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
sabai OP
2,027 posts
 
Bryoncunningham,
Once again, you have nailed Geoffkait to the wall so perfectly that I could not have put this any better. Bravo.
sabai OP
2,027 posts
 
Geoffkait,
Why are you being so evasive?

You first quoted me as saying:

""I have not heard of a single "person in the industry" or a single "senior reviewer" who minimizes the importance or denies the existence of "holographic sound"."

Then you replied:

"I kinda doubt you've heard what all of them have said on the subject. I have not seen a single buffalo out in my yard today. Lol"

Is it so difficult to answer my question? What's the mystery? Why can't you give a straight answer to a straight question? In case you did not notice, my question was very simple -- and very straight. In fact, I believe it was not very difficult to understand. Your evasive reply was "I kinda doubt you've heard what all of them have said on the subject". This is not a good enough answer -- with or without the Lol at the end. Why can't you name names? Why can't you give us specific statements that specific people have made? Why can't you put facts in place of evasive replies? I can read English as well as the next person on this thread. I'm waiting. We're waiting.
sabai OP
2,027 posts
 
Geoffkait,
You stated, "I said that your idea of connecting cables in series was unusual, not that the idea of holographic sound was unusual. I would be the last person to deny that holographic sound is achievable or unusual as a concept."

But, in fact, this is what you said, "In addition, there does seem to be a very strong resistance to any idea that is not "normal". It's ironic that the subject of this thread, Holographic Sound, is itself controversial. Hel-looo! Most people have never really heard Holographic Sound. Many people in the industry including some senior reviewers either minimize its importance or deny its existence ..."

You have made direct reference to holographic sound being unusual -- you call it "controversial" -- and now you claim you made no such reference. In fact, to bolster this claim you refer to "most people" never having heard holographic sound and to "people in the industry" as well as "some senior executives" minimizing or denying "its existence". When you refer to "its existence" you are not referring to cables in series. You are referring to holographic sound. I suggest that you re-read what you yourself have written.

I reiterate:

You stated, "Many people in the industry including some senior reviewers either minimize its [holographic sound's] importance or deny its existence." Well then, you had better come up with some specific names of "many people in the industry" and "senior reviewers" who back you up.

I have not heard of a single "person in the industry" or a single "senior reviewer" who minimizes the importance or denies the existence of "holographic sound". Of course, there is a world of difference between minimizing the existence of "holographic sound" and denying its existence.

Minimizing its importance means that the person in question recognizes that it exists but, for some reason "minimizes its importance". Could you please give us the details regarding who "in the industry" and which "senior reviewers" minimize the importance of holographic sound and their reasons for doing so -- and where they have actually stated this? And could you please give us the details regarding who "in the industry" and which "senior reviewers" actually deny the existence of holographic sound and where they have actually stated this?
sabai OP
2,027 posts
 
Learsfool,
On the contrary, you are a very clear writer. I just posted a reply to your thread about hearing loss, by the way.

I think one problem with threads is that Audiogon does not take care to post replies in the order in which they are posted. I have noticed that my most recent posts appear on the thread before earlier posts. This may cause confusion.

I agree with you about musicians hearing differently than audiophiles. I know my musician friends do not place the same emphasis that I do on the quality of audio systems. It is making music that is their first priority.
geoffkait's avatar
geoffkait
23,365 posts
 
Sabai, again, we have failure to communicate. What I originally posted was the following:

"As I said, we believe what we chose to believe. Sabai, if you don't object too much to my saying so, it's ironic and bizarre that you would attack someone who is presenting unusual ideas when you, yourself, are presenting unusual ideas. Cables in series, indeed. Hel-loooo! Lol"

You continue to insist I said Holographic Sound was an unusual idea, but actually I said no such thing. I said connecting cables in series was an unusual idea. Now do you see the irony? One wonders why you are so defensive about your holographic sound. Did you invent it? Lol
More to discover