How important is it for you to attain a holographic image?

^^^ Ten foot saxophones don't exist in real life. :-)

Frank

Frank, you misunderstand. No biggie. 😁

Interesting. Most have already touched on my feelings on the matter. Just wanted to say good conversation. 

Geoff, you have some real cajones to make such an analogy.
Frank, as Geoff states, but you were very close.

I remember a time when both the trailblazers of high-end audio here in the UK, Linn and Naim, decreed that holographic imagery a minor issue - timing was said to be the thing back then.

I love holographic imagery but the best I heard was through some noise cancelling Bose over ear headphones. Literally causing users to turn their heads to follow the sound.

However when it comes to commercial recordings I have serious doubts about how high a priority it is for recording engineers. Books like Greg Milner’s ’Perfecting Sound Forever’ paint a rather grim picture regarding some of the shenanigans that take place during recording. It’s quite possible that less than 1% of recordings were made with any real regard for capturing a three dimensional sound. Alan Blumlein, these engineers are not.

So for me tone, texture, timbre, timing and dynamics all come before imagery. I guess those speakers which are able to disappear better must also be better at imaging.

But can they also do those other things as well? Perhaps Linn and Naim were right all along, although their priorities have no doubt changed over time too. Compromises you can live with, and compromises you can't.