Has anyone heard the BACCH-SP "purifier" 3D audiophile imager?


I can't post a URL here, but you can find information about this device on the Theoretica Web site.

Robert Harley, John Atkinson, & .other celebrity reviewers (Andrew Quint in TAS as recently as last January) have given this box high praise.  Apparently, it's some sort of DSP that allegedly creates a breathtaking holographic 3D soundstage from two-channel content.

Yes, virtual surround processors have been around since, jeez, at least the 1990s, but this one purports to be a truly high-end device, including an audiophile-grade (whatever that means) DAC, 31-band equalizer, binaural recording capabilities, & ADC.  But for 25 grand, I'd expect it to also clean your records & wash your socks.

I'm kinda skeptical at this point, but better ears than mine have heaped high praise indeed.  Has anybody here actually heard a unit work on their own systems with familiar 2-channel content?

 

 

cundare2

I have the Bacch4Mac and continue to enjoy it immensely. It is the real deal, worth every bit of the investment to me. I rarely play anything where i feel it is affecting the presentation negatively. If so, just bypass it with one click, easy.

While I believe the Bacch technology is a game changer, the recently introduced Optimal Room Correction (ORC) module may be even more so. ORC has been in my system for a couple weeks now and I could never go back. I've used several products aimed at HT enthusiasts, such as Dirac Live, ARC, Audyssey, MiniDSP, etc. in my separate HT setup, but ORC is specifically targeted to 2 channel listening with the in-ear measurements and head tracking capability. It is very simple to use and adjustments with updated in room measurements are quick and easy to compare on the fly. Bacch and ORC used together are a very powerful combination that have really improved my listening experience.

In terms of pricing, the SP ADIO box is about the same as the DAC, preamp, Mac Mini and software, with various cabling I have now. It also has a 6 channel DAC and 3-way crossover, if you need it, among other optional modules. The benefit here is simply better integration if that's what you choose to do.

This is one of those products you just can't listen to on paper or from your keyboard. You really have to experience it first hand. I would encourage anyone who is attending Axpona to give it a listen for yourself. The only way to do that properly is to go through the ~2 minute sweep/calibration process for each unique listener. Wandering in and out of the room is unfortunately not useful in this case. They do also offer a 14 day in home trial for those with serious interest.

What gear are you all using with the BACCH?  Mahgister is talking about a $1000 system??

There are reports (some quite credible) that one can obtain much of the benefit of the $30-50K BACCH products by moving speakers close enough to create a mostly nearfield listening experience.  That's suprrising to me b/c if merely eliminating acoustic crosstalk is the goal, why wouldn't headphones do exactly the same thing?  (OK, I can guess why, because hps eliminate the normal reflections that  our brains use as imaging & soundstage cues.  I think.)  And I realize that it's simply not possible, or even desirable, to sit that close to speakers in many setups.  But if I had more time on my hands, I think that trying that out might be a cool experiment.

 

I've found that, whenever I've had a system that has a sweet spot that is elongated along a listener's line of vision (that is along the line formed when you move your head forward & back while in a normala listening position), that moving your head to get closer to the speakers changes imaging and soundstage -- and for the better.  Maybe I should have recognized that as a clue that something was going on.

 

Acoustics is interesting.  Floor bounce, I think, is something that should get more attention.  I once had to move a bunch of boxes into my listening room while we painted an adjoining room. They were all over the floor & I expected them to disrupt the performance of my meticulously positioned Quad ESL-57s.  What I found, though, was that the Quads' imaging and soundstage improved dramatically.  And they had been pretty superb to start with in that smaller (10x12) room, which was loaded with pricey room treatments.  The only explanation I could think of was that the boxes, while not blocking most of the panels' output, disrupted reflections from the floor.

 

My system is up to date in my profile. You'll see it's rather modest by high end standards here, though not mid-fi level either. ~$5k investment in the Bacch4Mac is not out of line for it at all. The SP ADIO, though much more costly, easily co-exists in some very high end systems, certainly nicer ones than mine. There is also an intro level software only version that's ~$1k, and it goes up from there. My speakers offer it as a "u-Bacch" option and it installs simply and works quite well.

Post removed 

What gear are you all using with the BACCH? Mahgister is talking about a $1000 system??

There are reports (some quite credible) that one can obtain much of the benefit of the $30-50K BACCH products by moving speakers close enough to create a mostly nearfield listening experience. That’s suprrising to me b/c if merely eliminating acoustic crosstalk is the goal, why wouldn’t headphones do exactly the same thing? (OK, I can guess why, because hps eliminate the normal reflections that our brains use as imaging & soundstage cues. I think.) And I realize that it’s simply not possible, or even desirable, to sit that close to speakers in many setups. But if I had more time on my hands, I think that trying that out might be a cool experiment.

 

My system will benefit from the BACCH system no doubt...

But i am very happy and his value is 1000 bucks... I decided to wait a bit before buying the BACCH. My income will be difficult to imagine to sustain living for many here by the way... Many dont leave on the same planet as me ...😊

 

For headphone : I own one of the best designed headphone ever acoustically...

Modulo some modifications i introduced this AKG K340 create an "out of the head " experience when the recording reflect great hall recording, church and many smaller Hall but WELL RECORDED ...the reason : it is his designed internal dual acoustic chamber with a dynamic cell and an electrostatic one add to that 5 tuned passive resonators resonators..

When optimized, which i did my soundfield is extraordinary and timbre and bass ...Almost all headphone had no interesting and refined acoustic chamber design this is why i dislike headphone, no crosstalk yes, but no acoustic room shell tuned the right way ... ( too costly on research too little profit said Kennerton who know his work when i asked why not designing a new hybrid 😊)

Now i can answer you remark about nearfield listening...

I listen in nearfield, not only that  reading Choueiri genius article i implemented for experiment a mechanical crosstalk barrier in my nearfield set up which experiment  make more sensible to me  the astounding  loss of spatial information in ALL STEREO SYSTEM by design...

I can assure you that Choueiri is right if you read his articles, because i tested this mechanically; then i know why my completely imperfect method so revealing it can be (impractical for most user i used high  wood panels separating the speakers for each ear) this mechanical method cannot compared one iota to the BACCH .. I dont need to buy BACCH  to understand basic acoustics.. 😊