Chadeffect,
You stated, "Simplicity in my experience is the only way to get true organic and holographic sound." You don't seem to be leaving the door open to other possibilities that you have not yet experienced. |
Simplicity in my experience is the only way to get true organic and holographic sound.
It's about very short signal paths, single stage amps, little or no crossover, well damped components, and as few breaks in the signal path as possible.
Then you get to speaker placement and room correction. The foundation where the bass meets the midrange is very important.
The fine detail that enables the layering and depth of soundstage to come through are very delicate. Any fuzz or phase artefacts will kill those details and when that happens the holographic elements collapse into 2D flat presentation. |
Geoffkait,
I have never heard an MBL system that sounded irritating. |
Mapman wrote,
"mbl set up really well are hard to best in the holography dept."
I heard them at the Vegas Show, actually I couldn't help but hear them as the Mbl room was next door to the room I was in. I did visit the Mbl room, which had the complete Mbl system including amps the size of Volkswagons but I thought the system sounded pretty irritating. |
DS,
Very refreshing to hear your thoughts on audio/life. There is a sound that many ears have not heard that needs to be heard. I believe most in this audio journey have a desire to hear not just a natural sound that is organic and pure but also to hear the sounds from above. Sad but most don't even know it!! |
Douglas_schroeder,
I choose my reference CDs carefully for the complexity of ambient cues. Here are four of my favorite reference CDs. The Oscar Peterson recording is a live recording that is full of subtle ambient cues. The Johnny Rivers recording features live performances full of subtle ambient cues. The Boz Scaggs recording is a studio recording with many subtle ambient cues. The Joni Mitchell recording is a studio recording with many subtle ambient cues. Using these and many other reference CDs it is very easy to discern a degradation in the sound or a loss of detail/definition.
1. The Sound of the Trio, Oscar Peterson, recorded Live at The London House in Chicago in 1961 (remastered).
2. Johnny Rivers, Secret Agent Man, The Ultimate Johnny Rivers Anthology, 1964-2006 (remastered).
3. Boz Scaggs Hits! (remastered).
4. Joni Mitchell Court and Spark (remastered). |
Douglas_schroeder,
I beg to differ. If there were a loss in detail with any item added to my system, that item would not be in my system. If the use of series cabling and "tweaks" were detracting from the sound I would have abandoned this approach long ago. I do not have the time or money to waste on things that do not work.
On the contrary, each and every cable and "tweak" in series adds significantly to the sound. There is no "trade off" or "loss" whatsoever. The facts are the exact opposite of what your comments state. Every series cable and "tweak" enhances the sound in my system. I am extremely meticulous in what I do. I test each addition to the system with my reference CDs. I look for even the slightest loss of detail or definition. These are CDs I have played thousands of times. They are chosen for their subtle qualities.
You stated that "It is impossible to keep interrupting/adding to the signal path and have an absolute increase in definition and detail." I'm sorry but you are absolutely incorrect on this point. If you travel to Asia please let me know and we'll have you over for a good home-cooked meal and a nice listening session. I have no doubt whatsoever that you will change your mind after you listen to my system.
According to your reasoning, if I have 20 Bybee products in my system there should be a noticeable degradation in the quality of the sound with each Bybee product added. But the opposite is actually what happens. I imagine this is similar to what Nordost claims for their Quantum Q4X. The positive effects are cumulative.
Mapman,
Your lighthearted comment missed the point completely when you stated, "Look, if continuous tweaking is what floats one boat or keeps one of trouble, then by all means have at it and tweak away." It is as though you think I an doing this just for fun. I am not in audio for fun. This is a serious pursuit for me. I do not waste time or money on things that do not work -- certainly not the time and money I have invested in my audio system. If you think that Jack Bybee's products are "esoteric tweaks" I imagine you have never heard what they can do for a good system. They are as fundamental in my system as components. |
I have never heard the MBL speakers sound anything but defuse and phasey. Probably a room boundary issue.
A big magnepan would get you just as far if not further IMHO. The money you save could go towards SOTA amplification. |
Look, if continuous tweaking is what floats one boat or keeps one of trouble, then by all means have at it and tweak away.
