How important is it for you to attain a holographic image?
@orpheus10 So you are saying that great soundstage is the end product of what everyone is after in regard to hi-fi audio? That seems odd....since not everyone here agrees with you. Maybe they should have their high end audiophile cards revoked. But then I guess there is the possibility that some of us.....maybe even me.....have great "holographic soundstage" and just don't get all that excited about it? Nah. |
Hey, if you know what you’re doing for the most part and you don’t have five thumbs on each hand, if you persevere and have a little bit of luck you can have it all. But soundstage is not black and white, it’s not as if you either have it or you don’t. There are degrees of soundstage, you’ll know it when you hear it. You can even get air, maybe, if you’re real lucky. If you can achieve a wide, deep and high transparent soundstage chances are pretty good everything else will follow, detail, tone, dynamics, frequency extension. Maybe air. |
Ladies and gentleman, boys and girls; a "holographic image" is what "everyone" in high end audio is striving for; it's not a separate entity, but what "automatically" occurs when you have it altogether, but not before. it only occurs when you have top notch high end equipment. I'll give you an example of this; me and the fellows; me being the resident customer, and they being the salesmen, were grooving mightily to Santana "Abraxas", on a lineup of top of the line ARC electronics, that even included the CD player, plus, the best Thiel speakers, when a real customer came in and requested to audition a Rotel amplifier. Before that occurred, I was focusing on the organ; it was isolated like I've never heard it before or since; this was on the cut "Incident at Neshabur"; https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=s-s2uFgMRjA Can you dig it? We were all seated in the small auditioning theater just grooving; that's when not a word is spoken, and each person is off in his own private inner sanctum; that holographic image with the individual instruments right in front of you will do it; put you out there where you want to be. "And then the doorbell rang"; it was a customer who wanted to audition a Rotel Amp; when his request was honored, the soundstage collapsed. Nothing else had changed, but no more holographic soundstage; a chain is no stronger than it's weakest link. That sums up a "holographic soundstage". |
@orpheus10 said "You guys are funny; while you're enjoying what you have, your subconscious is reaching for the grapes; "I wonder how I can get better bass", or some other refinement." No incongruity there at all. I never claimed that I don't wonder about things. I never claimed that I had the best system in the world. I never claimed my system had no flaws. I never said that I wouldn't seek any sort of improvement. What I'm saying is that some of us have the ability to be satisfied with what we have and to control impulses that will likely only account for small, incremental improvements as well as enough risk aversion to avoid spending money on 'improvements' that might end up being detrimental. And again, this is about sound stage. Spending money to get improvements other than sound stage means sound stage isn't my addiction of choice. That's all. Again, I'm not knocking anyone for whom that .01% improvement is worth a week's vacation some place nice. That is their business not mine. Its all entertainment after all. @orpheus10 said "N80, mentally, I will never settle; it's just that my bank account has put the brakes on." In the end that's still settling. And if you're not willing to eat Ramen seven days a week and walk to work for your hobby....well, what can I say? ;-) The point is that we all have reasons for how far we push things. And it really isn't our position to question someone else's.....especially when they have the real prize, the best grapes of all: great music and contentment. |
I’ve seen it said before in the forum that Audiophiles enjoy listening to the way their equipment sounds more than listening to music. . . Just look at all the discussions on synergizing equipment. I have been happy to see more threads pop up speaking to excellent recordings etc. I’ve worked 20 years now to get my system where it is but I’m not a trader like many. I research, listen, and save and buy my next piece. I know I’m close and would agree with the note above how important low level detail is. I have almost as much money in my subs as my 20.1 Magnepans. It is worth every penny when the tympani pounds and you can feel the reverberations perfectly accurate as if you were in the first few rows of the orchestra. While I can place all instruments in their locations on good recordings and the orchestra feels like it is there, big smiles from guests, it doesn’t make my hair stand up like I’ve heard on three occasions, all with different equipment. My father has heard it with me once at AXPONA, if you can believe it, and how the magic was broken moving just one seat over which still had great imaging and sound but it wasn’t magical. He’s visiting for the holidays and says that the system sounds better than anything he’s heard (very close to the AXPONA experience) and he’s correct . . . The difference in experience is almost life changing and my goal is to have it, all the time. One moment for me was playing on humble Sansui speakers in my home under construction listening to a recording processed through the BACCH filters. After reading extensively on their research site with tests they made on various speaker brands I was happy to see that their tests aligned with the system I wanted to create and hoped that someday I could incorporate BACCH into my dream system and get that magic back at an even higher level with better equipment. We will see this spring when I get my bonus from work and I can add it. Again what I speak to is not creepy or ethereal but transporting you to the event at such a level that all of your senses are overwhelmed. It may not be what others here want but it’s what I want and that’s all that’s important. |
