Stereophile Article - Holt telling it like it is.


http://stereophile.com/asweseeit/1107awsi/

Gordon Holt telling it the way it is. I have to tell you; I agree almost with 100% of what he's said. I look forward to the Stereophile print where a full article is too be written. I will purchase that issue.
lush
Holt ever do any serious recording? When I hear my instruments ( both electric and acoustic Basses ) tracks recordings played back the overall sound is remarkably lifelike. Along with knowledgeable engineering the chain, including the microphones and the speakers, is doing a very good job.

Some recording engineers work with absolutely horrible playback equipment but when you hear the take in a well equipped post production room the original tracks are stunningly life like.

The degradation begins during post production and goes downhill ending with the finished media. Unfortunately, I can't speak of the direct to disk method of recording.

Vic
Ditto Audiofeil.

Mrtennis and friends, go out to the audio shows and feel the difference.

My own Scintillas give me all the real satisfaction I need. They need to do that, because I will settle for nothing less.
Just some of my random thoughts on the subject- If reproduction was nothing more than an exact science, there would only be a need for probably 5 audio companies making only different price points.

Optical lens manufacturers (which require science to balance out distortions, chromatic abberrations, etc) balance science with aesthetics. They choose how their different products will reproduce reality.

I have posted this before, but I have friends who often host parties where they invite talented bluegrass musicians over to jam. They even have a stand up bass in the apartment since that is a bit hard to lug over.

So I often can tune my ears to the sound of acoustic music in a space much more similar to most of our homes than clubs or theaters.

I listen from close range (2-4 feet) as well as far back. It is quite interesting to hear the room colorations on live instruments, similar to hearing them on stereo gear when I'm further back in the room. I often close my eyes and pretend I'm just sitting at home listening, which helps remove the visual sense and excitment of being in the presence of live performers.

Now I'm not saying my system at home is 100% accurate in any sense, but what I hear live from close range is really not that far off from what I am getting at home. There is not as much detail at home, but obviously the recording process can't capture all the detail of the original waveform.

Sure there are additional colorations in my system (or recording) but the live instruments really sound like perhaps just the model or two up from my system, not a pale comparison.

I think getting the gestalt of live music is they key. Sure we may be missing some detail, a bit of air, the staging might be off or completely different, but at least for the type of music I listen to (smaller acoustic rock/jazz/vocals) realistic reproduction is possible within the limits of current recording technology.

Hi fi has never been better than it is today. The level of fidelity I am getting was simply unobtainable when I first started out in this hobby in the late 80's.

Interesting about the BBC dip reffered to. Didn't MFSL create a peak in the upper midrange to get more presence in their 80's remasters?
Good thoughts Emailists,

Funny, that BBC dip thing. IMHO it works very well in closely recorded, often multi-miked and mixed, music. Sort of balances out and can sound a bit more realistic. But if the music is recorded with a mike from a more distant location such as might be used in binural recordings by 'audiophile producers' it will sound dull. IMHO Gordon must have liked hearing all of the sibilence one would pick up from a 'mike in the mouth' so long as the speaker's FR was flat. His choice. He was also fond of ambiance systems, made it more 'realistic' for him - wonder what he did to compensate for the the ambiance already mixed into the recording. Personally I would seek out a different audio god if I wanted to deify someone.
Pubul57, it appears that you have attached meaning where none existed. My description of Holt's living conditions were merely accurate, not a judgment of his character nor listening ability.

Also, the comment about Audio Research earlier is something to mull over; their equipment is *way* better now than it was at any time in their history. I credit a lot of that to Warren Gehl, who is the 'golden ear' of the company.

FWIW I don't know of any amplifier manufacturer that makes an amplifier that downplays the midrange. I suspect that has more to do with speakers than amplifiers (but I think a lot of speaker manufacturers avoid tonal colorations as much as possible too).

IMO there is a lot to be excited about in 2 channel high end audio, JGH or no.