Holographic imaging

I know no one believes me but the electronics play a greater role in imaging than any of you or I believed. If you get a chance to hear the H-Cat amp, perhaps at the RMAF, you will know what I mean. I thought with my careful set up, speaker placement, vibration control, and room treatments in an already good sounding room that I had excellent imaging and close to realism. I won't say that I have absolute realism now, but I was only about half way before.

Mapman, sorry you are right, but they did and do make speakers that bounce sound everywhere for a non-directional sound or pseudo openness.

I think the terms holographic, realistic, and three dimensional are varying degrees of the same idea, with holographic being the best. Perhaps I have at last reached the level of being holographic, but it only is occasionally that I could be fooled into believing that the performer is in my room.

I am sure that there are many ingredients in achieving this, such as good room acoustics, phase coherent speakers (a rare characteric), good sources including recordings and pickup, and finally exceptional electronics. Room acoustics takes time and flexibility in a big room. I find that I cannot long endure digital corrections, but YMMV. I have owned several omni-directional speakers, but would merely point to the original Boas speakers as the falicy of this. Yes they spread sound all over the room, but there is no realism to it.

I would love to have a real point source, full-range speaker with 100db efficiency and 20-20k Hz frequency response. Short of that I still use a fairly efficient 92 db, 2 way, and excellent frequency response speaker, the Acapella LaCampanellas. I know they are far short of perfect but have a very simple crossover and are phase coherent.

I have very good sources, with the digital now being the Exemplar Music Server, which is the best digital I have heard yet. My Shindo Labs turntable is also the best I have heard, granted that it and the digital are much improved being on the Halcyonics active isolation bases.

Cabling of all sorts also are invaluable.

But it is electronics that have given me my closest approximation of being holographic. For 30 years I briefly toyed with solid state amps and preamps. Once in a while I found satisfaction with solid state, especially in phono and line stages, but only once in an amp-the 47 Labs first 25 watt amp and then only for a while. Tubes ruled.

Then I reconnected to an old friend from 30 years ago and found he was back into the audio business, making line stages and amps. I tried one of his line stages, the H-Cat P-12. It had better base than any of my tube line stages, the ARC SP-10, an Exemplar parafeed, and the Cat. The Exemplar was its closest rival full-range but did not have the three dimensional sound stage of the H-Cat. A final "production" version proved better yet and I sold the others except the Exemplar. During the next five years, I use the H-Cat with an Exemplar 300B amp, the Reimyo PAT-300, and the Exemplar Statement solid state amp. It shocked me, I must say. I tried it on a money back guarantee. With time its power and ungrained sound convinced me, and of course, it did not go back. Always I had what I thought was the state-of-the-art sound staging, in terms of wide width and layered depth. As better versions of the H-Cat P-12 came along, this all improved, but the now one year old P-12R X7 H-Cat marked an new level of realism that I have never heard here or elsewhere. I thought I had achieve audiophile narvana.

Then five weeks ago I finally got the H-Cat amp. I hoped that this amp would give me the sweetness of the Riemyo midrange and the extension on top and bottom of the Exemplar. Although Roger Paul had assured me that it completed the Doppler control started with the line stage and would shock me with it holographic image. He was right, but it took four weeks for it to reach its present level.

I am sorry that it has taken so long to explain why I think so many things contribute to a holographic image. I think it is very fragile, indeed. I dearly wish I could have people hear what I am hearing rather than trying to verbalize it.

But the long answer to the posting is, yes, electronics are quite important to a holographic imaging. But the best imaging is not to be found with tube gear. Presently my only tubes are in my dac.

Mapman, I owned the Avantgarde Duos and Trios. They do not disappear, in fact, unless you are quite far back from them they do not have integrated sound. Nor are they anywhere near as dynamic as the Altec VOTs with their compression drivers or the Klipschorns. I also had the now discontinued Beauhorns using Lowther drivers. They were dynamic and used a single driver, meaning they were blessedly free of a crossover. They also imaged quite well and mated well with the H-Cat electronics.

