Sorry for getting off topic.
In the famous words of Arte Johnson: (this is all) "Very Interesting. But stupid!(?)"
In the famous words of Arte Johnson: (this is all) "Very Interesting. But stupid!(?)"
What Does Holographic Sound Like?
And how do you get there? This is an interesting question. I have finally arrived at a very satisfying level of holography in my system. But it has taken a lot of time, effort and money to get there. I wish there had been a faster, easier and less expensive way to get there. But I never found one.
Can you get to a high level of holography in your system with one pair of interconnects and one pair of speaker wires? I don't believe so. I run cables in series. I never found one pair of interconnects and speaker wires that would achieve what has taken a heck of a lot of wires and "tweaks" to achieve. Let alone all the power cords that I run in series. Although I have found one special cable that has enabled the system to reach a very high level of holography -- HiDiamond -- I still need to run cables in series for the sound to be at its holographic best.
There are many levels of holography. Each level is built incrementally with the addition of one more wire and one more "tweak". I have a lot of wires and "tweaks" in my system. Each cable and each "tweak" has added another level to the holography. Just when I thought things could not get any better -- which has happened many times -- the addition of one more cable or "tweak" enabled the system to reach a higher level yet.
Will one "loom" do the job. I never found that special "loom". To achieve the best effects I have combined cables from Synergistic Research, Bybee, ASI Liveline, Cardas, Supra and HiDiamond -- with "tweaks" too numerous to mention but featuring Bybee products and a variety of other products, many of which have the word "quantum" in their description.
The effort to arrive at this point with my system has been two-fold. Firstly, finding the right cables and "tweaks" for the system. Secondly, finding where to place them in the system for the best effects -- a process of trial and error. A lot of cables and "tweaks" had to be sold off in the process. I put "tweaks" in quotation marks because the best "tweaks" in my system have had as profound effect as the components on the sound. The same for the best of the cables, as well. For me, cables and "tweaks" are components.
Have I finally "arrived"? I have just about arrived at the best level that I can expect within my budget -- there are a couple of items on the way. In any case, I assume there are many levels beyond what my system has arrived at. But since I'll never get there I am sitting back and enjoying the music in the blissful recognition that I don't know what I am missing.
I should mention that there are many elements that are as important as holography for the sound to be satisfying, IMO. They include detail, transparency, coherence, tonality, and dynamics, among others. My system has all of these elements in good measure.
Have you had success with holographic sound in your system? If so, how did you get there?
Can you get to a high level of holography in your system with one pair of interconnects and one pair of speaker wires? I don't believe so. I run cables in series. I never found one pair of interconnects and speaker wires that would achieve what has taken a heck of a lot of wires and "tweaks" to achieve. Let alone all the power cords that I run in series. Although I have found one special cable that has enabled the system to reach a very high level of holography -- HiDiamond -- I still need to run cables in series for the sound to be at its holographic best.
There are many levels of holography. Each level is built incrementally with the addition of one more wire and one more "tweak". I have a lot of wires and "tweaks" in my system. Each cable and each "tweak" has added another level to the holography. Just when I thought things could not get any better -- which has happened many times -- the addition of one more cable or "tweak" enabled the system to reach a higher level yet.
Will one "loom" do the job. I never found that special "loom". To achieve the best effects I have combined cables from Synergistic Research, Bybee, ASI Liveline, Cardas, Supra and HiDiamond -- with "tweaks" too numerous to mention but featuring Bybee products and a variety of other products, many of which have the word "quantum" in their description.
The effort to arrive at this point with my system has been two-fold. Firstly, finding the right cables and "tweaks" for the system. Secondly, finding where to place them in the system for the best effects -- a process of trial and error. A lot of cables and "tweaks" had to be sold off in the process. I put "tweaks" in quotation marks because the best "tweaks" in my system have had as profound effect as the components on the sound. The same for the best of the cables, as well. For me, cables and "tweaks" are components.
Have I finally "arrived"? I have just about arrived at the best level that I can expect within my budget -- there are a couple of items on the way. In any case, I assume there are many levels beyond what my system has arrived at. But since I'll never get there I am sitting back and enjoying the music in the blissful recognition that I don't know what I am missing.
I should mention that there are many elements that are as important as holography for the sound to be satisfying, IMO. They include detail, transparency, coherence, tonality, and dynamics, among others. My system has all of these elements in good measure.
Have you had success with holographic sound in your system? If so, how did you get there?
