Stereophile Article - Holt telling it like it is.


http://stereophile.com/asweseeit/1107awsi/

Gordon Holt telling it the way it is. I have to tell you; I agree almost with 100% of what he's said. I look forward to the Stereophile print where a full article is too be written. I will purchase that issue.
lush
I'm missing something here, (not surprising actually) but I thought the industry was trending towards a more accurate / neutral presentation, characterised most definitively by the newest speakers from Sonus Faber and tube gear from Conrad Johnson.....
The problem with surround isn't the format, but inability to record great artists economically. Hardly anyone can afford to record a symphony orchestra in two-channel, much less surround.

Most people are happy with processed, synthetic surround, so the demand for high isn't sufficient for the producers to cater to audiophiles.

So I think surround, as an audiophile format, is DOA with no prospects for high rez development.

Meantime, the vinyl meisters have a giant treasure trove of high quality reissue material. The artists and performance quality matter way more than format, next comes resolution and finally format (with resolution maintained, not compromised).

Resolution of vinyl has reached incredible heights. Digital potential is equally good (my 1-bit recordings at 5.6MHz are stunning) but I think that vinyl will prevail, surprisingly, due to ease of operation. After the commercial failure of DVD-A and SACD who wants to commit to a new gamble on 5.6MHz digital? No one, I suspect.

Sorry if Gordon is "bored" with vinyl, but his quest for "spacial" aspects is likely doomed, in my estimation. I hope he's right, but I doubt it.

Dave
Holt's comment about missing midrange is right. After 17 yrs I had to replace an amplifier and what I discovered was bizarre. Interconnects filtering out overtones and increasing pitches. Amplifiers filtering out sound trying to sound more musical. While eliminating midrange and tonal qualities helps get rid of harmonic distortion from poorly mastered cd's and transitorized equipment, most of what makes music sound good is the overtones from the musical instruments, most of which is in the midrange. I've listened to systems worth in the $10,000 that have 80% of the sound missing. Soundstage is a nice effect, but not worth sacraficing high fidelity. If you want your recordings to sound musical, buy quality recordings by competent artists.
Is there an inverse relationship between equipment that can produce good soundstaging (the visual) and producing accurate and balanced sounds - ar the two at odds when designing an amplifier? a necessary tradeoff?
Don't really understand all the hype on " Hardware ". We could spend Ginormous amounts of $$$$$ and if the recording was badley made it is going to sound even worse. Let's spend a little more time and effort on making "GOOD"
recordings to play on these Megabuck systems everybody is trying to sell us and claiming how great they are.
Remember basics "Garbage In Garbage Out"