I do agree that a quick sound is essential to realism, but it is necessary not sufficient. My LaCampanellas are horns above 700 Hz and have four small and quick drivers below that.

I have once heard the MBLs sound okay and have been interested in their development for at least the last twenty years. They are omni only in the top frequencies and while open sounding are not at all holographic. German Physiks in my opinion are not worth discussing.

It has been many years since I heard Ohms.

I think until you hear the H-Cat line stage and amp, you will not have any idea what I am talking about.

Mapman, I am down on omnis in general because I have never liked any I have heard. You mention that ohms sound is disassociated with the speakers. That I believe is quite true but not real. The waves impacting on microphones are mainly direct. Taking that signal and springing it around your room doesn't recreate the original recording venue. I want to hear what I would hear were I located where the microphones were or very near-field.

People rave about the Magicos also, but I would never buy them either. I must say that I seem to march to a different drummer than most reviewers so I don't expect to influence anyone but me.

Perrew, an excellent question that I have been unable to evaluate yet. I have one of John Tucker's Exemplar line stages from ten years ago, but really don't think it is worth the trouble to try it, but soon John is going to send me his new top-of-the-line line stage. I was so good with his LSA Statement amp at the RMAF that I am anxious to try it with both amps.

I fully expect that the H-Cat amp will be better with the H-Cat line stage, but I am, I think, open-minded.

There is one that has both.

Guys, for questions and user experiences with the H-Cat line stage I would merely direct you to the h-cat.com website. As Mr. Fiel suggests, I am enthusiastic about the H-Cat sound. I do not sell this equipment, while Mr. Fiel does sell rival equipment, but I have had 47 years of experience with audio equipment. Of course, your experience may differ from mine, but for many around the world have validated my experience with this product.

Mapman, omnis don't give holography but totally obscure where the music is coming from. There is no realism at all. If you make your definition of holography that you cannot find the location of the speakers, omnis are your choice. But certainly not the choice of those wanting realism of the recording venue or the sense of being there. You are right about Carver, however.

Mapman, I agree that we make our own choices based on what we hear. I get no holographic presentation from omni directional speakers but do with my LaCampanellas and the H-Cat electronics. I suspect that all of us are interested in the music, but there is a thrill to realism in an outstanding performance, that I have always sought, but again some may not seek this. Need there be further discussion?

Pubul57, live music IS more dynamic, especially if you are hearing it without amplification which is difficult to find. If you are as close to the performance as the microphones, you would hear great holographic imaging.

Mapman, I have no interest in arguing your definition of holographic. I have seen holographic visual images. This is my definition of an audio holographic image.

As I have said before I have owned omni speakers and heard the MBLs repeatedly over the last 20 years and in a friend's home. My present non-omni system is much more holographic.

Tvad, you know from our previous exchanges that I have used tube traps, RPG diffusors, Room Lens, acoustic mirrors, LEDE, and Holographs, one pair of which I still use. I have tried digital corrections also. I have had tube traps. I have used Combac and Marigold dots on the walls, I have used MD Brilliant Pebbles, Shun Mook Mpingo disks, and recently Acoustic Revive guartz products. Once I even had the Cello analog equalizer. The rug never proved very important for the good or bad. You knew all of this so why did you post?

Detlof, I have been to many concert presentations at the University auditorium which is useless unless you sit in the first two rows center. It is an electronic reverb hall and is awful. I have been is several symphonic halls but have no recordings from any. I did some recordings of big jazz presentations at Florida State Un. and was there, of course. I no longer have a tape machine, but do have recordings of the North Texas Jazz band and was present at one of these. Here I did hear actually better presentation than I heard from my left side seat.

I have also heard many small group un-amplified sessions and have many near-field records done in such a configuration.

