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

Showing 3 responses by psacanli

Armstrod, he means within the abilities of what is recorded. And as all of those with 'great' systems know, what has been recorded has been "incredible" on countless occasions- way better than what the average audiophile listener can even imagine. Gorden just hates to see a W-l--n deliberately varying from accurate just to 'Sell the sizzle'. I agree with him 100%. Truth is best.
Dcstep, a audio club recently did and discovered they could not hear any difference between items under test. Interesting comment by them-but what does it say?
to quote Mr. Holt:
"we haven't accomplished what we set out to do.The playback still doesn't sound 'just like the real thing'"

Not to be too critical,but,anyone sitting close to an orchesta in full swing(that means loud & soft) will know this would truly be a "monumental" achievement for a few pistons flapping wildly. Does anyone else out there have the feeling it "may- my baby finger & tongue stuck firmly into right cheek-"not" even be 'remotely' possible with todays-fine as they are- speaker technologies(within economic & size constraints.
I believe his "we" relates to a miniscule percentile of the already minute numbers of purveyors of "high end audio". Perhaps if the financial & manpower resources of NASA were used toward this end the advances might be quicker?

But I also understand Gordon from a different perspective and agree wholeheartedly. I have collected records & now CD's,since ~1965; I thoroughly enjoy music.
In the 60's my 1st self assembled Dynaco and Wharfedale 3 way speaker kit with 12 inch woofers- in my own "mighty" solid box playing a Marantz tuner & Dual record changer, provided me a great amount of basically "non annoying" 'rocking' listening from Heifetz, Jazz to the Beatles .
When I stepped up to Quad 33/303 with Quad ELS speakers, Hitachi FT920 tuner and a Thorens turntable in the 70's there was more of the same (I mailine classical dialy).
Forward to more of the same going to my next step up the
"ladder of enhanced enjoyment" in the 80's with a Goldmund Studietto, CJ pre/Krell KSA100 and mighty JBL 250Ti's.
On & up to Spectral/MIT in mid 90's & 'thoroughly' modded 250Ti's (still dynamic & emotive)--and this is where I was forced to go to CD to listen to new music---and honestly it has been an uphill struggle with the s----y CD sound ever since. (Let me say I'm "very happy" I retained my Goldmund & my analog 920 Tuner & even my Thorens & SME tonarm with Shure cartridge.) It's the "almost painful" CD reproduction that has forced me to "monumental" AC conditioning & isolation to make it 'acceptable'-- but even then without the unalloyed relaxing enjoyment of the best plain black vinyl reproduction. And of course the multi miking (read 'realistic' ambience destroyers) and 'processing' of many post '70s classical albums reveals itself clearly to those with capable systems-often leading to startling appreciation of those 'older' classical, jazz, folk, blues and (few) rock albums that were cleanly, clearly & reasonably dynamically recorded('even' mono) providing what I consider a sense of 'purity'.
Yes, there have been many improvements to the recording chain & there many 'spectacular' modern recordings(Reference Recordings among others) but Gord is right in that there has been a tremendous & unnecessary amount of junk foisted upon us by greedy, uncaring technicians & businesspeople with wooden ears.
Fondly, I like to consider his tirade generated 'primarily' by the ubiquitous CD where from which view I can wholeheartedly agree with many of his comments- it is "shameful" we had to step backward in the enjoyment of recorded music due to Sony/Phillips and there ilk creating demonstrably "c----y" CD Hardware,including reproduction equipment & Software-all in the name of quick profit!.
Records played on good systems very rarely hurt the ears(remember the odd mistracking violins); that couldn't be said when CD's came in. Annoyance with virtually "every single CD" if your ears have evolved with a clean reproduction system & analog sound.
I think Gord will be a 'happier camper' if he restricts himself to listening to well recorded vinyl in a well tuned room. I am not exagerating in the least.
His (erroneous in my opinion)espousal of multi channel I believe also arose primarily from the muddled & fuzzy(can I say "harsh") non-recreation of detail sound on countless CD's and virtually "every" CD player. Even here I think a good records portrayal of ambience in a well tuned room will placate him immensely. Most people of musical background & the fussiest Classical,Chamber,Jazz & solo instrument listeners that I know think multi-channel is a
"bizarre joke" for serious listening for those applications. Those of us who enjoy live music find it enjoyable virtually anywhere its played, indoors or out. Recorded music the same-music is music. No venue is perfect-but a nice quiet living room-of any dimensions, with or without tuning- is far better than most places for serious listening to the magic & depth of a musical performance by a serious artist---through a plain 2 channel stereo system.