[Bob in St. Louis]

Call this article one of the following:

- A topic of discussion
- A stirring of the pot
- Damn good journalism
- Horrible journalism
- Other ????

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

Thought, feelings, whatever......

Bob

[jules]

J. Gordon Holt couldn't be much more damning of current Hi Fi could he! Still, a feisty attitude and hell, I like the cut of his jib!

jules

[Toka]

Wow...I'd call it "damn good" if it weren't so sad.  Mr. Holt makes excellent points, and while perhaps a bit pessimistic overall I can't say I disagree with him.

[Wind Chaser]

Yawn... Pathetic egotism.  Just another reminder as to why I stopped reading that rag a long time ago.

[BrianM]

If you're looking for reactions to Gordon Holt, mine is Christ, what a self-righteous crank.  "My disciples, spreading my gospel"?  Jeez.  And I like how "We didn't accomplish what we set out to do."  We, Gordon and his flock.

FWIW, it doesn't make sense to acknowledge that the audio biz is now "a multi-million dollar business...an empty triumph" and later announce (without offering evidence) that "As far as the real world is concerned, high-end audio lost its credibility during the 1980s, when it flatly refused to submit to the kind of basic honesty controls..." Well, since the "real world" is the one that turned audio into a growing "multi million dollar business," they didn't appear to agree with him about the credibility problem.

If he doesn't think any meaningful advances have been made in realistic sound, okay.  That doesn't resemble the world I see out of my window, but whatever.  Sure there's lots of b.s. out there.  It's just not ALL there is.  If he thinks audio as a hobby is dying, fine.  Maybe we should all just go die already.

The definition of a washed-up crank is someone who can't be at peace with the fact that THE ENTIRE WORLD didn't end up submitting to his pet ideals.  I didn't conquer the universe and turn "high fidelity" into a universally sought-after, Eternal Truth for Everyman.  No -- tragedy of tragedies -- audiophilia remains essentially the niche pursuit of some committed enthusiasts...people just like Gordon.

[aerius]

J. Gordon Holt is right for the most part, mainstream hifi audio has mostly stagnated for some time after fracturing into two basic camps.  To generalize a bit (or a lot), there's the "musical" gear which often sounds overly ripe & mushy and the "accurate" stuff which to me sounds like nails on a chalkboard.  There's very little gear which manages to both measure well and sound good.

The high-end mainstream has become obsessed with "boutique" and "mil-spec" parts without understanding proper design principles.  Oftentimes I'll see some amp with a completely underpowered driver stage, but it'll have Blackgate capacitors and Vishay mil-spec resistors coming out the wazoo, which do nothing for the fact that the circuit is a POS and will still sound like poo.  With speakers, I see lots of manufacturers using drivers with all kinds of peaks and notches, and then trying to correct it all with complex crossovers which doesn't work too well since you can still see all the resonances and crap on the CSD waterfall plots.

If hi-fi is going to find its way again, it's going to be through the work of the smaller companies on the fringes who do know what they're doing, and who have the skills and knowledge to get it right.  For instance Artemis Labs makes excellent sounding tube gear with good proper circuit design.  Living Voice makes speakers with some of the most linear drivers around so they don't have to dick around with overly complicated cross-overs, and they also sound great.  Simaudio builds technically sound CD players which sound amazing.

[sunshinedawg]

He's pretty much right on, see my post here

I don't understand how people have been in this hobby for years and years and they don't have a basic understanding of how to reproduce the sound field of a live event. You don't get it done with $10,000 power cords etc.  You achieve it by studying acoustics and how the human brain/ear system operates. Then, you use system setups that can imitate the sound of a live acoustic hall as closely as possible. Two channel 2D equilateral systems can never come close to sounding like a 3D performance and they sound so boring to me.

I don't see how the evolution just stopped, similar to what Mr. Holt is speaking of. We went from mono to stereo and then to really crap surround and megabuck 2 channel systems that don't accomplishing anything on the sounding real front.

[BrianM]

He's pretty much right on, see my post here

I don't understand how people have been in this hobby for years and years and they don't have a basic understanding of how to reproduce the sound field of a live event. You don't get it done with $10,000 power cords etc.  You achieve it by studying acoustics and how the human brain/ear system operates. Then, you use system setups that can imitate the sound of a live acoustic hall as closely as possible. Two channel 2D equilateral systems can never come close to sounding like a 3D performance and they sound so boring to me.

