Holographic sound

[Timpd]

I have heard what I understand to be holographic sound a few times and found it captivating but what are the ingredients that produce it. At least twice the amp,has been a valve amp but can't recall the speakers , good quality but not wildly expensive. So is it amp, amp/ speaker synergy or room acoustics or a mix of those? I would love to produce it at home and would willingly sacrifice ultimate bass, detail etc to find it. Where is the best place to start finding it?

 

[Infiniteloop]

I have heard what I understand to be holographic sound a few times and found it captivating but what are the ingredients that produce it. At least twice the amp,has been a valve amp but can't recall the speakers , good quality but not wildly expensive. So is it amp, amp/ speaker synergy or room acoustics or a mix of those? I would love to produce it at home and would willingly sacrifice ultimate bass, detail etc to find it. Where is the best place to start finding it?

I think what you may have heard is good soundstaging. Valve Amps are known to be very good at this.

Usually, a well set up system will respond with good soundstaging. You need to experiment with speaker placement relative to your listening position for best results. Your listening room (and its furnishings) will play a part too.

 

[andyjm]

Room / speaker interaction is the main driver of decent stereo effect. Moving stuff around can often bring remarkable improvements.

However, if you really want the 'sitting in the auditorium' effect, then electrostatic speakers have a well deserved reputation for doing a disappearing act and producing a remarkable 3D soundstage. They are however expensive, large, very fussy about placement, and only have a small sweetspot where the illusion is truly effective. They also have an impedance curve that looks like a dog's hind leg and demand pricey amps to drive them properly.

I foolishly went to listen to a demo of a Martin Logan / Krell setup and was hooked. Beware if you go down that route.

 

[davedotco]

Room / speaker interaction is the main driver of decent stereo effect. Moving stuff around can often bring remarkable improvements.

However, if you really want the 'sitting in the auditorium' effect, then electrostatic speakers have a well deserved reputation for doing a disappearing act and producing a remarkable 3D soundstage. They are however expensive, large, very fussy about placement, and only have a small sweetspot where the illusion is truly effective. They also have an impedance curve that looks like a dog's hind leg and demand pricey amps to drive them properly.

I foolishly went to listen to a demo of a Martin Logan / Krell setup and was hooked. Beware if you go down that route.

I am still 'haunted' by a demonstration involving Martin Logan Statement speakers back in the '80s, nothing else really comes close in terms of sound stage, in the '90s I spent a lot of time and money chasing that dream, at one point my setup was near £30k at regular prices, and £30k was a lot of money in those days.

Still not even close to the big ML setup, the only other system that matched the MLs was Alastair Robertson-Aikman's unusual setup involving two pairs of late model Quad electrostatics in a rather unusual arrangement.

 

[matthewpiano]

I get very holographic imaging from my system now, in depth, width and height of the soundstage. It's interesting that you mention sacrificing 'ultimate bass', as I've found that 'bassy' speakers generally don't produce this sort of soundstage. The Wharfedale Diamond 220s have been criticised for being bass light in some quarters. Compared to many speakers they may appear that way, but my experience is that they just don't produce false bass. The slot-loading, instead of the more traditional rear or front port, results in an absence of boom, overhang, and smear in the bass and instead you are left with a more accurate and honest representation of bass notes with much more of the timbral qualities of the instrument. This also leaves the rest of the frequency range clear and open, producing a balanced and immersive sound with the speakers placed close to the rear wall. They are the closest thing I've heard to electrostatics from a budget cabinet speaker, and they really excel in soundstaging, detail, and natural reproduction of instrumental and vocal timbre.

I also have a pair of Dynaudio DM2/6s. They are very capable speakers in many ways but they are heavier in the bass than the Wharfedales, and can be susceptible to smearing. Whilst they do produce some nice spatial effects at the top end, the midrange can sound 'hooded', and they aren't as wide-open sounding as the cheaper speaker.

 

[Electro]

Imaging and being able to create a believable sound stage is one of the many things my system excels at .

With a good ( especially live ) recording the stage can extend 50' or more backwards and as wide as the actual stage is, the walls dissapear and with closed eyes it is impossible to hear where the speakers are, in fact my listening room dissapears and it feels like you are surrounded by music just like being at a live venue.

To achieve this everything has to be right from the equipment to the room accouctic and the quality of the recording itself.

Bass is very important indeed, without it you will not get the full live spacial experience.

It is the lower bass that gives you the most spacial information about the size of the room so it must be as distortion free as possible and bass transients must not be smeared or muddled.