Showing 50 responses by mapman
"I don't see what all the excitement is about." Here's what it is about. 1) Mars appears to have once had water flowing on it like earth 2) Water means chance that life existed on Mars once. Finding fossils in the sedimentary rocks would help confirm that. 3) If there was life on Mars once and had technology like ours, they could have visited Earth like we are visiting Mars now 4) If they visited Earth, its possible some life on earth originated on Mars 5) If the evolution of Mars is similar to Earth's, then Earth may be on its way to resembling Mars some day. What will become of us? I think that is all fascinating at a minimum. I doubt the sound of my stereo will be impacted in the short term though. |
Chad, I think people would be less concerned about Geoff and his contributions if he were not a vendor potentially profiting from his actions. Vendors who are forthcoming and clearly add value like Atmasphere catch relatively little flack. In fact, most appreciate that they are willing to share their expertise in a forum like this. |
Finally I will say that I believe Geoff is 100% sincere when he talks about mind matter interaction. Its your mind and his attempts to affect how you think that changes its interaction with matter. He can sell almost anything and claim success accordingly. If someone thinks it sounds better, that's all that matters, whether in fact it does or not. At least that is my take on Geoff. Do I approve of this is true? Not the way Geoff does things as best I can tell. He is not forthcoming about anything much. He just pushes tweaks. It doesn't matter what it is. WIth his approach, a telephone book may have better results than tweak b, even if tweak b in fact does something. At least this is my best guess. I could be wrong. I do not expect anything from GEoff to really help me learn anything, even anything about himself. So it is what it is so take it for what it is. |
If it sounds good, it sounds good. Record producers do whatever they want to do in the interest of what they consider to be a good product. Nothing wrong with the listener doing the same as needed to deliver the sound they seek. Lots of ways to do it. No right or wrong. Its all a reproduction. Some like clear photos and some like abstract art. Whatever floats ones boat. Phase angle adjustment are just another tool at ones disposal if needed. Some of the most reknowned record producers in the world, like ALan Parson's, have been known to play similar tricks I believe. |
"When one asserts things that most will interpret as nonsense, that is bound to create a stir. The solution is to explain the nonsense so as to address peoples concerns. Not change the subject, obfuscate, or go on the attack of the questioner." One thing I find these days is that is is becoming increasingly common for people to create a stir as a simple means of garnering attention. I think it started to become a major phenomenon back in the late 80's with the ascent of shock jocks, Howard Stern being the most notorious. More and more people seem to leverage this approach these days as a means of garnering attention in an increasingly complex world where it might be harder to stand out for other more philanthropic reasons. |
My impression of Geoff is that everything he says or does is for the purpose of remaining an enigma in every way shape or form. I suppose that has appeal to some. But being an enigma in general does not build confidence or trust, two key ingredients in most any relationship. I keep hoping Geoff will become something other than an enigma that levitates towards any controversial topic in order to build that reputation apparently, but I might have a long wait I am thinking. He has some good knowledge, so I believe he could be less enigmatic and establish some credibility there if desired. Whatever. Everyone is free to post. Everyone is free to draw their conclusions accordingly. |
"My impression of Geoff is that everything he says or does is for the purpose of remaining an enigma in every way shape or form. " ALso, I believe that this services the brand identity of his business entity, Machina Dyamica. Assuming this, then I should probably not hold out any hope that anything will change, as long as the company is successful and reaching its target market (rich guys who do not know what else to do with their money to get better sound perhaps). |
"Mapman, I'm giving serious consideration to promoting you to Associate Stalker." Thank you Geoff. I am anxious to learn from the master!!! When is your next two for one sale? At $30 a pop I might be more inclined to try one of your inventions and maybe eat some crow. BTW, how do you manage such inexpensive prices for such seemingly advanced technology? Does someone else pay for your R&D or are you just that damn brilliant? That is an enigma to me as well. |
FWIW, having never tried Bybee stuff, I do think there is a good chance they actually do something. I fact I would be willing to bet on it. I am not to that point yet with the life on Mars thing. There is scientific evidence now that that might be possible, but certainly it is still far from conclusive. A discovery of fossils in those sedimentary rock beds on Mars similar to what occurs on Earth would probably do it. |
Here's an interesting gadget that might actually work as best I can tell and perhaps even help holography: Harmonizer Might even have some quantum principles in its design. Dunno. Any insights? Opinions are fine. Scientific principles that I might understand is better. Not cheap though. Disclaimer: The fact that I think this expensive tweak might actually do something constructive does not mean that I think all tweaks are good. Yes, Machina Dynamica also sells esoteric tweaks for relatively cheap in comparison, but that is a completely different story. $60 is a big markup for something that appears worthless and based on malarky. |
I'm not sure speakers can be designed specifically for holographic sound. If speakers do the other things identified in that thread well, and additional things are in place with the system and recordings as I mentioned in my recipe early on, then holography or a 3-d soundstage, assuming these are synonymous, can happen, if one cares about it. I suspect there are many that do not in practice though. My guess is that could be partially because so many other things must be done right first before one has a good chance at decent holography/3-d sound. |