I guess I'm more of a music person. The gear tweaks, etc. is just a means to an end for me. Once I am there I am done until something changes. I find I place less and less value in esoteric tweaks these days than in past when perhaps my gear was not performing up to snuff and I did not have the knowledge and finances needed to get the fundamental things right first. |
It needs to be stated that there WILL be a tradeoff for all this "holographic" sound; the trade off will be a loss of detail/defintion. It is impossible to keep interrupting/adding to the signal path and have an absolute increase in definition and detail.
For this reason I keep my signal path as short as possible.
The "holographic" sound can be generated readily enough via products which treat the signal, i.e. cables with networks, room correction devices, etc. I find these all to ultimately fail my Law of Efficacy as they all detract from the sound quality as much as enhance it. I fear the daisy chaining of cables would do similarly.
I have not yet, but do intend on testing this with XLR cables. |
mbl set up really well are hard to best in the holography dept. I have heard them that way at a local dealers showroom. There was 5-6 feet to the sides and 12' or more behind them + a lot of other room acoustic tweaks in place.
The same dealers rig setup at shows I have attended were more back with the pack, largely do to less than ideal setup and room acoustics.
So results can and will vary no matter how good gear may be. |
Hi Geoff,
I have tried quite a few Belt products in the past. I must admit the strangest but most profound effects. I had much fun with various foils at the time.
The one that sticks in my mind most was a foil which I put on the ICs in my DAC at the time. I left the lid open so I could audition simply and find the best places for the foils.
The moment the foil touched the chip I felt something had changed. I went back to the hot seat and the music had become so clear and vivid compared to before the foil was added.
I have no idea how to explain what took place other than a profound sense of the music content. It was magical. Luckily for me a friend was over and he experienced it too, otherwise I would have booked myself into a mental asylum! |
Mapman,
As I mentioned in an earlier post, when I visit Singapore I make a point of taking my reference CDs to the MBL showroom at the Adelphi 1 Audio Mall. They are very friendly and never rush me. The imaging and holography of my system consistently outranks the MBL systems I have auditioned. The imaging changes very subtly with movement to the left or right of axis -- there is no dramatic change -- as though one were moving to a different position in a concert hall. This is the only way I know how to give you a sense of what happens in my system. It is really uncanny. I have never heard anything like it before, and I have heard a lot of very expensive high end systems with many of the biggest names attached to the components and cabling.
Geoffkait, I have not tried the WA Quantum Chips or Belt products. I have only read about them. I have a two Kemp products in my system. |
Sabai wrote,
"I have upwards of 20 Bybee products in my system and upwards of 20 other "tweaks" in my system. My system would not exist without Bybee products. I recently added a pair of Combak Harmonix MIC Enacoms to the system and they are a wonderful product. But there is nothing I know of that could substitute for most of the Bybee products that I have in my system."
Have you tried the WA Quantum Chips from Germany? They're all the rage.
Link to WA Quantum Chips at:
http://www.kempelektroniks.com/Accessoires/WA-Quantum-Chips-(1).aspx
Back on the subject of information retrieval, ever try any of the Belt products? |
"The music is rendered holographically in three dimensions so that when you are seated in a different position in the hall the sound just takes on a slightly different aspect but does not cease to be holographically three dimensional."
That is the thing often attributed uniquely to omnis.
As I mentioned, my Dynaudio monitor setup that runs off this same gear as my more omni OHMs exhibit this quality as well, as do many well set up rigs I have heard at dealers and even shows over the years.
The key difference I notice between the omni OHMs in particular and the Dynaudios in this regard is that with the OHMS, if I move say to the left the holographic image shifts to the right, much like in real life. WIth the Dyns, if I shift left, the image does as well. ALso the OHMs will continue to exhibit this behavior from most any location in front of the speakers, even if well to the outside of either. With the more directional Dynaudio monitors, the soundstage will tend to diffuse sooner if listened to from more highly deviant locations. |
Orpheus10,
You asked, "How do you do that?" regarding hearing holographic sound outside the sweet spot. This seems to be a function of the amazing imaging that my system has. Once the voices and instruments have their own positions on the sound stage and the ambience of the venue is created by the system, the sound does not fundamentally change outside the sweet spot.
It is like attending a concert. There is no sweet spot in a concert hall. The music is rendered holographically in three dimensions so that when you are seated in a different position in the hall the sound just takes on a slightly different aspect but does not cease to be holographically three dimensional.
