might be a cool experiment.

 

My system will benefit from the BACCH system no doubt...

But i am very happy and his value is 1000 bucks... I decided to wait a bit before buying the BACCH. My income will be difficult to imagine to sustain living for many here by the way... Many dont leave on the same planet as me ...😊

 

For headphone : I own one of the best designed headphone ever acoustically...

Modulo some modifications i introduced this AKG K340 create an "out of the head " experience when the recording reflect great hall recording, church and many smaller Hall but WELL RECORDED ...the reason : it is his designed internal dual acoustic chamber with a dynamic cell and an electrostatic one add to that 5 tuned passive resonators resonators..

When optimized, which i did my soundfield is extraordinary and timbre and bass ...Almost all headphone had no interesting and refined acoustic chamber design this is why i dislike headphone, no crosstalk yes, but no acoustic room shell tuned the right way ... ( too costly on research too little profit said Kennerton who know his work when i asked why not designing a new hybrid 😊)

Now i can answer you remark about nearfield listening...

I listen in nearfield, not only that  reading Choueiri genius article i implemented for experiment a mechanical crosstalk barrier in my nearfield set up which experiment  make more sensible to me  the astounding  loss of spatial information in ALL STEREO SYSTEM by design...

I can assure you that Choueiri is right if you read his articles, because i tested this mechanically; then i know why my completely imperfect method so revealing it can be (impractical for most user i used high  wood panels separating the speakers for each ear) this mechanical method cannot compared one iota to the BACCH .. I dont need to buy BACCH  to understand basic acoustics.. 😊

Great post!

The reason i still wait is because of price...

Now all recordings are not well done and certainly not better (10% in your evaluation ) if we suppress crosstalk with the BACCH among other things and make way more evident the spatial information balance  quality or akwardeness linked to all recordings...

 

The acoustic discovery of Choueiri with his filters implementation will stay though it is too much important ... But perhaps with another form in the near or much longer future...I hope a price decrease because i cannot justify this expanse on my 1000 bucks system...I am already very pleased for many reasons anyway... And as you said to be a success at this price will take a much longer time in this economic crisis era incoming...

 

Thanks for your well informed post and justified criticism ...

 

 

A friend lent me the Bacch SP adio to use for about 6 weeks. It is a fascinating device. It is also hugely overpriced. The Bacch4Mac is a cheaper solution and probably nearly as good for a purely digital flow but it is still fairly expensive.

As for sound quality, the Bacch on many tracks makes a big difference in how the music is presented. The soundstage may widen and deepen, different elements of the music may be more forward or recessed, and even the tonality sometimes seems to shift. I would say I preferred the Bacch on about 90% of the music I listened to and I did have my system set up so Roon played the same track to the Bacch and to my DAC and I would switch between both from my preamp.

The issue I had, besides the cost, is not all music sounded better or even correct through the Bacch. For me I found it disturbing when certain tracks simply seemed wrong to me and I certainly didn’t want to spend my listening life switching back and forth deciding which presentation I preferred. So even though the Bacch was better, often much better, on the vast majority of music, sometimes it was worse and I didn’t like that. I think many people would find the tradeoff of 90% much better and 10% different in a way that seemed wrong, a very acceptable solution. Certainly, my initial reaction was that I couldn’t believe every audiophile with a 6 figure system wasn’t using the Bacch at least some of the time.

Truly, the unit should be priced like a mid-range DAC at $2-5K and I think they would sell thousands of units. The Bacch4Mac is an effort to do that but in a very kludgey and unsatisfying way. With its current pricing and product offering I doubt they will ever achieve much success.