Stereophile Article - Holt telling it like it is.

Holt it was so much better back in the day and we have made no progress since the 90s come on what a bunch of crap.Many audio products have made progress since old Holt.Hes just one of those grumpy old audiophiles that feels everything was better back in da day.As seen through rose colored glasses.Why care what old tin ears thinks anyway ? He proclaims that Audios dying but he doesnt even give a thought to upcoming markets like a small country called china.These types always say the hobbie is dying this they want for its then more exclusive and they can say how right they are.Not even giving thought to other markets beside US shows a very closed mind and ignorance. More audiophiles world wide than at any time in history but if you read the old white reviewers take where all doomed.....Hobbies dead.As I said a bunch or crap from a very old wind bag who thinks his opions matter but realy knows deep inside noone cares, like a scream in the dark, a last gasp...from the failing mind and ears of holt.

As I said a bunch or crap from a very old wind bag who thinks his opions matter but realy knows deep inside noone cares, like a scream in the dark, a last gasp...from the failing mind and ears of holt

Wow, this just proves that Gordon Holt magic is still alive even today - he polarizes people and gets them fighting their corner! If this is the kind of reaction he can still cause perhaps he is not so irrelevant after all - perhaps this is why Stereophile still invites him over for a rant! It actually help keeps the hobby alive - it shows people care!!

I'm surprised so many people agree with this fellow. I’m sorry, but as one of the younger folks on A-Gon he sounds to me like nothing more than a bitter old man who’s pissed off because the world of hi-fi didn’t adhere to his very narrow vision of this hobby. He also seems to think that there was a time when he was the only voice and vision of all audiophiles and as contentious as the debates on this forum are I highly doubt that. His dogged insistence that the only goal of hi-fi should be “perfect reproduction of the sound of real music in a real space” is silly.

I like listening to my system because I love music. The sound quality is certainly important but not always paramount and I don’t have any foolish notions of being able to recreate Carnegie Hall in my 18x15 family room. I just like to listen to music.

Is the industry suffering under its own inaccessibility? Yes, certainly. It’s completely lost its appeal as something that most people aspire to own because most people don’t see the value in it. It’s the same reason most people choose a Chevy over a Rolls Royce. Both perform the same basic functions but for most people one is justifiable and one is not. For most people playing music on any old thing is good enough, and the more stratospheric hi-fi becomes the more people are simply going to settle for “good enough”.

That’s what happens when you put your manufacturing dollars into smashing the last 99th percent out of a system instead of making something that’s merely “really good” and packaging it in a way that people want to live with. Someone will buy that highest performance piece, it might even be me, but it won’t be most people. And then we’re really going to wring our hands because sales are declining? Really?

I wonder if Mr. Holt, is really all at the point where he can’t enjoy a record because the sound quality is mediocre? Am I missing something? Should I toss my Charlie Parker recordings because the acetate pops? The first time I heard Coltrane was out of a single speaker in a really loud 1979 F-150 but it still grabbed my attention.

And frankly, what’s wrong with “”good” sound is whatever one likes”? Otherwise you’re presuming that there is some perfect, agreed upon standard of what “good” sound is. Two people sitting right next to each other in a concert hall can hear totally different components of the music and take away a vastly different “live” experience. Suggesting that there is some attainable perfect reproduction of live music is fallacious for a lot of reasons and very few of them have anything to do with hi-fi technology.

I don’t care if this guy is a legend in the industry. He’s a crank.

I think, Holt is right. But it is no secret, everyone knows that who is interested in music (not Show). Of course, there are a few manufacturers, who really try to push the curtain, but let's be honest, the most gear out there is crap.
I see - or hear - it all the time when I go to Shows etc. Good looking, nicely made stuff which is normally over hyped and at the end of day it is more or less wasted time to listen to it.
Money makes the world go round and the customer "has to" spend his bucks, no one is interested in "real sound" or "natural presentation". I agree, this is a endless discussion, but I listened to so much gear, which isn't able to bring out all details and they are endless hyped from their distributors or dealers.
And when a customer writes about that, he is a bad guy, or his speakers suck, or he is deaf, or his System is bad or the cartridge does not match with "his" tonearm .....
Depressing.

I think one of the things that makes a discussion of the goal of high end audio tricky is the models we use for the result.

IMO, the room is part of the result. My model is that the stereo can 'graft' the wall of your room onto a musical event in progress. This model allows for the technology striving for the 'absolute' while at the same time accounting for the listening environment.

I think the industry is doing great progress in reproduction- we have equipment now that is far more neutral that what was possible ten years ago.