What I am talking about, however, is a very precise location on the sound stage both left and right but also in depth. Plus a very sharp leading edge that startles you as is the case in real-life. Plus a top end that shimmers, especially on high-hat and brass bites. Finally, the speakers are gone and you are enveloped in the sound stage.

What Feil is ragging on about in his characteristic way is that the secret of the H-Cat circuit is a Doppler correction that keeps all frequencies emerging at the same speed.

Atmasphere, the Doppler shift is not in the recording it is in the electronics that you are using to recreate it.

The WTC afforded matching the H-Cat P12R line stage with other electronics. Frankly I wish it were auto-focusing like second generation cameras, but like cameras this is not to say that the properly focus image is not worth it.

Theaudiotweak, arguing with Audiofool is like conversing with an epileptic in a seizure.

Certainly not PC.

Well, you go incommunicado for four days and a good deal happens. I have had the advantage of hearing at least 7 stages of the development of Roger's capability to "tighten up" Doppler shifts. While this trip has been expensive and often irritating, where I am now in terms of great realism in reproduced music is something I will never regret having taken this long path. Roger's theory has proven correct in my experience.

All that I can really attest to is that Roger has told me he increased a tighter clamp on the signal by tighter Doppler correction, what I hear is greatly improved in its realism. Many times I have thought certainly there could be no further improvement only to be proven wrong later.

I do know that Roger has leased test equipment to assess the benefits of his improvements only to see nothing in the measurements but obvious benefits in what you hear. I have always thought that it is ridiculous to suggest that if instruments don't measure it that it doesn't exist. What it indicates is the sensitivity of the ear. I grant that we can be deceived, but typically we are not, and thankfully so as we would not have survived in this dangerous world.

I have been largely responsible for "awakening" Roger to AVM and IsoClean fuses as I am always tweaking and sometimes with success. If some don't hear the benefits of these tweaks, it is of no concern to me, but Roger has.

I really think that I merely suggested that if one really wants to hear a holographic image you needed to LISTEN to the H-Cat amp especially with the H-Cat line stage in front of it with its WTC set correctly.

If you don't like what you hear, I am sorry you don't share my experience.

One further thought. I would challenge any of you to defend in theory and in measurement what you judge to be a superior amp or the one you own. And please don't say it is low in THD, or worse yet the lowest in THD! I have heard amps with low THD versus those with somewhat higher distortion. None of the lowest were very distinguished and would get my money.

Last year at the RMAF Stereophile gave seminars on amps showing the Boulder had quite low THD and reacted well to loads put on it. Another unnamed amp did poorly on THD. I innocently asked whether the unnamed amp's designer thought THD was a design concern. Everyone looked at me as thought I was profane. I left the room as no one was interested in sound.

Shadorne, I know that Roger has the most sensitive measurements and has told me the reveal no difference with different corrections but that he and later I and others clearly have. Again I think your faith in measurement is unfounded or you are measuring something that is not relevant. It is hard to see how frequency would not be important, but when you are measuring one frequency you are not measuring music. Perhaps it is the context of multiple notes that is where the benefit is.

I again ask all of you who suspect Roger is a charlatan to defend using your logic why your most preferred amp is superior. I bet none of you do more than listen. Perhaps you defensive amp designers have pet theories, which you might also defend.

Audiofool, as always you are doing a lot of talking about nonsense as usual. Get a life or maybe I should say a livelihood.

Tvad, are you speaking of my discussion, if one can call it that, with Feil? I would think that it is obvious that I would like nothing more than to have no further discussions with him. If you are talking about the challenges to Roger Paul that suggests they know more about what he is doing than he does, then I must suggest that salvos must be fired in response to salvos.

Detlof, save for your committment to "current scientific terms," I cannot help but agree that listening yourself is the only real way to tell. We don't really know whether Ralph has a handle on what is best in design or whether he is hidebound by conventional wisdom. Personally I have never heard any amplifier that equals the H-Cat, although a friend with the H-Cat tells me that the much more expensive Lindemann does and then some.