If you go into a large auditorium or cathedral when it is empty you will hear a low continuous frequency rumble and if you close your eyes it is still possible to tell you are in a large enclosed space, this is the bass spacial effect I am talking about.

The key to good imaging is having a system that preserves musical transients at all frequencies as well as possible imo .

I have hundreds of good recordings that can make you feel like you are there .

I am constantly messing about with my room accoustics using very simple methods.

 

[Gaz37]

The key word used so far in this thread has been "Illusion"

The sound is actually coming from two speakers and anything different that you may think you're hearing is just your brain fooling you. this illusion will also only be as good as the studio engineer made it and it would have been him that decided where the instruments/singers are placed (remember in studio tracks each instrument/vocal is recorded individually)

This makes you wonder how one speaker can create the illusion better than another

 

[abacus]

The speaker is the least accurate piece of equipment in any system, so it’s hardly surprising that different speakers produce different sounds to what the producer intended. (This is why it is of vital importance to listen to them with your equipment before purchase)

Room acoustics also play a big part in how a speaker sounds, thus causing even more variations.

The only thing you can do (As mentioned) is to find speakers that do what you want, and experiment with placement in the room that they are in.

If you don’t mind looks and cables all over the place, go for a pair of professional active speakers, add a quality room EQ system (Dirac is one of the best but there are others), and finish off with a computer with a convolution reverb Plug-In.

Hope this helps

Bill

 

[Native_bon]

 

The speaker is the least accurate piece of equipment in any system, so it’s hardly surprising that different speakers produce different sounds to what the producer intended. (This is why it is of vital importance to listen to them with your equipment before purchase)

Room acoustics also play a big part in how a speaker sounds, thus causing even more variations.

The only thing you can do (As mentioned) is to find speakers that do what you want, and experiment with placement in the room that they are in.

If you don’t mind looks and cables all over the place, go for a pair of professional active speakers, add a quality room EQ system (Dirac is one of the best but there are others), and finish off with a computer with a convolution reverb Plug-In.

Hope this helps

Bill

This is one area I think most Hifi purist will be loosing out on. When I listened to the Arcam 850 with Dirac software in use it totally blow me away. It was like some one watching VHS from the 70's and suddenly was watching UHD HDR10 in 2016.

Now the results of Dirac in use may differ, and will totally depend on how good/bad the acoustics of the room in use.

Anyone who has already got a very good system and wants to take the performance to the Nxt level, I feel really needs a software like Dirac in place.

 

[Timpd]

Thanks for the input. It may be an illusion but when the music hangs in the air so I feel I can touch it ,it seems pretty real to me. I have heard very expensive systems that sound good but it's just a 2D wall of sound not an immersive 3D experience. When I auditioned my current system at a local dealer it was engrossing particularly with a Talking Heads CD. The demo room was much brighter acoustically than my room which has carpets ,rugs ,heavy curtains and sofas to kill the sound. I may have a look at some valve amps but I feel ,probably wrongly , its like buying a classic car, need continual tweaking and care.

 

[Leeps]

There is another way to skin this particular cat, and the purists will hate it. I don't do this all the time as the soundstaging from my current speakers is already very good but...

My AV receiver has an "Extended Stereo" feature that projects the 2.0 source through all my 5.1 speakers. So far so bad. The imaging sounds wrong because you can hear the voice coming from behind you too. So the success is in the detail: on my AVR i also have to use the "fader" (actually a feature on the controll app that can alter the balance and/or fader). I place the mark 2/3 of the way between the centre and front. Now it sounds spot-on. The rear speakers now just add ambience and the front soundstage remains in the front. Like I say, I don't use this all the time, but it can sound superb and truly 3D. I've heard similar settings on other AVR's (like Dolby Pro Logic) and it sounds awful- muddy and confused. But Pioneer's Extended Stereo is excellent in my opinion, providing you get the fore/aft balance correct.

But yes, it does need an AV receiver and 5.1 speakers! But the upside is its obvious ability with 5.1 signals too: movies or music.

 

[Rethep]

Valve-amps (you will have to spend a few thousands on a good one!) are going the way of holographic imaging! But only combined with good speakers. Try 'open baffle' ones, e.g. like mine! Also Audio Note AZ-2 is 'open baffle' type. The 'open' says it: it does not sound like 'out of a box-sound' at all. Expect the area of bass (slam) to be a lttle weaker, but in ALL other areas a very good (holographic) sound!