Of course, in my system, this also depends on the recording. It does not apply to old Beatles albums. The better the recording, the better this effect will be rendered. On better recordings the sound is stunning. As to "how" I do that, it is the daisy-chained front and and the series cabling that is producing the effect. |
There's also a big difference between artificial effects vs. what's actually going on in the recording studio. Not a lot being said about that here. But there is a lot of hysterics going on considering what is actually achievable with cables. |
Kijanki - We are in agreement.
bc |
The controversial: Some folks claim that longer power cables can result in better SQ. The explanation typically offered attributes the improvement to reduced "reflections." That may be nonsense It is nonsense for audio cables. I'm not sure about power cables but home wiring is so long that any difference shouldn't matter. I don't know why longer cable should reduce reflections and if it does it wouldn't be a good thing, since we're talking about high frequency energy, that is far better to dissipate in cable on multiple reflections than to enter power supply. The system specific: On a few occasions I've had cables that were so short that they created a "nest" of criss-crossing behind components. In those cases, I have sometimes opted for a longer cable to provide wider spacing between cables, which at least in theory, could result in less interference and therefore better SQ. True, but I'm only talking about "sound" of the cable alone. Speaker wires 1ft long will most likely sound better than 10 footers but speakers 2 feet apart will not. Longer IC might allow to separate interacting components benefiting overall sound but it doesn't change the fact that shorter IC causes less of transparency loss itself. The semantic: The generalization that "Shorter cables are always better" might give a false impression that shorter cables are always AUDIBLY better than longer ones of otherwise equivalent design. I suspect that, for any specific design, there is a range of lengths which are sonically indistinguishable. True, but if you believe that particular cable has any affect on the sound then half of the cable will have half of the effect. |
09-20-12: Kijanki
"I agree with Al that shorter cables are not always better"
He mentioned exception of digital cables related to timing of the reflections, but shorter analog cables should always be better. I've never heard of anybody claiming improvement with longer analog audio cable, other than salesmen trying to find excuse to sell more common longer cable (1m vs. 0.75m or 0.5m IC) that he has in stock. Hi Kijanki - My post was written playfully, not precisely. I agree with both you and Al that digital cables are the most demonstrable exception to the generalization that shorter cables are always better. Having said that, there may be other exceptions, though they are either controversial, system specific, or semantic... The controversial: Some folks claim that longer power cables can result in better SQ. The explanation typically offered attributes the improvement to reduced "reflections." That may be nonsense, I'm not technically competent enough to say. The system specific: On a few occasions I've had cables that were so short that they created a "nest" of criss-crossing behind components. In those cases, I have sometimes opted for a longer cable to provide wider spacing between cables, which at least in theory, could result in less interference and therefore better SQ. The semantic: The generalization that "Shorter cables are always better" might give a false impression that shorter cables are always AUDIBLY better than longer ones of otherwise equivalent design. I suspect that, for any specific design, there is a range of lengths which are sonically indistinguishable. This is particularly likely with balanced cables. Bryon |
Mapman,
You stated, "Tweaks are what they are...tweaks." All tweaks are not created equal. If you had the pleasure of having Bybee "tweaks" in your system I think you would agree. |
Newbee,
Substitute "directional" for "dynamic" and I would agree with most of what you said.
I am not sure directional speakers are necessarily easier to set up with adequate results than omnis. I think it depends. In smaller rooms with limited placement options away from walls, that might be true.
Tweaks are what they are...tweaks. You no doubt have to get the big things, starting with speaker and matching amp selection, speaker placement + room acoustics, right first for best results, not to say that good results might still be achieved otherwise, just not the best possible. |
On the subject of speaker placement and holographic image, one thing worth mentioning is that most speakers are set too far apart. I suppose many folks assume they will be able to obtain a wider soundstage do they frequently place the speakers rather far apart and toe them in as well. When I set up the speakers according to the XLO Test CD, specifically the Out of Phase track, I found, curiously enough, that the speakers presented a much more solid, deeper and wider soundstage placed about four (4) feet from each other, as opposed to say six feet - and with no toe in. XLO Test CD Test CD cautions that most speakers are placed to far apart. Obviously, the ideal distance for a given pair of speakers depends on at least a few factors. The ideal distance cannot necessarily be found by ear because you can easily wind up with a local maximum, not the real maximum. |
I believe most people who use single wiring throughout their system are unaware that holographic sound has virtually limitless gradations -- unless they have visited a showroom or listened to a friend's system where exceptional sound opened their ears and mind to something unimagined. In fact, most of the very high end showrooms I have had the pleasure to visit had a rather simple front end and rather simple cabling that undervalued the components they were displaying.
