Would it not be better to have heard a BACCH system and formulated an intelligent option about it?
85 responses Add your response
I have been interested in this subject most of my audiophile life. Decades ago I heard a demonstration of a Yamaha DSP-1 Sound Field Processor and I was blown away. Since then I have acquired several processors including a Carver C-9 Holographic Generator, BSG QOL, Black Ice Foz SSX, and a DSP-1. Someday I expect to write a review of these processors in case anyone else is interested. I have not heard the BACCH system but I look forward to it. I've got a spare MAC laptop that I could use but I would like to hear it at an Audio Show if possible. For now I'll discuss the BSG QOL processor because it's my favorite and there is good reporting on it. The unit is very good at expanding depth of the soundstage. You can almost see the instruments placed in 3 dimensions with much more depth than standard stereo. I really like it and I run it most of the time. Whenever I compare components I bypass it because it makes everything sound better. I like it so much that I bought a spare in case this one breaks. There are several good articles in the trade mags about this processor and they go into the theory behind it. If you are interested you can learn more about this subject in layman's terms. Here are a couple links: Stereophile BSG and TAS BSG Review
|
Amazing comment. Pretty much reinforces my belief that while the underlying engine might be truly wonderful, it's always the implementation interface that makes it terribly unpleasant to deal with and not worthwhile. About not working well with all speakers is a huge problem, and of course music selections are kind of important. I have lots of recordings that sound absolutely wonderful even without this product innovation. Why the designers spend all their time with the core engine without giving regard to the interface and issues encounter upon implementation is beyond me. Dsp tools that are out there are also the same, the backend is probably fine it's just the front end that screws things up and frustrates the hell out of people.
|
| Post removed |
Hi, I heard it at Axpona and I thought it was excellent sounding. It had a 3D effect. I have ordered one and we will set it up in the next two weeks. I have a reference listening room and we use this room to test lots of different brands. I do not represent this manufacture but I am in the audio industry. I find this manufacturer very interesting and I believe the designer has a very solid reputation. Cheers and I will give my honest opinion after it has been set up. |
More than half people had no idea of basic acoustic .... The concept above of "envelopment" or named " listener envelopment" Which is the experience resulting from the relation between the sound sources apparent dimensions and the listener position and envelopment , ASW and LV abbreviated, can be mechanically created in a small room and this without any DSP but with some timbre modifications and no comparable perfection as with the BACCH filters... I did it in my small room then i know it ... Then when i read about the BACCH i know instantly how and why this will be a revolution in audio... Knowing basic acoustic by experiments is better and a real knowledge, buying many dac and many amplifiers and speakers because of hype and a big wallet is NOT KNOWLEDGE...There is no other dsp to compare the BACCH filters with... Reading what Choueiri explained well, if you had basic acoustic knowledge is ENOUGH to understand why it is not a marketing gimmick...
|
| Post removed |
Yes, I’ve heard it. I bought "BAACH4Mac", the lowest price version, for under $1,000 USD. You can spend over $30K for the most expensive versions, with several price points in between. The cheapest version does not have the most advanced filters, nor does it include a microphone for acoustic measurements or a web cam for head-tracking. Software only, for MacOS only. This is not a gimmick, it really does produce remarkable effects. For example, in one of the first tracks I heard, the apparent position of a trombone player moved from approximately my left speaker to a point around 7 feet to the left, placing it outside my living room walls and onto the front porch. Uncanny. However, I don’t get that dramatic effect with most recordings. And you may not get it with all loudspeakers. Mine are hybrid electrostatic speakers that are rather tightly focused on the listener’s sweet spot. IMO this is a potentially game-changing technology, but years after first release, it still isn’t productized to the point it is ready for prime time (unless it’s been greatly improved since I bought it). For most users, the installation and set-up process might take an hour or more, with a lot of telephone support and remote access by the vendor. The UI is ugly and complicated. And again, at least in this lowest-price version, you don’t get the most dramatic effects on all (or even most) recordings. I kept thinking something about my setup was wrong, so I kept monkeying with it until I gave up and went back to conventional stereo. I may revisit it soon, after having made other upgrades to my system. I’d be interested to hear if anyone has auditioned and can comment on both BAACH4Mac and Apple’s spatial audio technology. |
The concept of eliminating cross talk in stereo audio reproduction is not a new fad, but rather a longstanding pursuit in the field of audio engineering and high-fidelity audio. It's not necessarily neurotic but rather driven by a desire to improve the accuracy and realism of stereo sound reproduction.