I'm just guessing, but it would seem like if you really wanted to kill off audio as a hobby for good and all, you'd wean companies off of building 2-channel systems and try to move everybody into highly specialized & complicated "system setups that can imitate the sound of a live acoustic hall as closely as possible."

Not that I have anything against the concept, but there's a beauty of simplicity about 2-channel audio...and it can sound darn good.  Good enough for most people, and deep enough for real enthusiasts to explore with a lot of satisfaction.  So keep shooting for the ideal, but don't throw the baby out with the bath water -- I doubt there is the consumer base to sustain it.  I.e., what kind of a room do I need for this ideal recreation of a 3D performance?  And what about all the recordings that aren't compatible with it?  Most of the good music has been recorded already, in stereo, don't forget.

[Jim N.]

J. Gordon Holt to the rest of the world: "Get off of my lawn, you ungrateful punks!"

He goal is accurate reproduction, which is fine. I have a far simpler goal: to enjoy listening to music that appeals to me. I am not on a quest for absolute truth, I simply want to be entertained, distracted, moved emotionally or find relaxation via music. Coloration is a given with most music reproduction systems. I simply choose that which best fits my personal taste. In this day and age we can mix so many different types of coloration that we can tailor sound to our taste.

I do agree with his point about media formats, that the majority will usually choose convenience and simplicity over sound quality. Most people use music as background while performing other tasks. It is only we fools   that make listening to music a primary task.

[TerryO]

I happen to agree with J. Gordon Holt. His honest assessment of the limits of measurements was and still is valid. The constant diatribes against blind tests is, however, certainly an indication that many don't want to expose themselves to a fundamental truth: A lot of people can't hear any better than a lot of people. Many would like to feel that they and their opinions are invested with special significance and the World eagerly awaits their pronouncements on various (audio) topics.
It sadly reminds one of The Emperor's New Clothes.

The one statement that I would disagree with is his opinion about the baby-boomers. It's true that they are a failed, spoiled generation, especially compared to their parent's generation, but their offspring,
 the so-called Generation X is even worse. If many of the Boomers abandoned taste, humility and integrity, at least they knew the difference and made a conscious choice. Their children don't know and didn't have the opportunity to make that choice.

I didn't mean to go into a rant, but after a lifetime of observation, these are some of the conclusions that I've ended up with.

Best Regards,
TerryO

[mjosef]

  I kinda agree with most of his thoughts...and certainly loved this comment

. I was done in by time, history, and the most spoiled, destructive generation of irresponsible brats the world has ever seen. (I refer, of course, to the Boomers.)

THe last poster thinks the Boomers kids are worst...well, look at the parenting...spoiled begats even more spoiled. 
Gordon 

[aerius]

The one statement that I would disagree with is his opinion about the baby-boomers. It's true that they are a failed, spoiled generation, especially compared to their parent's generation, but their offspring,
 the so-called Generation X is even worse. If many of the Boomers abandoned taste, humility and integrity, at least they knew the difference and made a conscious choice. Their children don't know and didn't have the opportunity to make that choice.

As a person now in my late 20's, I couldn't agree more.  I grew up with everything, we were born and grew up in a time of unprecedented wealth & luxury, we are likely the most spoiled & sheltered generation in history.  Unfortunately for us, and some might call it karma, we're going to get dicked over hard in the near future thanks to Peak Oil, and many in my generation will be up the creek without a paddle while the Boomers will for the most part be either in the twilight of their years or safely dead.  To use a cartoon illustration, Wile E. Coyote has run off the edge of a cliff, and soon he will reach down to check if there's ground below his feet, shortly after which he takes a 2000' fall.  We've just gone off the cliff, but haven't reached down to check yet.

[sunshinedawg]

I doubt there is the consumer base to sustain it.  I.e., what kind of a room do I need for this ideal recreation of a 3D performance?  And what about all the recordings that aren't compatible with it?  Most of the good music has been recorded already, in stereo, don't forget.

You're probably right about the consumer base, but I was just talking about audiophiles. You really don't need a special room, but I think lots of room treatment helps. Every legacy recording is compatible. I listen to mono recordings from the 30's and 40's that sound fabulous, these were hardly ever processed which makes them sound so real. Stereo recordings sound fine as well.