@orpheus10 "Never quit trying to reach the grapes; we're "audiophiles", reaching for sweet audio grapes is what we do." That does seem to be true of quite a few audiophiles here. That is not my cup of tea. But I am new to this and by nature or nurture I also have a deep suspicion of 'progress' that has no ultimate goal. I do not see this hobby as a pursuit unless you include pursuing good recordings. When I listen to my system it pushes all the buttons I need to have pushed. I've done some basic room testing, etc and things check out okay. The sound quality makes me smile and sometimes gives me chills. The sound stage is reasonably large and defined. So at this point rather than seeking (= time+money) for that something extra, I'll enjoy the sweet grapes I have. Some might call that settling. And maybe it is. But in this field I suspect that there are those that would say that in some fashion or another you are settling as well. Who knows. And again, its not sour grapes. I bet that high hanging fruit is wonderful. And to be honest if I was going to invest that time and money there are other aspects of SQ that I would probably pursue before sound stage improvements. For me tight, clear bass would be the thing that could turn into an obsession.......if I let it. |
n80, I walked into my first high end salon in 1990, and it took me 25 years to reach the grapes; the grapes are a "holographic sound stage"; when you get that, all else is in place, it depends on everything working together. Never quit trying to reach the grapes; we're "audiophiles", reaching for sweet audio grapes is what we do. |
n80, it's for sure you can't miss what you never had. Unfortunately, those high end salons no longer exist that presented you music in a fashion that you had never heard before, but once you heard, there was no putting that Genie back in the bottle; you had to have it. As I stated before, at those shows with the worlds best audio, I doubt if anywhere had a good holographic image because of the numerous requirement in addition to the equipment that are required. The salons had the rooms, and audio fanatics who could put it altogether. The bottom line is the music, and not the equipment; having the music that makes you happy is most important. |
I think that as many have mentioned here it just depends on what you're after. I care nothing for "3D" movies and would never try to simulate that at home. I'm sure that with the right money, equipment, expertise and room that I could do it but why would I when I've seen the very best and didn't care for it? The point is, it isn't sour grapes to decide that you don't want or need some holographic effect that, as had been mentioned, requires knowledge, money, equipment and expertise. The truth is, that sentiment does not just come from those who have never experienced it. There are audio critics who have heard the best there is to hear and still don't put it at the top of their list of criteria that are important to them. Just Google it. And I think that is an inherent problem in the audiophile world. There is always this notion that someone has heard something that if everyone else could hear it they would love it and if they haven't heard it then they are claiming sour grapes. I like the grapes I can reach. I can acknowledge that the grapes I can't reach might be delicious but why make myself unhappy when I can't (or don't need to) reach them anyway? |
I'm 65, been playing with this stuff back when we use to get the digest sized 'Audio Mart' in the mail every month. The fun we had with the anticipation of looking at those ads every month. To continue our discussion: I would simply like to state that the more I can control my rooms 'interference' with the original signal being launched from my speaker driver, the more stuff I hear in my music when I listen. Those interesting comments we make to ourselves like 'I never heard that before'. I was never really trying to get the holographic effect in my sound stage, quite honestly I noticed it just happened when the room quit interfering... |
Some of the responses remind me of the fox and the grapes, if any of you remember that fable; after not being able to reach the grapes, he decided they were green. It took me years to get a holographic sound stage, but when I got it, I knew I had arrived. Not only does it require knowledge, but top notch components as well. "There are many who pretend to despise and belittle that which is beyond their reach." While a holographic sound stage is not beyond anyone's reach that has responded to this thread, it does require knowledge and effort. |
Orpheus 10, Very true, Audio salons nowadays are nothing like they used to be. (I’m probably as old or older than you are.) when I recently went to look for speakers at the two that were in my area, the presentation was ridiculous. I don’t know how they sell anything. On your other point, I’m not sure that three dimensionality is what I’m ultimately after. I don’t doubt it’s a sign of a top rate system, but I don’t think it will make me appreciate the music any more. As others have said, there are a lot of other factors which are important for musical gratification. That’s why some refer to it as a “trick.” It doesn’t necessarily help you get to the heart of the music. Having said that, I certainly would like to have it just for fun. |