|
https://www.theabsolutesound.com/articles/theoretica-applied-physics-bacch-sp-adio-stereo-purifier/
Listening to music played with the BACCH-SP adio for six weeks can only be described as revelatory, in the sense that I heard a domestic two-channel system—mine—do things I’d never heard before in any setting. Two observations should be made at the start. First, as promised, the BACCH XTC filter introduced no colorations or timbral distortions to the reproduced sound. Instantaneous comparisons of filter/no filter are readily accomplished with the BACCH app on the iPad; it’s easy to toggle back and forth between the bin your filter is in and “Bypass.” The crosstalk-cancellation process is utterly transparent. Secondly, whoever did design the DAC (and ADC) for Theoretica did a helluva job. I heard no meaningful difference in the overall sound of my system when using the $47k Ideon or the BACCH-SP. Getting the model with the DAC (and ADC) requires an additional expenditure of $4000. Sounds like a bargain to me. What does the BACCH-SP XTC filter bring to the table, sonically? The processor renders several aspects of spatiality very effectively, some of which I’ve experienced only rarely in the past with the most elite systems, if I’ve heard them at all. One is envelopment. The sonic image moved out in front of the two speakers and wrapped around the sides to end up well out into the room, outside the lateral boundaries of the Magicos. On a Chesky Records binaural recording featuring trombonist Wycliff Gordon (Dreams of New Orleans), Gordon is localized at the 10 o’clock position, forward from the plane of the loudspeakers. His improvisatory genius is believably isolated and exposed—your brain tells you that’s where he is standing as the featured performer, not where some mixing engineer put him in post-production. Music played back with the filter engaged often seems subjectively louder, perhaps because of this heightened sense of immediacy.
Envelopment and proximity are attention grabbing at audio shows but can be dismissed by skeptics as gimmicky; reverb can be taken for granted. A fourth spatial characteristic of the sound created by a BACCH filter, the one that impressed me the most, is what Choueiri has called spatial extent and resolution. Extent, he explains, “is the perception that the sound occupies a three-dimensional volume, like a hologram,” while resolution, in this context, “is the ability to discern detail and structure within the extent.” Listening to my favorite orchestral test track, the opening Allegretto of the Shostakovich Symphony No.15, as performed by Bernard Haitink and the Royal Concertgebouw Orchestra, I attended closely to the sequential woodwind solos near the beginning of the movement. It’s not only clear that the bassoon is a larger instrument than the flute, and that the former is seated a row behind the latter—you can get that kind of information from traditional stereo—but also that these correctly scaled and localized aural images interact to represent a continuous acoustic environment where the musicians are breathing the same air but still own a unique three-dimensional space of their own. It’s like the difference between the pop-up-book kind of depth and dimensionality you get from most 3D movies and the far more effortless perception of space you experience in life. |
| Post removed |
No, it’s more just your problem. As others have stated here this is clearly not just “marketing stuff” from Princeton. You clearly don’t have the capacity to understand it but for some reason seem intent on disparaging it — why I have no idea. You have no idea what you’re talking about and have done not even the most basic research on the technology, so your opinions and credibility here are precisely zero. From Andrew Quint’s review of the BACCH system…
But, maybe you know better based on — nothing.
|
| Post removed |
| Post removed |
It's dsp. It takes a system and modifies the heck out of the sound. It's a massive coloring project. It's a system designed to improve upon existing system components. And enhancing the qualities so it seems pleasant and desirable. If this was so revolutionary, more people would be aware of it. Why is this? Does anybody even have the system? |
| Post removed |
You’re so far off base it’s downright silly and you’re now embarrassing yourself. Maybe go read something about this rather than throwing out ridiculous and totally ignorant statements. |
Incredible... It is evident you had read nothing and describe not what are the BACCH filters... You describe the BACCH filters as a mere other dsp among others without even knowing what they do... Before speaking READ... Does this site and science articles of Choueiri lab appear marketing to you? READ...
|
It sounds like a glorified DSP system. Subject to all kinds of tweaking. Has anyone seen the interface? Seems installation would be somewhat problematic. Dsp interfaces are notoriously annoying to deal with. I don’t feel like sitting down with the laptop every time I sit down to listen to music. Every single piece of music is different, so this means you got a tweak every single piece of music. Of course if you tweak one piece of music, you’ll be tempted to tweak things for another piece of music not sounding as good. It all gets back to quality of recording which varies substantially. If you have a really good system these differences and sound quality are less of a problem. Quality amplifier, preamplifier, streamer of course speakers. If your system needs to improve, I'd spend the money on a better quality piece of equipment rather than this dsp System. |
It is not a dac, or an amp. or speakers with a sound of their own ... BACCH filters can be coupled with any DAC... Even my low cost marvellous one...😊 It is not a component which we evaluate comparing it to another similar component in a review...There is nothing else to compare it anyway... I did not recommend it as a component.... I recommend it as an acoustic revolution because they are filters which can be coupled with ANY SYSTEM peculiar original sound qualities without modifiying them nor modifying the timbre as perceived through your stereo system but increasing each acoustic recording 3-D spatial perception... There is nothing else to compare... It is not a dac nor a component but a spatial acoustic catalyser acting without degrading nor the timbre nor the specific swound qualities of your system ...It work only with specific measure of your room and inner ears and head position peculiarities which must be measured for each customer... There is many articles of Choueiri and youtube interviews, nevermind the reviews...Then you will understand without even the need to listen to it WHY it is an acoustic revolution... Then all reviews will make sense... It is not an audio gimmick or the marketing of a new components as they are plenty new one each months with positive reviews, it is practical applied acoustics ... I signal the existence of this acoustic revolution here because i read about it and listen Choueiri acoustic explanation...I never recommended to people here to upgrade their components and throw money on upgrade components, i ALWAYS advised people to EMBED FIRST rightfully what they already own electrically, acoustically and mechanically... I dont reviewed components to sell them ... I reviewed here my reading about an acoustic revolution... Inform yourself , it is what i spoke about mentioning Choueiri as a genius in acoustic... We must read the man not the reviewers First and last..