Just have a demo-ed listen somewhere.

 

[Rethep]

Thanks for the input. It may be an illusion but when the music hangs in the air so I feel I can touch it ,it seems pretty real to me. I have heard very expensive systems that sound good but it's just a 2D wall of sound not an immersive 3D experience. When I auditioned my current system at a local dealer it was engrossing particularly with a Talking Heads CD. The demo room was much brighter acoustically than my room which has carpets ,rugs ,heavy curtains and sofas to kill the sound. I may have a look at some valve amps but I feel ,probably wrongly , its like buying a classic car, need continual tweaking and care.

I think you are wright in this. When your acoustics kill the sound there is nothing to be won. And certainly not with 'open baffle' speakers which project the sound to the rear too! Then one way is the one the previous poster has mentioned, or use some other electronic effect box on your 2 channel system.

Of course you can open the curtains, shuffle with furniture, or remove some rug. That would also improve your current set-up!

 

[lindsayt]

Valve-amps (you will have to spend a few thousands on a good one!) are going the way of holographic imaging! But only combined with good speakers. Try 'open baffle' ones, e.g. like mine! Also Audio Note AZ-2 is 'open baffle' type. The 'open' says it: it does not sound like 'out of a box-sound' at all. Expect the area of bass (slam) to be a lttle weaker, but in ALL other areas a very good (holographic) sound!

Just have a demo-ed listen somewhere.

Oh no you don't. You only need to spend thousands of pounds if you need more than 2 watts. Even then, if you can DIY, or buy 2nd hand, you can get good valve amps with more than 2 watts for less than £2000.

Also, there's a lot of sense in Electro's excellent post. One thing I would add is that his graph had a very slow looking rise time on the initial transient. Music transients go pretty much vertically up or down during the initial attack phase.

 

[Macspur]

Imaging and being able to create a believable sound stage is one of the many things my system excels at .

With a good ( especially live ) recording the stage can extend 50' or more backwards and as wide as the actual stage is, the walls dissapear and with closed eyes it is impossible to hear where the speakers are, in fact my listening room dissapears and it feels like you are surrounded by music just like being at a live venue.

To achieve this everything has to be right from the equipment to the room accouctic and the quality of the recording itself.

Bass is very important indeed, without it you will not get the full live spacial experience.

It is the lower bass that gives you the most spacial information about the size of the room so it must be as distortion free as possible and bass transients must not be smeared or muddled.

If you go into a large auditorium or cathedral when it is empty you will hear a low continuous frequency rumble and if you close your eyes it is still possible to tell you are in a large enclosed space, this is the bass spacial effect I am talking about.

The key to good imaging is having a system that preserves musical transients at all frequencies as well as possible imo .

I have hundreds of good recordings that can make you feel like you are there .

I am constantly messing about with my room accoustics using very simple methods.

Would love to come and have a listen some time electro.

Mac

www.macsmusic.blogbubble.net

 

[bluedroog]

If I were to put together a system with this in mind, on a mid-budget I'll be looking at something like:

Magneplanar MG.7 speakers

Croft 25 valve pre-amp

Hypex ncore power amps

Actually now I'd love to hear that!

 

[iQ Speakers]

Hi Electro

Love to come over, could combine and bring Mac over as well. I'm affraid Ill have to bring a Hypex amp though!*stop*

 

[GCE]

For Holographic sound you should look for a vintage Carver amp http://www.hifiengine.com/manual_library/carver/cm-1090.shtml

 

[Electro]

Hi Electro

Love to come over, could combine and bring Mac over as well. I'm affraid Ill have to bring a Hypex amp though!*stop*

Sounds like a plan to me. *good*

 

[Gaz37]

How a valve can create an illusion better than a transistor?

It is an inescapable fact that what we hear as a "soundstage" isn't actually there, it's simply an illusion created by the sound engineer by increasing/decreasing the level of instruments/vocals either from one channel to the other (creating lateral soundstage) or volume (creating the illusion of instruments being closer or farther from the listener) That being the case how, in technical terms, does a valve amplify a signal in a way that enhances that illusion better than a transistor?

Anyone know?

 

[Electro]

Imaging and being able to create a believable sound stage is one of the many things my system excels at .

With a good ( especially live ) recording the stage can extend 50' or more backwards and as wide as the actual stage is, the walls dissapear and with closed eyes it is impossible to hear where the speakers are, in fact my listening room dissapears and it feels like you are surrounded by music just like being at a live venue.