Are you looking for opinions or are you looking for the means to attain it? Three dimensionality in your soundstage is possibly most effected by (my descending order?) 1. room acoustics, 2. speaker placement, 3. near field listening (or otherwise), 4. and speaker design. If these things aren't right for your room your electronic choices may be a mute point. Read, experiment, make adjustments, listen, be patient. I use a combination of Corner Tunes, Tube Traps, and Bybee products. Great results... |
I feel sorry for audiophiles who are younger than me, and that includes just about everybody. When I was getting my audiophile act together, I spent so much time at high end salons, that my wife swore I was seeing another women; no way would she believe that I would spend most of the day until late in the evening listening to audio equipment, but I was totally spellbound by these incredible 3D sounds; not only could you hear the performer, but it seemed that they were invisible, and in the room. This was top of the line equipment that I couldn't afford, and a lot of what I heard, I still can't afford, but I remember the sound, and that's what's important; that way, you know what it is that you are after. Not until you hear top of the line equipment in perfectly treated rooms will you believe what is possible. Not even with the same identical equipment at audio shows, can they duplicate what I heard, because the don't have the time and the room. They spent great effort on the most minute details in these "high end salons", and that's how they achieved such spectacular results. Words can not describe what the best components together sound like; you have to hear it for yourself, and the "high end salons" gave you that opportunity, you knew what the best and most expensive sounded like even if you couldn't afford it. Here is something I accomplished that may help you a little; while I was going to those salons, I decided to rate "Stereophile's" rating system; was it valid or invalid; I pronounced it valid; when I evaluated the equipment they had rated, I came to the same conclusion. Although if a component is on that line where it barely made "A" or "B", that can be an iffy situation, and they explain it. Without going to audio shows, this forum and audio magazine ratings are all you have to rely on. |
I said before that the idea of a ’holographic’ image is not all that important to me. But if I use that term, and maybe I use it wrong, that represents an image that has a near perfect representation of a projected realistic (sound) image. In other words that means to me : drums, 4 feet behind lead guitar and maybe a little behind the speakers, bass player 6 feet to the left, rhythm guitar 4 feet to the right, lead singer 8 feet in front of me and well in front of the speakers, voice 4.75 feet off the ground, lead singers just behind and to the left of the speakers. I do not get that with my system. And I don’t think many recordings give that sort of image. On the other hand, if the sound image was perfectly flat, or just in a big messy ball in the middle or if the music sounded like it was being piped out of my speakers like a hose, then yes, that would be a deal breaker. As others have mentioned, even with a low end system I can usually get the speakers in the right place to at least have the sound in the middle and out in front of the speakers and with some hint of 3 dimensionality. |
Source is Marantz 8260 CD player, or, tweaked to the bone RP3, Grado Master 2 cartridge, followed by an Audible Illusions Modulus 3A that feeds Primaluna monoblocks. I have custom 3 way speakers that utilize a Heil AMT; they're dipole; this helps the holographic sound stage. My listening room has a vaulted ceiling, the speakers are 4 feet from the front wall and 2 feet from the side walls. Now that it's winter, all is perfect; let me explain that; the left wall is a sliding glass door to the patio; that's not good. However, since it's winter, I have that door covered over with light insulation; consequently, no more sliding glass door, but a wall of insulation that makes the room perfect. I consider what I have to be the ground floor of a good holographic image. I will be glad to answer any question you have. |
For me, there has been nothing more important; when it appeared in my listening room, I knew everything else was together. It is impossible to get a good holographic image without top notch electronics, that let me know that I not only had high end components, but high end sound as well. While it varies from record to record, the essence of depth and 3D is always there. |
Don't get me wrong. I'm not saying there's NO imaging. lots have studies have proven our ear/brain mechanism along with HRTF can localize objects in a 3D space!! I'm just saying, I've heard speakers do it MORE than real. The Guitarron was really interesting because even though it is a plucked instrument, it's sound is pretty low, as low as a double bass to my ears. Best, E |
erik, I just find this so weird. My experience is different. Just a couple weeks ago I encountered two different small bands playing on the sidewalk in my city. One was acoustic guitar, stand up bass and a sax. Other was larger, drums, tuba, trumpet, sax, electric guitar and I think trombone. In both cases when I closed my eyes the musicians were distinctly "imaged and soundstaged" with obvious localization. And I find that typical when I hear live acoustic music. (As in for instance some of the pubs near me where live acoustic music is played - in particular Irish instrumentals, vocals etc) |
