Stereophile Article - Holt telling it like it is.

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.

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.

What it does do is make the music sound more distant - as if your seat is far back from the band or orchestra. (Distance filters out this audio band to a listener anyway) Indeed it can sound realistic.

I suspect the reason it works so well is that a small two way when played at higher levels will compress in the bass quite rapidly (loses its dynamics very quickly or simply does not represent bass transients properly or fully) - Rogers L33/5's come to mind. A very low cost speaker and a highly popular example of the "BBC dip".

The end result is that a small two way speaker that does not have a "BBC dip" in the mid range will sound very much out of balance, especially so at higher levels where bass transents fail to keep up. They present the kick drum "slap" but the punch or impact of the "bottom" is missing.

There are two popular ways manufacturers achieve the dip;
1) Direct field: Direct on axis response with a dip in the upper mid (easily seen on frequency plot)
2) Reverberant field: A dip in the off axis response more pronounced in the upper mid range than other frequencies. Often this is the inevitable result of using a 6" driver too high in frequncy (beaming) or a tweeter crossed over quite low where it can't keep up. (harder to see of a frequency plot - more subtle way to achieve the same thing)

Basically the presentation gives you the feeling you are further from the action and therefore it can be a convincing balanced sound with less dynamics (you hear more of a smooth reverberant field in the bass than the impact from being close up)

In order to present flat upper mid range response of a close miked vocalist, IMHO you need very powerful dynamic bass...all but impossible in most small two ways.
Hence the attractiveness to manufacturers of the "BBC dip"...nice balanced sound in a low cost system and a presentation that gives a deep soundstage or impression of sitting at a distance. Bose seem to have got it right on their very popular Acoustimass line...again pretty good sound for very low cost. IMHO, it is the low cost of this design and form of audio presentation which has made it so popular with speaker makers. If you can keep costs down you can increase your target market.

Emailist, that is a fabulous system, carefully and thoughtfully assembled.

On orchestra, I adjust the volume to suit my seating. My speakers are 7.5' apart. That puts me first balcony at our music hall.