Also, hey I believe in holographic sound. THat's all that rally matters to me. I think that there are many who have never heard "holographic sound" and may not know what they are missing. THen, once they do, it is still possible that they will not care. ITs kind of the final frontier of home audio in my mind. Many may choose to never venture there. That does not make them bad people. Their stuff might still be considered "high end" for all the other reasons. |
"To me there is little more satisfying than a reach out and touch type presentation in your room. " I am in that camp as well. Tubes are fine and may have some advantages in some ways for this, but in teh end its a matter of getting everything right end including crossing the Ts and dotting the I's. There are many recipes for great soup! But there are even more for other kinds. |
Chad, I find different IC will effect how soundstage/imaging occurs in different ways but I do not know if one is inherently better than another in any particular case. Like most tweaks, I think it depends. I know what you are saying about the MIT cables. Even the older less expensive ones I use (Terminator series) work well in this regard. So do the DNM Reson ICs I use in my main rig currently. I could go either way depending on mood. Tonality/timbre is the biggest difference I hear between these two. MIT does bass very well and is smooth and controlled everythere else. DNM Reson adds a little definition and clarity to the midrange, which I tend to like with my OHMs in particular. I tend to be able to follow what singers are saying easier with DNM. Both are very good. I think it depends.... |
Not that I care what Kal thinks, but: Its not clear to me at all that that is what he believes. HE might mean that the listening room is the same which is true and that ambient information is there but not delivered exactly as recorded which I would also agree with. Geoff, I care more that one being a technical person they do more diligence reading carefully and being clearer about what is their interpretation of what is read rather than asserting things that were not said. |
"In other words, IMO, "holographic" sound is less about ACCURACY relative to the recording and more about REALISM relative to what instruments and performers actually sound like." Bryon, that's a very good way to say it (as usual). Its also a good reason why audiophiles who might not care otherwise should. Without it, instruments and performers sound less real. I have at least one MErcury Perfect Presence LP that shows a diagram of where the players were located and the mikes during recording. This provides a useful reference regarding the accuracy of the players location while listening in your room. Relative positions should be and are distinguishable in at least two dimensions (width and depth), possibly even height (do not recall if the diagram indicated relative height of players as a reference). 0% of my other thousands of recordings have this information readily available as a reference. For many recordings not miked properly at a live performance, it becomes mostly irrelevant. SInce there is no practical reference, I pay no attention to that aspect. Only that what I am listening to sounds "real", and the 3-D imaging/holography helps enable that since sound is a 3 dimensional (actually 4) phenomenon. That's a big reason I think why I am fond of more omnidirectional (or even wider dispersion) speaker designs. SOund does not occur naturally in 1 dimension (width) only. ALthough more directional speakers combined with the rest might still do OK, its like fitting a square peg in a round hole. |
"Only that what I am listening to sounds "real", and the 3-D imaging/holography helps enable that since sound is a 3 dimensional (actually 4) phenomenon. " Surprizingly enough (at least to me at first) I've found that this even works for mono recordings, at least in some cases. It works best for me with either pair of my OHM Walsh omnis. Good mono recordings (remastered mono Muddy Waters for example) have a three dimensional ambiance to the point where sometimes I cannot tell for certain if it is a mono or stereo recording just by listening. Its an amazing thing! And with the OHM omnis, the 3-D image hold together coherently from most any listening position in from of the speakers. I can elect to listen from different seats in my listening room venue just like at a live performance and the only thing that changes is the perspective and sometimes, but not really in a noticeable way usually the timbre just very slighly since the OHM Walsh tweeters above 7-8 Khz or so are more directional. mbl omnis in comparison are full omni at all frequencies and very holographic as well set up well (maybe the best I have heard) but those crossover much lower and multiple times so the music is perhaps not quite as coherent or organic as the OHMs. You gotta hear it to believe it sometimes I imagine. |
I would very much like to hear the harmonizer in my system. I expect it could well have a positive effect in that it seems to based on scientific principles I can understand. Sound travels through air. Physical properties of air determine how it travels. The gadget seems to be an active device that creates sonic waves of a certain design. Something different is likely to result if all goes as described. It could be significant. Even if I decide to not shell out the dough at this time (most likely given priorities) it would be a worthwhile experiment because the indicators are something might actually happen. MAybe a good use of time. Scientists select experiments that they believe have a good chance of working based on their understanding of scientific principles. That is the key to GOOD science. Knowledge to start relevant to questions to be answered. Some experiments make sense and some do not. Audio fuse experiments actually do make sense to me. That does not mean I want to do them though. |
"Listening to music has now become a science project with experiments. This thread has become a parody of a satire." Listening to music does not require a science project. But I would argue that getting the sound one wants out of a stereo system (via tweaking) is exactly like a science project. Of course there is good, bad (and weird?) science and they are all not equally effective. |
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..... |
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. |