Hey Gang, So this past weekend I heard a 3 piece mexican acoustic band at a restaurant. A harpist, guitar, and something that looked like a very fat guitar, called a guitarron. Interestingly, I could place the harp and guitar, but not the guitarron. I was looking right at them, about 15' away. Also, it reset my expectation for what 3D sound is like in real life. I still like my original statements: Live music is not that holographic, but we may sure like it. :) E |
Most decent speakers and systems are capable of making a reasonably good stage, on plain and slightly wider than the plain of the speakers. To each their own, but, after several years as lead guitar in a 60s rock band and many more years of attending live performances of every genre of live music, I'm to the point that I simply can't handle up front and in your face music. Live acoustic jazz, small venue folk and live chamber, where I could enjoy 5th row center, without a 90-100db battering and the agony of a three day headache, eventually became my favorite venues of live performances. I'll happily stick with ribbons and stats that put the performance behind and well extended beyond the bounds of the speakers - placing the performers and instruments each in their own space, on a stage behind the speakers and not in my face, ....Jim |
When I was 16 I figured out how to place stereo systems to generate a stereo image. Now at 53 I have met a few who had crazy amounts of $ in audio but only heard imaging in my systems. I could spend $200 at parts express on a system and it would image wonderfully after a easy set up. Its really not that hard or costly to generate a stereo image. And while I would say its important I could easily live with one large horn playing in mono. But to honestly answer this question about producing holographic images that are 3d visuals I dont have a holographic imaging set up conected to my audiosystems. Maybe in the future when such tech exists I will adopt it so at this time its not important in the future when it can render a 3d lynda carter it may become very important |
n80, I totally agree with you. Everything you said regarding the size of the soundstage and placement of singers and instruments is identical to what I hear with my systems, although my systems components are totally different than your system. I also agree it all varies with the recording. Like you, I enjoy the music and don't concentrate where things are within the soundstage. |
I’m not clear on the nuances of sound stage vs holographic vs imaging. So based on that here is my uneducated experience in the matter: Recent live rock show, small venue, speakers all over the place. No real sound stage or holography that I could perceive. I hear people describe listening to their system and saying they can hear the distinct position of every musician. I can’t say I’ve had that experience with my system very often. At first that disappointed me. It doesn’t anymore. With my system the sound stage has a shape. It is no higher than 8 feet. It sounds slightly wider than the room. Drums andback up singers often sound like they are at or slightly behind the speakers. Singers and lead instruments usually are out in front and between the speakers but usually not dead in the middle. This projects out into mid-room but not right up to my listening position which is of necessity a little farther from the speakers than I'd like. Sometimes there are sounds that sound like they are behind me but not regularly. All of this varies tremendously with the recording. With all 'good' recordings I hear separation between instruments regardless of where they seem to be in the room (my room). It can all be re-shaped to some extent by speaker placement. But at no time and with almost no recording does it sound like individual sounds are coming directly ’from’ or out of one of the speakers. The sound may be distinctly left of right but does not sound like it is piped out of the speaker. That’s all I really need. When I sit and concentrate on where something is within the sound stage I find that I’m not enjoying the music. So I don’t do it since that is the opposite of the reason that I listen to music. |
Re Carver, I grew up listening to my Dad's set up, which consisted of the Kef 105.2 speakers, driven by Carver's M-400t Magnetic Field Power Amplifier Cube, and the Carver C-1 Sonic Holography preamplifier. It was incredible sound and certainly introduced me to the magic of imaging. Though I found over time playing with the sonic holography that I often turned it off, as it sounded just a bit more artificial to me, and slightly altered the tone of the speakers (which imaged amazingly on their own). |
I believe the achievement of the "holographic" image you refer to is fully a function of the manor in which the music was recorded. There is a passage at the very end of season two Game of Thrones program where all of a sudden a crow calls out from high to the right of my room and sounds as if it flies right in front of my face. The first time I heard this I about jumped out of my chair. It is an amazing effect. But that's what it is, an effect. Most music is recorded in a studio with close mikes and then reverb and other signal processing is added. This can effect the holographic image you mention. In a live situation where acoustic instruments are played in a concert hall venue, the image is based on how the venue is recorded since a sense of space is naturally present vs. say a studio setting. I guess my point is that a decent system should reproduce whatever effect is inherent in the recording. A good example of imaging in my mind vs. "holography" is found on the track "Down to the Waterline" on the debut release from Dire Straits. Knopfler's guitar is positioned far left of the rest of the instruments which creates a very impactful effect. This is an example of a recording technique vs. room acoustics which, as stated, more naturally lends itself to the "holographic" effect mentioned. |