Roger need not "come up with an explanation in more currently accepted terms," anymore than Ralph needs to explain why his amp is preferable to many others. Basically, currently accepted terms, are insufficient to account for why some amps sound better. Even Ralph, I would assume, would not say that it is THD as he prefers tube amps with higher THD.

If you make a better mouse trap, the world will beat a path to your door, regardless of whether you can explain it is "currently accepted term."

As I first stated, you are doing yourselves a disservice if you don't take advantage of getting a listen to these H-Cat products. I would welcome anyone to come down and hear mine.

Detlof, it is perhaps rashly a dead horse. You chose the words you used, so I perhaps inferred what you said. Roger is painted too broadly with the brush of not explaining what he has come up with and others have not adequately explained, even using currently acceptable terms why some amps sound better. The losers are those who believe that the H-Cat is not worth a listen.

Bear in mind that this is a posting on achieving holographic sound images. It has become, however, the typical measurement is all versus sound is all confrontation that so often underlies discussions here and on AudioAsylum. It will always be a dead horse.

Dazzdax, I am sorry my comment subverted your thread. I had no idea this would happen.

Detlof, I don't share your opinion about you is being logical and who is not.

So, Atmasphere, all you need is bandwidth?

Detlof, forgive me if I laugh, you think every decently designed equipment sounds the same? If not what is the difference? Also, please tell me how you know "decently designed equipment?" Do you look at it, trust the designer, or listen to it?

Pubul57, I agree about the dynamics. I think it is basically how slow our drivers are. If you have ever heard the old Altec VATs or the Klipshorns with their compression drivers, you get close to the dynamics of real music.

I think that were you where the microphones are you would hear similar realism.

Goldeneraguy, I reread Detlof's and Atmasphere's last posts, I didn't miss what they were saying. I know of nine others who are thrilled with their H-Cat line stages. I know of two others who have heard the H-Cat amp, both dealers, who love it and have had great response to their demonstrations. I don't know what you mean by agreeing with statements by Roger, but one guy who is strongly dismissive of most posts here, says that he now better understands why it sounds so good. Again this makes my point that it is the sound that attracts people, not the explanation of why it does what it does.

I am a survivor of many of the scam police wars. I could give a shit whether people need to have the benefits of tweaks or components "proven" to them. This is the height of hubris IMHO. If they refuse to try it themselves, screw them. I will just keep enjoying the benefits.

Goldeneraguy, Roger's design is in my opinion far superior to anything I have ever heard. I don't teach students what audio to buy but rather teach what research shows. I am not in the science of amplifier circuits and know none posting here are either. I don't know how Roger conceived of this Doppler correction circuit or even why it has so improved over time, but I do know it has.

He is proud of what he has accomplished and the proof that it works. He is honestly trying to convey his thinking which underlies his circuit. I have told him that those who demand an explanation based on currently accepted terminology are not interested in sound, so he should not bother with them. None seem capable of defending their personal amps or those they make. But they demand it of Roger and he foolishly responds.

This is a great amp.

Tvad, I probably started the slide by suggesting that electronics can contribute to holographic imaging. That brought the usual response from you know who. I think Roger was merely trying again to explain his ideas. He is too sincere and insufficiently dismissive of ignorant responses for his own good.

I only ever said that it sounded outstanding. Some did ask why and I gave a response limited to my understanding even though for me it did not matter.

Apart from Audiofool's usual nonsense, the key issue here is explanations for why some components sound better than others. Electrical engineering has some concepts that can be used in such explanations based on age old science. In science our understanding advances from observation and experiments centered often on assessing hypotheses. In engineering you apply the relationships that have been supported by science.

All of this is of little import for making decisions on buying equipment. If someone finds the equipment of a designer to sound good, let her buy it. For the engineer designing an amp, there are many considerations to weigh. The very best parts in a classic circuit may sound wonderful but be unaffordable. The designer optimizes the known parameters as he sees fit. This is not science; it is the use of science.

