What Does Holographic Sound Like?
Let's assume the harmonizer has a clear positive effect and the price was not an issue. I still would probably not by it. Its just me but I would not want to have to depend on such a device in order to enjoy my music. To me, it would be analogous to needing a respirator to breathe or some kind of drug in order to enjoy something. I would not want that. But hey, maybe it transports one into a new dimension of sound that is just in a new league of some sort. Maybe I would change my mind..... |
Hi Bryoncunningham, Thanks for your response. I tried my best to explain how I see things here. Your analysis is detailed and faultless. I find no flaws in your reasoning. I simply place a different emphasis on the importance of the room in the equation -- for now, at least. At the moment I am too cramped. My Shakti Hallographs are squeezed too close and I don't have room to mount my SR ART. I am in a dedicated listening room about 14 x 15 feet with a 9-foot ceiling. Once we remodel I will have a dedicated listening room about 18 x 26 feet with a 12-foot ceiling. I can't wait -- but I'll have to. |
Mapman wrote, "Let's assume the harmonizer has a clear positive effect..." That's probably a wise assumption, you know, judging from all the rave reviews and testimonials floating around. "... and the price was not an issue." Take your choice, inexpensive tweaks you suspect probably don't work because they don't cost enough or tweaks you suspect probably do work because they're so expensive. :-) "...I still would probably not by it." I betting you're right. "Its just me but I would not want to have to depend on such a device in order to enjoy my music. To me, it would be analogous to needing a respirator to breathe or some kind of drug in order to enjoy something. I would not want that." Oh, boy, here we go again with the drug addict analogy. I didn't see that coming! :-) "But hey, maybe it transports one into a new dimension of sound that is just in a new league of some sort. Maybe I would change my mind....." Dr. Miles J. Bennell: Listen to me! Please listen! If you don't, if you won't, if you fail to understand, then the same incredible terror that's menacing me WILL STRIKE AT YOU! - Invasion of the Body Snatchers :-) |
Bryoncunningham, The acoustic treatments will be Shakti Hallographs, SR ART and I would like to add the Steinmusic Harmonizer System, as well. I have been interested in the latter for a couple of years. Unfortunately, it is going to take time for the construction work to get done. We're looking at a time horizon of a couple of years at the moment. Since we have a large property we may end up building a new bigger house on it and sell off the old house that we are living in now. The cost of renovation is so high that building new is starting to make sense to us. |
Hi Bryon and Sabai - I will now chime in on your discussion here. By and large, if I am understanding both of your positions here, I agree with Sabai. Bryon, when you are talking about your concept of "reactive" listening rooms, you seem to be implying that they are more "live" than the original recording space. For those of us that listen mostly to classical and jazz, this is quite simply false. The vast majority of these recordings are not done in a studio, but in a concert hall or church or jazz club, all of which are MUCH more "live" than any recording studio. One of the biggest reasons that a home listening room can never match the original recording space is precisely because there is almost no way to make the room as "live" as the recording space was. Your discussion, however, might be much more valid for mostly electronically produced music done in a studio. I think this is where the difference in the positions of Sabai and yourself are coming from. The rest of the discussion, I think we are all in basic agreement with. |
10-08-12: LearsfoolI didn't mean to imply that. With the word "reactive," I was simply referring to listening rooms with significant reflection, diffraction, and diffusion. So basically, a room that isn't "dead." The vast majority of these recordings are not done in a studio, but in a concert hall or church or jazz club, all of which are MUCH more "live" than any recording studio. One of the biggest reasons that a home listening room can never match the original recording space is precisely because there is almost no way to make the room as "live" as the recording space was.I don't believe that typical listening rooms are more reactive than typical recording spaces outside the studio. I'm not sure what gave you the impression that I believe that. I agree with you that typical listening rooms are in fact significantly LESS reactive than typical recording spaces outside the studio. IMO, the lack of "reactivity" is one of the major problems with typical listening rooms, as I mentioned in my last post. So I think this is a point about which we are in agreement. And FWIW, I don't believe that a listening room MUST BE more reactive than the recording space in order to be effective at creating "holographic" sound or the illusion that "you are there." In fact, I believe that "holographic" sound can be achieved even in a dead room, as I mentioned in my last post. On the other hand, the illusion that "you are there" is more difficult to achieve in a dead room, IMO. Whether the listening room SHOULD BE more or less reactive than the recording space isn't something I've expressed an opinion about, because I don't have one. :-) I honestly don't know. Bryon |