Most people build the cabling in their system by purchasing cables from one company or by mixing and matching cables from different companies. This is a process of adding a cable here, subtracting a cable there, a rather simple process where, if the audiophile is lucky, he or she may discover a really good addition to their system, for example, any of the HiDiamond cables or a Synergistic Research Hologram D power cord.
But few audiophiles that I know get into "tweaking" with inline products. None that I know do cabling in series and only two that I know do parallel cabling. Very few audiophiles daisy chain isolation transformers, power regenerators and power conditioners. So, it is understandable that the reaction of many to an unconventional approach to building a system using components and cables in series would be scratching the head and a good measure of disbelief. |
Mapman, I agree that either dynamic speakers or omni's can meet someone's expectations of holography.
But to get there one needs to thoroughly understand how the speaker propogates its sound and how the room will react to the sound. IMHO this is the most difficult aspect of audio and the one, which when absent, will most often keep folks from achieving anything much more than a pedestrian sense of 'soundstaging' certainly not anything aproaching holography as very well described by Sabai in his response to me. Clearly he understands how I define holography.
At the risk of being a pedant, or sounding pedestrian in this group, Omni's are very difficult to set up because one has to deal actively with the back wave, albeit there is much less problem with first reflections points.
Dynamic speakers (not dipole ones) are on one hand easier to set up and achieve an adequate sound stage (thought by many to be excellent) but which are handicapped by the user's lack of understanding of all of the set up issues. They know that they are lacking something but don't know what that might be so they fuel the tweak industry seeking the holy grail when all they really had to do was move the speakers a bit to deal with first reflections, including toe in which, by the way, is far more important than many think - folks seem to do this only to adjust tonal balance, not realizing the effect of first reflections off side walls and ceiling.
For example, many manufacturers recommend that speakers be set up so that they fire straight down the room. Why do they do this? Apart from possibly reflecting consideration for the speakers response on and off axis, because the first reflections off the adjacent walls will make an 'apparent' wider sound stage.
In the real world (mine anyway) i.e. our typical room, what this means is that the speakers have to be placed quite a few feet from the side walls resulting an adequate space between them to keep from rendering a congested center image, especially considering when the sweet spot is set up, but hey its wide! Consider that the only sound that should appear outside the speakers is out of phase sounds!
In that same room, you can place a dynamic speaker very close to the side walls (so long as it is not near a second room boundry (corner/back wall) IF you toe the speaker in so it crosses in front of the listener in his sweet spot and if necessary deaden the side wall surface adjacent to the speaker. That can easily create an uncongested stereo image which is as wide as the room behind the speakers, and incidentially because of the sound arrival time of each speaker create a much wider 'sweet' spot. It can also diffuse ceiling reflections as well which can be beneficial depending on height and surface. It can also produce a great sense of depth dependent on the space behind the speaker, the quality of the drivers and electronics, and lastly, IMHO, the effectiveness of any tweaks.
So, IMHO, as a practical matter it isn't nearly as important which type of speaker one selects as it is how well he understands them and how to use them in his room. Actually this is fairly scientific and predictible for those with the energy to research and learn.
FWIW.
|
"I agree with Al that shorter cables are not always better"
He mentioned exception of digital cables related to timing of the reflections, but shorter analog cables should always be better. I've never heard of anybody claiming improvement with longer analog audio cable, other than salesmen trying to find excuse to sell more common longer cable (1m vs. 0.75m or 0.5m IC) that he has in stock. |
Bryoncunningham,
Great post. I loved it. |
I agree with Sabai that “holography” is difficult to achieve.
I agree with Newbee that ‘holography’ needs to be better defined.
I agree with Kijanki that shorter cables are usually better.
I agree with Al that shorter cables are not always better.
I agree with Douglas that daisy chaining cables produces a lot of confounding variables.
I agree with Al that cable performance is highly system dependent.
