What Does Holographic Sound Like?

Sabai, please clarify. When you say there are 5 levels of interconnects between the D/A and the integrated amp are you saying that you have daisy chained 5 different interconnects together and are using them as a "single" interconnect? And does 6 levels of speaker cable mean a similar arrangement is used between the integrated and the loudspeakers?

I think I got it. You mean only one post at a time? I don't see any problem with more than one.

Onhwy61,
There are 3 interconnects plus a Bybee product and a Combax product. That makes 5 levels. There are 3 speaker cables plus two Bybee products and one Synergistic Research product. That makes six levels.

Sabai, my experiences have been the same as yours. Before I got to where I am, Carver holography was my thing. There's no comparison with what I had and what I got.

It took years to get where I am, but fortunately "high end emporiums" existed at that time. You could pay them a visit, and mix and match various pieces of equipment. I recall one time in particular when we were grooving high on top of the line ARC electronics, and Thiel speakers, when someone came in wanting to audition a Rotel amp. Although they kept the ARC CD player, ARC preamp and Thiel speakers in the mix, the sound stage went flat, no more holography.

That illustrated that you have to have it all, and the more expensive, the better. Not only do you need top of the line equipment, but 20 or so years as an audiophile doesn't hurt either.

In regard to what it sounds like? The short answer is "heaven". When stationary instruments occupy positions on a sound stage, with a vocalist that you can reach out and touch in the center, that's heaven. I just got a new cartridge that cost more than my wife will ever know, and heaven just got a lot better.

Sabai, Jefferybowman2k and Ebm are mocking you. Their posts added nothing constructive to the conversation. Ignore them.

If you Google the prhase, "One hit quit," refers to a potent Cannabis which would get the user high in one hit. I assume they are suggesting either that you are high or that anyone who reads your post will become high, that is become delusional. Instead of telling you why they don't like your idea of daisy chaining cabling they made fun of you. So, ignore them.

As a person who has spent many years, a lot of money and time on cabling my reaction to your post is the absolute opposite. I commend you for being creative! Instead of assuming you know how things will sound you experimented. THAT is how exciting things are discovered in system building, not sitting back and laughing at others.

You have spent a lot of time with Cabling and it shows. You also are to be commended, not mocked, for creativity when trying novel ideas in building audio systems! This idea of linking/daisy chaining cables had not occurred to me, but I will try it at some point to see what the effect is. People who sit and laugh at others miss out on the experience of the discovery. I have tried a lot of experiments with systems to see what might yield unexpectedly great results.

Now, having said that, I am in agreement that the shortest cable run is the best in that it will bring the best sound; the idea of daisy chaining power cords and interconnects goes counter to my thinking. I believe that if I were to put a couple ICs together as you suggest, and try them both ways that I will still conclude that a single one is superior. The same with power cords. I think you are hearing an effect emphasizing macrodynamics but I think your definition and detail would suffer using the method you suggest.

It had also better be a big change. I don't chase puny changes in systems, as there are way too many huge upgrades to be had, and I'm long done chasing pissy little ones. If even after several seconds it doesn't manifest itself as a big difference then I'm usually done with it; it won't ever be enough to consider as a big improvement. I will certainly not be an audiophile who sits there, 'Well, I think I hear a difference..." IMO, that is a loser's game.

I do believe you are getting some RFI filtering with added length to the interconnects and power cords. So, my guess is that it would seem "better" in some respects, but at the cost of some microdynamics/definition/detail. In principle I almost never will sacrifice definition and detail for any other improvement. I demand both the definition/detail AND the other improvement such as holographic image. :)

But with cabling it is just fun to try novel arrangements. Just last night an audiophile friend and I were comparing two digital cables, one a .5 meter RCA and the other a 2M Balanced/XLR cable acting as AES/EBU, both of the same manufacturer. One might think the shortness of the .5M cable and the fact that it is a dedicated Digital Coaxial cable would make it superior. But no, the XLR interconnect acting as a digital AES/EBU was clearly superior.

My point in the illustration is that we can think logically that we know the outcome of a particular cable decision but the truth is that often the results would surprise us if we heard the two choices in comparison. I have no doubt that you are getting quite different sound with your daisy chaining cables. It would be similar to something I do with speaker cables - using two full pair of cables on one set of binding posts.

I find it incredible the number of audiophiles who are so tight with their money or so arrogant they think they can predict a sound without hearing it that they refuse to experiment. Their loss! From your OP it sounds like you have used complete double paralel runs of speaker cabling and have found precisely what I have; it transforms the speaker's sound, gaining a tremendous amount of what you have termed "holographic." Prescisely! It is a very pleasing gain in the sense of solidity and 3-D nature of the soundstage. The Arrogant Ones would say it's stupid. Again, their loss! :)

My thoughts about your experimenting with using multiple interconnects and power cords is that I fear you are muddying up the result. Of those two cords or two interconnects you join one will be superior. It may not have all the properties you wish for, but it will come closer to your ideal. I would urge you, then, to keep looking for a single interconnect or single power cord, etc. which will have ALL the properties you wish. They do exist, though you may have to go through a dozen to find them. It can be a very exhausting process.

The other problem with daisy chain of cabling is that you cannot tell what each is contributing to the sound. It is only trial and error, but that doesn't help you move your rig with purpose toward your ideal sound. This is especially so if you are mixing and matching cables throughout the system! You are unwittingly making it far harder to gain a clear direction where you want the sound to go. I did a lot of mixing and matching of cables in my early years as an audiophile and thought it was superior. Now that I have been able to procure many different brands and hear them in comparison I advise the opposite; Stop mixing and start comparing entire looms/sets.

But, I will try your method of daisy chaining interconnects just for fun! It's a lot of joyous discovery to find out what such things do to the sound! It hurts nothing and opens your ears to new experiences. What do I expect? I expect a fundamentally different sound, a change which will emphasize macrodynamics but at the cost of mircrodynamics, similar to a networked power cord or a power conditioning device placed on the system. It will be interesting to see if that is my impression.

Finally, I would compare the daisy chain technique more to networked cables, which I have over time found to be horrid, one of the best ways to kill definition and purity of a system. I have a feeling that I will not be using your technique, but I commend you for creativity and being willing to discuss it.

Finally, to everyone; there are hundreds - no, limitless numbers of steps to advance an audio system. Holographic nature of the soundstage IS an element which will improve dramatically as those steps are climbed, be it one at a time or in leaps and bounds as far more capable equipment is used.

I'm not impressed with devices and gimmicks which are not in the signal path and seemingly have little purpose toward the signal (aside from sensible room tuning devices like sound panels and bass traps, etc.). They are largely a waste of money and time - and yes, I have done demo of many of them. I dont own them because they wasted my time for pissy results. I do not review them typically because they are a waste of time and effort relative to the direct changes one can make within the signal path. In that respect I see little wisdom in working with extraneous tweaks when one can alter the sound directly through things like cables. IMO, a Bybee filter has a lot more going for it in terms of change of a rig's sound than a LessLoss Blackbody or the Synergistic Research A.R.T. system.

Sabai, keep having fun and experimenting! You are a positive person on this board and have an obvious love for the hobby!