Regarding Holographic Sound and Soundstage and all that jazz, I'm afraid things are worse than we thought. Much worse. To get an idea how much the room influences the sound, dictates the sound, how much distortion is produced by comb filter effects, map out the room with a test tone and handy SPL meter some time. You'll find the sound pressure varies dramatically all around the room, with a great many peaks 6dB or higher than the average pressure in the room. These peaks will be observed on room walls, the floor, buildup in room corners and in the 3D Space of the room. The peaks can be produced by slap echo, first reflections, standing waves, secondary reflections and others. All of these peaks, many of which are *louder* than the speakers, interfere with the pure signal of the speakers, obviously. What this means is that no matter how much effort is spent to produce a pure signal out of the speakers, all will be lost between the speakers and the listeners ears. |
Sabai wrote, "Geoffkait, You stated, "What this means is that no matter how much effort is spent to produce a pure signal out of the speakers, all will be lost between the speakers and the listeners ears." Of course, anyone who as actual ears and not theoretical ears knows this it total nonsense." Although I'm a theoretical physicist by education I have actually measured the acoustic anomalies in the room. So, I'm speaking from experience, not theory. No matter how many Bybees you have in your system you will only get so far, because of the room anomalies. But I can certainly understand your attitude, that you would rather rest on your laurels and brag about your Bybees. Heh heh. Nice stalking with you. |
I wish Bybee would explain how their gadgets work more than is the case. If what I think they might do is in fact what they do, I would at least be interested to hear. Otherwise, meh. I do not like to guess how something works. I'd rather know. That makes it a lot easier to decide where to invest ones time and money. |
TO all the high end audio vendors out there that sell expensive (or modestly priced even) stuff and leave it up to the listener's ears to decide if the product works or not, as opposed to explaining how it works to those interested like most normal products that normal people would buy: Meh! I'd rather spend my time and money trying something for a reason other than because someone else said to or that it is good. I advise my kids to be their own person and do what is right, not what someone else does or tells you to do. GOtta walk the walk and not just talk the talk, especially when it comes to raising kids. Hows that for a good explanation of why certain esoteric tweaks do not interest me? IF they interest you have at it. You should not care what I say or do if you do not agree. |
Mapman wrote, "I'd rather spend my time and money trying something for a reason other than because someone else said to or that it is good. I advise my kids to be their own person and do what is right, not what someone else does or tells you to do. GOtta walk the walk and not just talk the talk, especially when it comes to raising kids." Good luck in your quest to protect gullible audiophiles (and apparently children) from those bad bad tweak manufacturers, the evil doers, the ones who are trying to control their minds. Have you seen any suspicious looking people lurking outside your kids' school, presumably to sell them esoteric tweaks? "Here kiddies, wanna buy some quantum chips?" Just Say No. Ha ha ha! |
I have heard one system that I would say produced truly holographic sound. It belongs to a friend and it does not have one esoteric tweak in it. When heard, the effect is mesmerizing. All he has is excellent components and cables that are well matched going to a pair of time and phase coherent monitors. His philosophy matches Mapman and it works. There is more than one way to skin a cat. I have tried multiple tweaks over the years in my system including Bybees at multiple different times. I have tried the rca bullets, xlr tails, speaker tails and power cable tails. I never had more than one in my system at a time. They definitely produced an effect, but to me they detracted from the musicality in my system. I tried them over and over hoping to hear the epiphany others kept reporting. To me they made the background blacker, but they also truncated the natural decay of instruments. Believe me, I wanted them to work. Fortunately, I was able to sell them without losing money on them. Granted, these were all earlier versions, but I could see no point in spending more on a newer version of something that didn't work for me in the first place. I am not here to argue about the merit of the Bybees. If they work for you, that is all that matters. It sounds as if you have put a great deal of effort into getting your system the way you want it and have used some unusual methods to get there. I applaud you for experimenting and finding what works for you. I certainly would not try to convince someone to not try the Bybees for themselves, but IME they are not the be all and end all. If you search the archives, there are others that feel the same, though more people like them than not. YMMV |
Mapman, I may understand in a general way what they are saying but I am not a quantum physicist. The highly technical explanations do not prevent me from trying out their products and enjoying the benefits of products that I do not understand. This also goes for Synergistic Research and many other companies. If you can figure out what some of them are saying you may win an award. But not understanding everything does not deter me at all. Mapman, You stated, "I'd rather spend my time and money trying something for a reason other than because someone else said to or that it is good." I am the exact opposite. I try things because others say they are good. The only thing that matters to me are results, not explanations. There is no more powerful reason for me to try a product than strong testimonials. Csmgolf, I have never experienced any negative effects with Bybee products in my system. Onhwy61, Taunting is what Geoffkait does best here, as we all observe by the way he personalizes his responses. Which is why I have pointed out that he is not in the same league as Robert Neill of Worldwide Wholesales (HiDiamonnd Cables), Bobby Palkovic of Merlin Music and Ted Denney of Synergistic Research who are gentlemen on these forums. Geoffkait cannot even answer the simple question, "And how many Bybee products did you say you have in your system?" Note to self. Since the moderator continues to allow Geoffkait's inappropriate posts the best thing is just to ignore him. |