Ok, we are talking about imaging. (And soundstaging) I don’t know what I should consider an "extreme" case of imaging and soundstaging, as the imaging/soundstage of my system changes with the source. One minute I’m listening to a singer in a tiny dry space, intimately placed between the speakers with little ambience. The next I’m listening to a classical recording of a singer in the far distance with the sense of hearing in to a big hall. I don’t see which one should I consider "extreme" and why. The system simply reproduces the imaging/soundstaging encoded on the source, so by nature it changes "by extremes" when listening to extremely different recordings. Anyway, I hope you got some decent answers to what you meant to ask. |
You don’t like the term holograph. Fine. You finally got the point. As you rightly say: “...imaging and soundstaging is an artificial creation.” I’d say it’s impossible to be otherwise, unless you can place yourself where the microphones are. I guess you can regard holography is an extreme case of imaging and soundstaging, in which case you can understand my initial post. |
geoffkait, d2girls, oregonpapa Rhythm/pace is numero uno. One can have music with one note repeated in a rhythm/cadence. It can be acoustically dead or alive. But music is based on time first, then frequency/harmonics and then dynamics. All the other attributes of audio are extra such as imaging, soundstaging, tonal quality, etc. Sure I want all of the attributes, but without rhythm, there is no music. The imaging/holographic attributes are not a requirement for music; however, in an audio system, if the recordings has 3D sound characteristics, the better the system, the more accurate is its reproduction of it. |
Uhm...yes...it is obvious and well known, that in many cases (though not all) the imaging and soundstaging is an artificial creation. And of course the image/soundstage of the real event would be different for listeners on either side of the musicians. All obvious. The curious thing is you keep using a term "holography" when we already have terms that refer to these effects in stereo playback: Soundstaging. Imaging. Any decent stereo system will reproduce the encoded soundstage/imaging artifacts of the source. Yet you keep using the term as if to refer to SOMETHING DIFFERENT or BEYOND the soundstaging and imaging most of us hear. Why don’t you just ask people if soundstaging/imaging is important to enjoying their systems? Why introduce a distinction...with no distinction...that only confuses things? I was listening to some Gordon Lightfoot recently. His voice appeared floating between my speakers, with a sense of 3 dimensionality and body, very reminiscent of a real person who may have been sitting between the speakers. That’s imaging. What is different about that, vs the "holography" you are talking about? |
Prof. Again, if you followed my posts in this thread, you would know what I’m talking about. To reiterate, you don’t sit where microphones are placed. — usually in the air or a few inches away from a performer. You, therefore, are not getting the perspective the microphones are picking up. They are “floating in the air.” while you’re sitting on the floor at least several feet from the source of sound, whether at a concert or at home. This, of course is even more true at a symphony recording session where the mikes are placed far above the musicians. Obviously, the perspective is different. The recording is picking up the sound waves from a different location. Also, microphones are not ears. They “hear” differently than human ears depending on where they’re placed. What you’re getting in your listening chair is an artifact of the event not the real thing: a “holography.” |
rvpiano All stereo imaging of any singer is "disembodied" because...there are NO BODIES ACTUALLY THERE. It is a "disembodied" voice. That’s what I mean - ANY image of a singer’s voice between a pair of speakers is a "disembodied voice" - a trick getting us to perceive a voice where it is not in fact even occurring. Now you seem to be talking about the palpability of the reproduced sound. As in: Is it "dense" with the sense of "body" like one would hear from a real singer? Well...it seems to me we all want that. That’s what is so compelling about a live singer vs reproduced sound. And some systems are better at producing that sonic density, body and palpability of a singing voice than others. (As this sense of "body" and density is very important to me, my speakers are particularly good at giving that sense of physical density). So now it seems when you talk of a "holographic voice" you mean "disembodied" in the sense of the sound NOT having palpability, body and density. But then...that makes the question in your OP really weird. If by "holographic" you mean some dimensional sounding sonic image (e.g. voice) that lacks realistic body....why would you be asking if that is "important for people to achieve" in the first place??? I don’t know of any audiophiles who want their sound images to lack body and realism...so why would you think anyone would have the mindset that this "disembodied" character would be "a must for them to enjoy their systems?" I can’t make any sense of what you are trying to say here. Are you asking "Do you feel it is important to achieve a dimensional sonic image with no body to it’s presentation?" The obvious answer would be "no." I don’t know of any audiophiles who don’t want some body/palbality to the sonic image. Or are you asking "Do you want a holographic/dimensional image?" In which case, many of us will answer (and have answered) "yes" but this is par for the course in high end sound systems, and stereo speaker set ups, and it’s "imaging/soundstaging." |