|
Bob Carver got into this, as did Polk to some extent. Neither really caused a great deal of market shift and the efforts were mostly forgotten. I did some math, and something like 65 dB of separation is equivalent to about 1,800x the voltage. Doesn’t seem like you can really hear better. What I really need is a way of encoding 96kHz/24 bit signals into 44/16 in order to avoid upgrading my dial up modem when streaming music. 🤣 |
It's not a new fad. Ralph Glasgal has been promoting DSP crosstalk reduction for a long time. Polk, Carver, Lexicon and others have tried to tackle the crosstalk problem over the years using analog methods. It's a real problem, a real shortcoming of 2 speaker stereo reproduction. It's not intentional or desirable in any way, although some may develop a taste for it. 2 speakers is the simplest stereo possible and it beats mono, so that's why it became a standard. It has nothing to do with any inherent audio superiority, although with crosstalk reduction it can get so good on properly made recordings that it's harder to argue the need for multi-channel formats. Still, I think well done up-mixing of stereo recordings to 5 or 7 speakers located across the front of the listening area has some great upside potential, especially for creating a huge sweet spot. Purpose made recordings for this kind of setup would even be better, but that's not likely to happen. Adding crosstalk to headphones may make some sense, but ideally you would not want to do it with the same time delay that happens across your head with stereo speakers. If you do so, you'll introduce massive comb filtering to the signal for center panned sounds, just like speakers do to your ears. Now that I say that, I can think of a way to add time delay without causing comb filtering to center panned sounds - I think I'll have to try that! I've not tried the BACCH DSP yet, but I'll vouch for crosstalk reduction. From the reviews I've read of BACCH it sounds similar to my own experiences with using a physical divider or my own, not so powerful channel mixing methods. The timbre of center panned sounds is very nicely improved, as is the overall sense of acoustic space. It matters more on some recordings than others. I never heard anything that sounded worse because of it, although I'm just reducing crosstalk, not creating the extreme degree of left right separation that BACCH DSP can. |
By the way there is no "true" stereo...😁 This true stereo concept had no meaning in acoustic save if we use this expression to characterise many speakers system of home theater compared to it... There is acoustic day to day TRUE experience of sound and music , and there is recording always defective or imperfect reproduction through headphone or 2 speakers or many speakers for specific reasons in each case in acoustic.. Dr. Choueiri explain it way better than me...
To start the understanding read this article it is simple to read : «In 2014, Choueiri founded Theoretica Applied Physics to manufacture and market audiophile-caliber components incorporating his patented innovations. There’s a problem, Choueiri and many others maintain, with the way that stereo recordings have been played back for the last 70 years or so. “If you go out in the forest and you hear a bird singing, it’s not because there are two birds singing,” Choueiri explained with his characteristic intensity. “There’s one bird singing.” Stereo only creates the illusion of localized sound by manufacturing a phantom image “and your brain doesn’t believe it.” In life, a sound is precisely localized because of a slight difference in the arrival time at the right and left ears, as well as slight differences in amplitude and tonality that are attributable to the physical presence of the listener’s head and the shape of his or her ears. With reproduced sounds emanating from two loudspeakers, these relationships are considerably degraded, especially if the listening environment introduces reflections. Each ear isn’t hearing what it’s supposed to—inter-aural crosstalk is spoiling the party.» https://www.theabsolutesound.com/articles/theoretica-applied-physics-bacch-sp-adio-stereo-purifier/
|
Acoustic articles are not a "fad"... All Dr. Choueiri research and Filters are PURE acoustic... It takes few minutes to verify... It is not a "tweak" nor a new upgrade...There is no degradation of the TIMBRE experience and it is scientifically explained WHY this is so...It is not a new complexities level added, it is a new acoustic experience better than anything before it... Dont trust me read not the reviewers only but Dr. Choueiri papers... It is complete acoustic improvement UNIVERSALLY acclaimed... Anyway it is for me in my actual journey the only REAL upgrade not a marginal upgrade or a mere change...As most costly dac upgrade for example...
|
| Post removed |