Sabai wrote, "Taunting is what Geoffkait does best here, as we all observe by the way he personalizes his responses." Only when someone personalizes his post. What's good for the goose... If you can't stand the heat get out of the kitchen. Which is why I have pointed out that he is not in the same league as Robert Neill of Worldwide Wholesales (HiDiamonnd Cables), Bobby Palkovic of Merlin Music and Ted Denney of Synergistic Research who are gentlemen on these forums. "Geoffkait cannot even answer the simple question, "And how many Bybee products did you say you have in your system?" I already answered your silly question. Why are you so hung up on Bybee? "Note to self. Since the moderator continues to allow Geoffkait's inappropriate posts the best thing is just to ignore him." Apparently you are unable to ignore me, judging from your last 30 posts on this thread and others. Apparently you are also hung up on me. Maybe you can complain to Mommy. |
Geoffkait, Saying that you are not in the league of gentlemen vendors like Robert Neill, Bobby Palkovic and Ted Denney is not a taunt. It is obvious. It is stated as a fact that we observe as you continue to post here. In French this is called "une constatation" -- an observation of fact. On the contrary, it looks like you must be hung up on some posters with your obvious need to post "inappropriate and inflammatory" posts on an ongoing basis. These kinds of posts are often flagged by the moderator and dropped. In your case, they are giving you slack -- for whatever reason. From reading this thread, there do not appear to be many posters who relish your puerile attitude. And this is also not a taunt. It is a fact that can be observed by the way many posters feel about your participation here. Your latest post is one of many that exhibit this attitude on your part. This is a lamentable situation that your posts are attracting such a negative response from other posters. It is not lamentable for me because I am only one of many people who post, buy and sell on Audiogon. It is lamentable for you as a vendor to be cultivating this sort of reputation -- and apparently with relish. This is a very odd way to run a business. IMO. I don't believe Robert Neill, Bobby Palkovic or Ted Denney would have much of a business left if they conducted themselves in like manner here. |
Sabai, your continued cheap personal attacks are duly noted. If you have nothing further to say regarding Holographic Sound, and apparently you don't, I suggest you start a new thread. You can call it, Why I object to Geoffkait or Why I think Geoffkait is not a Gentleman or whatever you want. Frankly, I couldn't care less what you think, about me personally or audio. |
Geoffkait, My response seems to have struck a nerve with you, which is understandable. It is very accurate but it is not personal at all. As I pointed out in my previous post, my remarks are an observation of fact and nothing more. The problem is not that you could not care less what I think of you -- the problem is that you could not care less what anyone thinks of you when you post here -- in stark contrast to vendors like Robert Neill of Worldwide Wholesales (HiDiamond cables), Bobby Palkovic of Merlin Music and Ted Denney of Synergistic Research. As I have pointed out earlier, it is lamentable that any vendor who wishes to garner respect and credibility on Audiogon should choose to express themselves in these forums in the way that you have done. |
Back to Holographic Sound for a moment. For your consideration, the Acoustic Revive RR-77 Schumann Frequency Generator. "Space opened up on the recording acoustic." Excerpt from RR-77 Schumann Frequency Generator review at 6 Moons Full review at: http://www.6moons.com/audioreviews/acousticrevive/rr77.html "The Acoustic Revive RR-77 ultra-low frequency pulse generator is a stand-alone active device that plugs into a wall outlet but not your HiFi rig. According to Acoustic Revive, the RR-77 generates a 7.83Hz Schumann frequency pulse that 'shields' your HiFi electronics and listening room from radio frequency interference and thereby improves the S/N ratio so the electronics perform better. Let me give you additional background because there's quite a lot more to the RR-77 than that. Let's start with the Schumann resonance frequency phenomena. The Schumann resonance is a natural geophysical resonant frequency mode of the Earth that occurs at approximately 7.83Hz and in 1952 was predicted mathematically by physicist Winfried Otto Schumann for whom it was named. Some scientists believe that over evolutionary time, biological organisms evolved to use the Schumann resonance phenomena as one mechanism for maintaining biological health. For an example, they point to the human brain's electromagnetic waves that are synchronized to the Schumann frequency. In studies when people were shielded from the naturally occurring Schumann resonance frequency, their circadian rhythms were disrupted and they began to experience migraine headaches, emotional stress and other health issues. When exposed to Schumann pulse generators of 7.83Hz, their symptoms disappeared. Listening Impressions Space opened up in the recording acoustic, notes decayed in a much more natural fashion and what little edge, grit or glare I was hearing on lesser recordings over the review system became more tolerable. One aspect particularly intrigued me: You know how you can hear the acoustic signature of a recording venue in a recording? The recording has its own acoustic signature and so does your listening room and they are different. With the RR-77 powered up, it's as though the dissimilar acoustic signatures of the recording and listening room blended and became one. This effect of the RR-77 is a little hard to articulate fully and you really need to experience it to get the full understanding. On smaller, more intimate jazz recordings in particular, it makes it seem like the musicians are in the room with you playing and yet you feel like you're in the recording." |