To achieve this everything has to be right from the equipment to the room accouctic and the quality of the recording itself.

Bass is very important indeed, without it you will not get the full live spacial experience.

It is the lower bass that gives you the most spacial information about the size of the room so it must be as distortion free as possible and bass transients must not be smeared or muddled.

If you go into a large auditorium or cathedral when it is empty you will hear a low continuous frequency rumble and if you close your eyes it is still possible to tell you are in a large enclosed space, this is the bass spacial effect I am talking about.

The key to good imaging is having a system that preserves musical transients at all frequencies as well as possible imo .

I have hundreds of good recordings that can make you feel like you are there .

I am constantly messing about with my room accoustics using very simple methods.

Would love to come and have a listen some time electro.

Mac

www.macsmusic.blogbubble.net

Hi Mac,

You are welcome to come and visit and for a listening session, I would love to hear your thoughts on my system.

Here is an email address you can contact me on.

As soon as you have messaged me I will delete this address .

I must invite Colin over sometime as well if he is not to busy building amplifiers. *smile*

 

[nopiano]

How a valve can create an illusion better than a transistor?

It is an inescapable fact that what we hear as a "soundstage" isn't actually there, it's simply an illusion created by the sound engineer by increasing/decreasing the level of instruments/vocals either from one channel to the other (creating lateral soundstage) or volume (creating the illusion of instruments being closer or farther from the listener) That being the case how, in technical terms, does a valve amplify a signal in a way that enhances that illusion better than a transistor?

Anyone know?

The precise reason is not known for a valve-amp to be better at almost every aspect of (hifi) sound.

One very important thing you forgot about the soundstage: the 'phase' of the different signals! That creates the most of depth to my idea. I think that's where valves excell. Having little (or no) feedback, is an important factor too.

The soundstage is often artificial, yes! But the one thing that only matters is: does it capture and hold your attention. My experience is that (my) valve-sound almost imprisons me!

For almost 30 years ago i had Magnepans MG 1.5 (with SS-amp). The sound i have now is very comparable to that of 30 years ago, but then even much, much better. As i said before somewhere else on this forum: this is my last set-up, i don't have to buy another one, as it leaves me nothing (better) to wish for anymore.

Beguiling though valves can be, I rather fear that their pleasantness is more likely to be because their (considerable) distortions are more euphonious and akin to instrumental harmonics than the same in a SS amplifier. Therefore they sound more 'musical' despite being less accurate.

Much as the microphonic effects and pre-echo on an LP sound more 'ambient' than the equivalent CD.

 

[hybridauth_Facebook_100000759563588]

Headphones. For a cost effective immersive sound, for me, you can't do better than get a decent source, DAC/headphone amp and some headphones.

 

[Rethep]

How a valve can create an illusion better than a transistor?

It is an inescapable fact that what we hear as a "soundstage" isn't actually there, it's simply an illusion created by the sound engineer by increasing/decreasing the level of instruments/vocals either from one channel to the other (creating lateral soundstage) or volume (creating the illusion of instruments being closer or farther from the listener) That being the case how, in technical terms, does a valve amplify a signal in a way that enhances that illusion better than a transistor?

Anyone know?

The precise reason is not known for a valve-amp to be better at almost every aspect of (hifi) sound.

One very important thing you forgot about the soundstage: the 'phase' of the different signals! That creates the most of depth to my idea. I think that's where valves excell. Having little (or no) feedback, is an important factor too. Not to mention the fact that it has mostly only 2 amplifying stages.

The soundstage is often artificial, yes! But the one thing that only matters is: does it capture and hold your attention! My experience is that (my) valve-sound almost imprisons me!

For almost 30 years ago i had Magnepans MG 1.5 (with SS-amp). The sound i have now is very comparable to that of 30 years ago, but then even much, much better. As i said before somewhere else on this forum: this is my last set-up, i don't have to buy another one, as it leaves me nothing (better) to wish for anymore.

 

[Rethep]

Beguiling though valves can be, I rather fear that their pleasantness is more likely to be because their (considerable) distortions are more euphonious and akin to instrumental harmonics than the same in a SS amplifier. Therefore they sound more 'musical' despite being less accurate.

Much as the microphonic effects and pre-echo on an LP sound more 'ambient' than the equivalent CD.

[/quote]

It's the only thing that counts isn't it ?! 'Accurate' has to do with numbers. So, for everyone to make the choice.

for themselves. As i said before, if you want real 'slam', choose SS, otherwise, to me, valves is better!