Since designers here have attacked Roger Paul, using what Detlof calls "currently terminology" saying that they don't find his attempt to explain how his circuit works. One would think that they could defend why theirs does, but they have not.

All of this is irrelevant, if your focus is on the observation that this amp and linestage sound extraordinary. Something must explain this. I merely suggested that people hear it. If they don't like it I would be shocked, but that is their business, not mine.

I don't care two figs whether they can accept what Roger says because I know full well that their understanding of what makes for a good sounding circuit is limited by our understanding of nature's principles. With time we will further understand these principles, but regardless, Roger has found a circuit that works.

I have, of course, said this several times, and so I need not say them any more.

Carlos269, one of my undergraduate majors was Physics, but my Ph.D. is in political science.

I would urge you to listen to the H-Cat if you have a chance and would welcome you were you to come by.

Roger is very sincere guy and has come about a circuit that works, although it has been evolving the last six years. Although I have known Roger since the early 70s, it was only about six years ago that I learned he was back in audio. I agreed to give a listen to his new line stage. I was impressed and bought it. Relative to the unit I have today, it could not compete although it got TAS' Golden Ear award. There was an amp even then but only a very few were made. A production version of an exceptional amp is only recently available. If the line stage is very, very good, the amp is unbelievable and renders the goal of his electronics, a holographic sound stage.

Over the years Roger has repeatedly attempted to tell me how this was accomplished. Since the product sounded so good, I put little stake in my understanding about what was going on. Remember that Roger's innovation is his claim to fame. He does want to answer question, but not to divulge proprietary information.

I had an early linestage with no WTC, but although I wish it were automatic like self-focusing cameras, I cannot live without what I get when it is on the money, especially now that I have the amp. This experience is why I initially posted here and only to suggest that people give a listen to H-Cat.

I have no investment in his company nor have I ever profited from selling either the line stage or the amp, although I think I strongly influenced many to buy one.

H-Cat is not a scam, although I do know of people who did not like it or perhaps who would not deal with the WTC or Roger's suggestions about grounding only the line stage.

Publul57, it maybe that Lotus Group will have the P-12R X7 line stage. The local dealer who did demonstrations last year is now in China, I think.

Goldeneraguy, I suggest that you have chosen a correct path.

Carlos269, have you ever heard an instance where are product is well defended in terms of theory or science? Since most merely revise old circuits with better parts or bells and whistles, what can they say?

Pubul57 and Audiokinesis, I refuse to concede that reproduced music should be allowed to differ from real. We are seldom allowed to be in optimal locations at live events or to hear without amplification. There is an enormous thrill is hearing reproduced music at very close to what the microphones hear. I don't want to start the wars again, but this is what I am getting. I hope this will entice you to catch a listen.

Detlof, I return your sentiments. I never intended to advance knowledge, however, only to reveal my experiences.

Happy listening to you also.

Atmasphere, while I understand what you are saying, my concern is with the sound not the explanation. As I have said, I didn't buy the line stage until I heard it. I did buy the amp before hearing it and did wait a long time for it to satisfy Roger and have it shipped. I can assure you that whatever he is doing is greatly improving over time.

I have had at least 30 different line stages or preamps in my 45 years in audio. After a certain period where I experimented with solid state line stages and amps, I went fully tube and presently have about 2000 tubes. I think I had the ARC Reference and the Exemplar parafeed linestage at the time I got the H-Cat. There were many things that the H-Cat could not equal, especially in the Exemplar, but man could it image. And instruments and vocalists were actual size. I did not have vocalists with five feet wide mouths.

Gradually, a purity of sound emerged also, with it sounding neither like a tube or a SS product. The real shock for me came with the amp. Even straight out of the box and just turned on, it was different. The top end had such scene and extension but quite sweet. Roger was expecting me to rave immediately, but it was two weeks later when it just became impossibly good.