I agree with Mapman that good speaker placement improves “holography.”
I agree with Onhwy61 that good room acoustics improve “holography.”
I agree with Douglas that omnidirectional speakers improve “holography.”
I agree with Orpheus that the degrees of “holography” never end.
I agree with Csontos that Sabai might achieve even more "holography" if he changed his ratio of spending on tweaks vs. equipment.
I agree with Douglas that Sabai's experimental creativity should be commended.
IÂ’m feeling agreeable today.
Bryon |
Douglas_schroeder and Mapman,
I agree completely that speakers are the most vital component when one is trying to create a "holographic system". I have owned many different brands but only the Joseph Audio Pulars have enabled the sound to reach this level. I am sure there are many other brands that would allow for the same level or an even higher level. |
Geoffkait,
I am not familiar with the Audio Pulse Model One. But you stated, "It was later on that I discovered how much information is actually buried in recordings, that even very large and expensive systems fail to reproduce, and what was required to extract that buried information for 2 channel stereo. The real ambient information was there all along, we just couldn't hear it!"
My system extracts an amazing amount of the ambient information you are referring to. The more I make changes that improve the system the more information is extracted and the more life-like and holographic the sound becomes. This is what has been so astonishing through this whole process.
Mapman,
I am using Joseph Audio Pulsar monitors. They are about 8 feet apart and my listening position is about 9 feet from each speaker. They are slightly toed-in. My ears are at tweeter level but I have them fired well to the outside of my ears.
Mapman,
Bybees products are the best bang for the buck in my system -- by far. They are absolutely phenomenal. I picked them all up for reasonable prices on Audiogon. I would highly recommend looking out for them. Be patient because they don't come up very often anymore -- and do a bit of research, in the meantime, on various forums where Bybee users have posted their observations. I have never heard of anyone who was disappointed with Bybee products.
I have upwards of 20 Bybee products in my system and upwards of 20 other "tweaks" in my system. My system would not exist without Bybee products. I recently added a pair of Combak Harmonix MIC Enacoms to the system and they are a wonderful product. But there is nothing I know of that could substitute for most of the Bybee products that I have in my system.
Douglas_schroeder,
I am also thankful to God every day for the blessings he has bestowed on me and my wife -- most importantly saving a life that was "hopelessly lost", according to modern medicine. The fact that he has enabled me to assemble an audio system that I never dreamed even existed is icing on the cake.
I am not familiar with the King Tower. I will Google it and have a look. What products are you referring to with transducer technology? |
"Regarding discussion of various technologies which produce the "holographic" soundstage, I have found no greater technology than the Omnidirectional speaker."
Agree, though as mentioned it is still quite possible with more directional designs as well with proper setup.
ALso certainly quality speaker designs including use of quality transducers are key. Poor quality in the speakers will likely greatly limit or mostly prohibit what might be obtained via other subsequent tweaks including to power otherwise. |
Sabai, I should be asking you the questions, as opposed to you asking me. My "holography" does not follow me around the room. When I leave the sweet spot, I leave the holography, maybe I can train it to follow me around the room.
But laying all jokes aside, "how do you do that"?
|
Now, to return my discussion to the topic of the thread...
Regarding discussion of various technologies which produce the "holographic" soundstage, I have found no greater technology than the Omnidirectional speaker. I have used far more capable speakers, but none create the specific "holographic" experience like an Omni.
There is a dearth of omnidirectional speakers in the market, imo. I felt the King Tower, which I obtained as a cancelled product it seems from Kings Audio, is a fantastic device at the price point. If it had been set up well and showcased at shows vs. put off to the side and not run I believe many would have been sold.
Then again, the zany blue foam balls which were stuffed between modules didn't help! I removed them immediately, which improved the speakers performance markedly.
But as to the most profound way to elicit a holographic soundstage - imo it's the transducer technology. Why? Basically any piece of gear (excepting special conditions ie. low power amps etc.) will alter the "3-D-ness" of the soundstage to a degree, but never as much as a complete technology shift in terms of a speaker. Whereas different cabling, amps, etc. display less fundamental shifts in spaciousness of soundstage, differing transducers display it fundamentally. YMMV |
Seeing my post from 2004 gives me motivation to thank the Lord for his goodness to me in the past eight years!