Chadeffect, sorry to hear that. These things happen. I had awful results with ERS paper which you mentioned is in your system. For me, even in small amounts, the ERS paper made the sound wooly and phasey. Even when the ERS paper was just sitting on the coffee table. The only way I could get rid of the effects was to take the ERS paper out of the house. Geoff |
Geoff, I know this sounds crazy and please don't take this the wrong way. But, and I mean this respectfully, is it possible you may have entered the Twilight Zone unawares and it's just ordinary paper that's been transformed into an alien entity that will be rendered harmless once you rent a small plane and fly into a vortex in the Bermuda Triangle? For life of me, I can't think of a better explanation. Hope this helps. |
Csontos wrote, "Geoff, I know this sounds crazy and please don't take this the wrong way. But, and I mean this respectfully, is it possible you may have entered the Twilight Zone unawares and it's just ordinary paper that's been transformed into an alien entity that will be rendered harmless once you rent a small plane and fly into a vortex in the Bermuda Triangle? For life of me, I can't think of a better explanation. Hope this helps." Not to worry, I didn't take it the wrong way. I realize you're a fish out of water and can't help stalking me. |
Geoff, "Chadeffect - Wow, wow, wow! I LIKE those Trios." So do I! Magnificent speakers. Thanks. They are like the most dynamic ESL that's utterly focused and effortless. The bonus being you can use any form of amplification too. SET,PP,SS,Class D,battery power etc etc are all good. It only took me about 25 years to realise the path to audiophile bliss...lol |
Here's another good thread on holography from a couple years back that I stumbled back upon recently that had some good discussion and content worth revisiting perhaps. Holography Thread |
Okay, If I'm actually beginning to grasp this whole pretense, you guys' definition of holography has not, or only in a limited way, included 3d positioning as it relates to tubes. But simply a sense of three dimensionality around individual instruments. Well I have news for some of you. I enjoy a fairly high degree of pin-point imaging with all my SS amps without this never ending quest to achieve a decent level of realism with external tweaks. The problem is not with the stars my dear, it's in our gear. Bryon seems to be the only one on the right track here. If you want to see a serious change in your system, you have to deal with the internals of your gear. Either by working on what you have, or changing it. You can only imagine what you could have come up with, had you spent all that money on mods by some very brilliant and talented techs and engineers out there. Incidentally, I wonder how many are of like mind as some of you. I think you already have an example or two. |
Csontos, I know some would challenge you and say that most SS amps are incapable of producing that 3D sound. For me personally 3D or holographic sound has usually come from tubes. I know of few SS amps that can have that density and image depth. The SS ones i do know of are mind bogglingly expensive. (Solution, ML, edge) Having said that I have heard many tube amps that were just plain rubbish at nearly everything...! I won't name and shame but some really highly thought of ones. Lets blame the tube choices. As an audiophile you have to try other equipment in your system to find what works for you. then maybe you can see what is missing or can be refined. I think tweaking is a way of fine tuning a system to get that last bit of communication out. But if the equipment isn't capable, no amount of tweaking will help you. |
Csontos, Measurable would be nice, but I am not sure which printed specs tell me about sound staging or image depth? Demostratable can only be defined by the listener and this is where I suspect the trouble starts. I say x sounds better while you say x makes no difference (or measurable sense). Then Geoff pipes up! |
Measurements vs perceived sound A long long time ago in a galaxy far away we found out that Total Harmonic Distortion of amplifiers did not dictate the sound, the perceived sound, of the amplifier. Not that THD does not carry some weight, but amplifiers, such as many tube amplifiers, with THD ten times higher(!) sounded subjectively better than some amps with vanishingly low THD, especially in terms of perceived distortion! We also learned that digital technology - for both electronics and software - with theoretical Dynamic Range and Signal to Noise ratio *Far Exceeding* that of analog, were neither as subjectively dynamic or clean as analog technology. It should have been a Slam Dunk. In reality off the shelf, untreated CDs quite frequently sound two dimensional, thin, tizzy, threadbare, compressed, unnatural, electronic, strident, rolled off, piercing, cluttered, like papier mache. What is going on? We also found out that room acoustics plays a crucial role in determining what the system actually sounds like, in particular soundstaging capabilities, but also in terms of distortion, naturalness and musicality. How good can a system get? You know, without changing out electronics and cables. Answer at 11. |