So you can see what guides me-sonic realism. This has to have some explanation, but I know from my experiences with science that many explanations are wrong. But Roger had something directing him. His amps of 25 years ago were quite good, but never like this one.

If so many had rushed to judgment that H-Cat was a fraud, I think you would find that Roger knows more about circuits than you think and has sought to measure what he is getting by leasing the best testing equipment despite his meager resources. As I said to Carlos, you need to realize that the H-Cat could probably be copied.

Carlos269, when you are on the right spot, it does sound louder. It is not placebo. I have had six different people here who always got to the same value while I changed the WTC. What you hear is a place where the soundstage suddenly becomes vivid and real. The bass is tight and deep, the attack sharp, and the top end sharp and sweet.

I will have to see if I even have the Stereophile Test cd#2. Is that the one with the garage door? I just checked. I only have the Test cd, not #2.

I suspect that those not hearing it have units that are not broken in, but I cannot understand why some cannot hear polarity differences. I have had that happen even in my highly revealing system.

Man, I was just looking at your "system." Is that your listening room or a storage area? I cannot believe that much of this stuff is connected; is it?

Carlos, I know there have been many attempts to "enhance" imagining. IMHO all are disasters and there are none in my system.

Also while I find power cords to be quite important with some being outstanding, IMHO I cannot stand any ac isolation transformer, regenerator, balance power unit, or ac filter. I use only the Acoustic Revive RTP-6 plug in strip with an IsoClean wall outlet on one dedicated line.

I also have found the Halcyonics active isolation base to far exceed any other isolation component. The Acapella Silencio base is pretty good. Since I can only afford three Halcyonics, I have to use them under my digital and vinyl sources and the other under my amp. It may be that my ac purity and magic isolation allows me to hear benefits from the H-Cat that are denied others.

Audiofool, I am sorry that you have never listened to any H-Cat product and never followed through on seeking to become a dealer. I really don't understand your mindless criticisms for something you haven't heard and apparently don't want to hear, but that is your business.

Mapman, Joe Cohen of Lotus Group, who is a dealer for H-Cat, had the prototype of the H-Cat amp but had an AM station coming through that was volume sensitive so he will probably have the line stage but will not have the amp. Roger cannot afford to have a room at the RMAF and his dealer in the Denver area, who did demonstrations last year, is now in China.

It would be very nice to give many the opportunity to hear the combination, especially with the outstanding Feastrex speakers.

Shadorne, "do an admirable job" "very few" those are good terms. I think speakers are basically "pick your poison." I have three times gone back to compression drivers in horns and three time abandoned them. I have four times tried horns with other drivers and retain one. I have had had two single driver systems which were outstanding by way of having no crossovers. I have had ribbons, electrostatics, and many multiple dynamic driver systems. I have even had two pair of omni-directional systems. My quest is discontinued now as I am retired, but I don't find the solution to realism is to be found in ideal speakers or even those that do an admirable job.

Audiokinesis, you say,"Years ago one of Stereophile's writer offered some perspective that I think is worth passing along, only I can't find the exact quote. But it went something like this:"I am not so much interested in WHERE the musicians are on the stage as I am in WHY they are on the stage."

Perhaps, I misunderstood why you quoted this.

No strawman argument here.

Mapman, you hope you are right.

Mapman and Learsfool, be contented then.

Back in those days, for me there were few choices and often you had to assemble them. I had my Dyna Audios and Health kits for many years.

Detlof, now I need health kits.

How do you know when something is a marketing "trick?" Until recently I have found many tube amps that give a great sense of having depth to the image. Some were more able to have depth on the sides while some only had it in the center.

Some ss amps, such as the Cello and the little 47 Labs 25 watter did not have as much depth but retained in on the sides. The Exemplar had great depth in the center but less on the sides.

I guess I would agree that there was greater probability that tube had depth to their sound stage. But that is not the issue.

Nothing to say, like Feil.

As I said.

No blue light specials for you.