The "etherial sound system" I referred to was an allusion to Heaven, not an audio system. My priorities will always surround my faith. As such my lifetime giving plan (Yes, I have planned it and am executing the plan) to the Lord is intact, and in fact my wife and I have been able to increase it as a percentage of our income over the past eight years. Audio has never and will never cause that to deviate.
As a result of an invitation from Constantine Soo of Dagogo.com I began reviewing in 2006 and that has allowed me to buy far nicer gear. As my wife and I save, budget and invest, as well as received an inheritance I have been able to obtain some items which were not within reach years ago.
I would like to encourage those who don't see fancy gear in their lives to be patient and work consistently toward that goal, as audio dreams do become reality!
So, I appreciate the opportunity to look back and give thanks to God! :) |
SAbai,
I am not very familiar with the Bybee products. They seem to have a dedicated following. Are they worth the money? Could similar results be produced somehow for less? |
"With my system, you can move around the room and all the elements remain in place. It is quite uncanny. "
Sabai, what speakers are you using and what is the configuration in the room relative to the listening position or area?
Conventional speakers can be set up to somewhat emulate this aspect most commonly associated with more omnidirectional designs like mbl or OHM. I can say the same about my Dynaudio monitors setup in my 12X12 room. It generally involves a setup where tweeters are not firing directly at the listener and effective use of room acoustics to leverage reflected sound effectively similar to what omnis do more naturally. |
Sabai, I acquired an Audio Pulse Model One, a digital time delay system that had three (3) sets of outputs (L and R). The user could select among a small club, a medium size auditorium or large concert hall. Each set of channels, front, side, rear, output the reverberant decay information associated with the size of venue selected. Separate amplifiers and speakers were necessary for the full system; however, inexpensive amplifiers and speakers could be and were used since the Audio Pulse Model One produced "non-coherent signals" and only up to 8 kHz for the ambient information channels. This time delay system, with all three sets of ambient channels, was capable of producing a soundstage as big as Kansas, much larger than the room, perhaps 30 feet deep in some cases. Note, the volume of the ambient channels relative to the primary speakers was much lower so as not draw attention to themselves.
It was later on that I discovered how much information is actually buried in recordings, that even very large and expensive systems fail to reproduce, and what was required to extract that buried information for 2 channel stereo. The real ambient information was there all along, we just couldn't hear it! |
Csontos,
Regarding your competence to judge this matter on more than a "my-opinion" basis, please let us know how many Bybee products you have in your system and if you are running them in series with HiDiamond power cords, interconnects, digital cable and speaker cables and a equivalent line-up of Synergistic Research active cables.
Once you fill us in with the details of your system we will have a basis on which to judge if you have enough experience in this area to make competent judgments about the systems of others who are doing series cabling. Please give us the details of your system and your cabling. |
The most educated decision you can make if you're reading this thread is to understand and follow Al's responses, however sometimes veiled they may be. He can be far too diplomatic at times imo. But he's been pretty clear here once you've weeded through it. The thing with conditioners is that when you use your power at the optimal time of day, it'll probably sound better without it. Biggest difference I've experienced with that issue is when I installed a dedicated line. I once accidentally plugged my amp into the wrong strip and wondered what was wrong till I noticed it. Very significant difference when I changed it back. That and decent interconnects/speaker cables with large enough awg. is what you need to realize the potential of your gear. The probable non-existent change you'll realize by spending huge money on gimmicky products is far better spent on a nicer piece of gear. |
What we're starting to see here is typical of many threads that begin to destruct when the "special" posters take over and do their thing. I would like to keep this thread going in the positive way it was started, if possible. Once the positive discussion is over and the thread is ready to be archived it should be allowed to arrive at the archive on its own -- not by sabotage. In the latter case interested posters back off because of all the flack in the air where they would normally be participating in a positive way.
If anyone has bones to pick with me I have no problem with that. They can start a special thread entitled "Sabai is a nut case" or "What rock did Sabai crawl out from under". These thread titles are only suggestions. You can make up your own. |
Csontos,
With all due respect, you have absolutely no idea what you are talking about.
Mapman,
Using only a power conditioner will not get you there. I have four elements in my front end and the addition of the isolation transformer and power regenerator made the biggest difference to the sound.
