2. misc-audio
  3. 1347580739

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?
sabai
chadeffect
586 posts
 
Sabai,

Sometimes it's hard to get ones intent across clearly in these little posts. It seems you have a good balance of obsession/enjoyment to me. I'm glad we cleared that up! Or should I say I'm about the same? My system is pretty stable these days. I learned a lot experimenting and reached a good place.

I tried some ICs with bybees of some sort inside some years ago. But had nothing to compare it with. I.e the same cable without the bybee.

I wanted to try the quantum purifier bybees on each of the speaker driver terminals, but when I asked about it I was told they were not worth the effort by someone with the same speakers.

The manufacturer said they had not gotten great results or feedback from the very few who had tried it. So I shelved the idea. I didn't feel that $$$$ brave :-(

I had the impression that less sensitive/speakers that needed more current which gained more. I would give the WA chips a go sometime.
mapman's avatar
mapman
22,457 posts
 
One last breath of hot air I must add is that I am not anti tweak. However I endorse addressing fundamentals first, tweaks second. Some talk first about fundamentals, then tweaks, recognizing the relative importance correctly. Chadeffect is a good example. I have considerable respect for Chads comments on most any topic accordingly.

Its those who focus on tweaks (user or vendor) without giving proper due accordance to the fundamental principals involved in good home sound and establishing some credibility there first that I tend to question.
mapman's avatar
mapman
22,457 posts
 
My perspective is that people rad these threads mostly to learn, not for pure entertainment value. TO me it is a disservice for anyone to be going hog wild recommending potentially expensive tweaks without putting those in proper perspective compared to the things that matter most. That may be good for the tweak vendors business, but does little for those who rally want to learn how do practically get better sound.
mapman's avatar
mapman
22,457 posts
 
"You stated, "I am not so certain". Certain about what? That a "strategy" you have no experience with may or may not work? This is like speculating about whether you will like vanilla when you have never even tasted it yet. More hot air.
"

I like vanilla.

I have never tried jumping into quicksand either but I have a pretty good idea what to expect regardless.
mapman's avatar
mapman
22,457 posts
 
Here's a useful principle
that relates to applications of technology that can also be applied to optimizing home audio effectively.

home audio tweaks fall into the 20% category of the Pareto Principle I would say.

Personally, as one who seeks perfection in my home audio sound (yet knows that is not likely to happen 100%) I tend to want to well exceed the 80/20 rule when it comes to home audio matters. I would say I want my rig to achieve 90% or better of what is possible in theory. Some tweaking will be necessary to get that but realizing the fundamentals has a good chance of putting one in the game based on the Pareto Principle..
More to discover