Mapman, you stated "Even if it turns out a particular gadget seems to work, why it does what it appears to do is still a mystery and the chances of similar results being repeated elsewhere in any kind of predictable manner is probably low." I use Bybee products throughout my system and the addition of each Bybee has given a predictably significant improvement to the sound. |
" any yutz with ears knows that specs are meaningless"
Well, then I guess I am not a yutz with ears, neophyte or otherwise.
GEoff, with you as ones guru, I am sure most anything of actual value is pretty meaningless. |
Mapman wrote,
"Wires/power cords and many other esoteric tweaks seldom provide much of anything in terms of specifications or other measurable attributes that can be used to make an educated decision."
That is SO funny. If you ever bothered to get up out of that Lazy Boy and take a look around, you might find that things have changed since the 1980s. :-) All major brands of audiophile cables and power cords, Cardas, Audioquest, Nordost, to name a few of the big boys, provide specs for their products. Power cords are required to Meet certain standards and specifications. Only a backsliding mossback would lump wires and cables in with esoteric tweaks. Besides, any yutz with ears knows that specs are meaningless. For anything. Welcome to the next century. :-) |
I do think that clean power, however that is achieved in any particular listener's case, helps. I have heard this to be the case even when I first introduced my modest Monster power strip into my system.
There are many threads here on A'gon about the effects of having clean power and how to go about assuring or achieving it. My recommendation would be to handle it once at the source via a power conditioner suitable for the task at hand. The best/most respected ones also provide specifications that clearly indicate power/current delivery and noise filtering capabilities so one can make an educated decision about which one to try. Wires/power cords and many other esoteric tweaks seldom provide much of anything in terms of specifications or other measurable attributes that can be used to make an educated decision. Even if it turns out a particular gadget seems to work, why it does what it appears to do is still a mystery and the chances of similar results being repeated elsewhere in any kind of predictable manner is probably low. |
Sabai, this whole thread is a joke "book", and you wrote it. But the joke's on you. You're the only one not laughing. Any one who believes the statements you've made is as desperate as you are to legitimize all the money they've wasted on glorified wires rather than concentrating their efforts on gear instead. With the money you've spent, you could've acquired gear that would put what you've got to shame with simple lamp chord! |
Mapman,
Yes, cleaner power is definitely a prerequisite here. I heard two very expensive systems in Bangkok recently -- beautiful Tad speakers with Marantz amplification and the amazing all-Accuphase showroom. Both lacked basic AC cleaning that I consider minimal and it showed. They could have done so much better if they had paid attention to their front end, their cabling and their "tweaks". But that would not have made for a pretty showroom. |
Mapman,
I have auditioned various MBL systems at the MBL showroom in Singapore on different occasions. MBL is in the Adelphi 1 Audio Mall. I brought my own reference CDs the last time I was there. My system sounds better that what I heard at MBL. But my system does have an omni-directional quality similar to MBL. |
I have also heard some small monitors do holography very well in smaller rooms. My Triangle Titus monitors do it very well even when I used to run them off very modest vintage Tandberg or Carver amplification (even with no Carver holography engaged).
My Dynaudio monitors with right setup are no slouches currently in the holography department in my small 12X12 office room.
I've heard Magico minis running off very high end electronics and wires do it very well also (for a price).
Other quality systems can do it to varying degrees as well although room size, acoustics and associated limitations are often more of a limiting factor with many larger speaker designs.
Cleaner power definitely helps as well from my experience to-date. |
For the ultimate in out of the box holography (for a price), audition an mbl omni system properly set up. That is the best I have ever heard overall, but pricey and in a large showroom with many feet distance from rear and side walls.
The OHM Walshes I use do nice job as well for much more reasonable cost, but I do not think they can deliver the soundstage depth that the full omni mbls can with their default configuration, which attenuates sound levels in wall facing directions to accommodate placement closer to walls than is desirable with true full omnis like mbl. |
There is a way of using the six available channels of a DVDA or SACD which generates a real 3-dimensional sound field (as apposed to an imagined one) It is called 2 2 2. There are four front spealers, Left high, Left low, Right high, Right low, Left rear and Right rear. This system was demo'd in Europe to great aclaim, but very few discs have been issued using this configuration. I have a couple, but never really made the appropriate speaker setup to evaluate it. Too bad. |