As a person now in my late 20's, I couldn't agree more.  I grew up with everything, we were born and grew up in a time of unprecedented wealth & luxury, we are likely the most spoiled & sheltered generation in history.  Unfortunately for us, and some might call it karma, we're going to get dicked over hard in the near future thanks to Peak Oil, and many in my generation will be up the creek without a paddle while the Boomers will for the most part be either in the twilight of their years or safely dead.  To use a cartoon illustration, Wile E. Coyote has run off the edge of a cliff, and soon he will reach down to check if there's ground below his feet, shortly after which he takes a 2000' fall.  We've just gone off the cliff, but haven't reached down to check yet.

There is plenty of oil around, it will just beharder to get to and this will cause fluctuations and make it more expensive. In ten to twenty years everybody will be driving around in electric and or fuel cell vehicles, don't worry about oil as it relates to cars. The technology has been around for years. In fact, the first cars ever made were electric. It is just now coming to the point where it is cost effective and batteries have improved to the point to make it practical. When other technologies become more attractive than oil because of price, practicality, environmental factors, etc. oil will no longer be as crucial. We'll probably need it for a while longer for planes and things like plastics, but there is plenty locked up in the tar sands and oil shale if we really need it for a particular use.

[JLM]

Oil:

1st we could produce faster than we were using it, so it was cheap.  2nd production equaled consumption.  Now demand exceeds production capacity, so prices are bound to keep going up.


Holt:

The grumpy/pessimestic view of old age.  But he's right.  There is no longer a unified absolute goal for the audio industry.  Most don't know what unamplified live music (the only true gold standard) sounds like.  The lofty idealized thinking of the 20th century (that technology can solve all the world's problems and that no goal is unattainable) has left the room.  Audio just got caught in the paradigm shift.

[BrianM]

There is plenty of oil around, it will just beharder to get to and this will cause fluctuations and make it more expensive. In ten to twenty years everybody will be driving around in electric and or fuel cell vehicles, don't worry about oil as it relates to cars. The technology has been around for years. In fact, the first cars ever made were electric. It is just now coming to the point where it is cost effective and batteries have improved to the point to make it practical. When other technologies become more attractive than oil because of price, practicality, environmental factors, etc. oil will no longer be as crucial. We'll probably need it for a while longer for planes and things like plastics, but there is plenty locked up in the tar sands and oil shale if we really need it for a particular use.

Forgive me sunshinedawg, and nothing personal, but it's this kind of complacent, glossed-over, free-market head-in-the-sand voodoo thinking that reassures me how screwed we are as a planet.     Half of what you say is dead wrong and the other half is dead unrealistic.  We're nowhere close to the necessary power grid for "everybody" to be driving electric cars.  Ten years?  No.  Plus you would still need oil to build and ship the electric cars, on electric ships presumably.  And electricity requires fossil fuels to produce.  And there's no substitute for jet fuel.  Extracting oil from tar sands and oil shale produces far more pollution and is vastly more expensive and time consuming than the drilling methods.  You can make oil from coal, too, and you can bet people will start doing more of that as well, and it produces something like four times the pollution to refine.  Rising demand from India and China is likely to swamp any incremental measures we make here in America.  On top of scarcity, greenhouse gas pollution is the real enemy, and no free market economics is going to ameliorate that.  That whole corporate self-regulation game is all about what can we get away with, what loopholes can we exploit for more short-term profit.

The point is, governments, run by complacent baby boomers, are not treating this like the urgent problem it is, and it's not going to solve itself through simple private sector macroeconomics.  People need to stop dreaming about tar sands and start getting serious about solar and wind power.  We gotta break the cycle of fossil fuel dependence!

And develop more realistic music reproduction!

[BrianM]

Most don't know what unamplified live music (the only true gold standard) sounds like.

I hear this all the time, and it never strikes me as very plausible.  Do you mean to say,"don't know what it sounds like in their living room?"  Everybody who's ever been to their kid's piano recital or school choir concert has some idea what unamplified live music sounds like.  They just may not particularly care when it comes to home stereo.  But in spite of the beleaguered classical recording industry, classical music and opera are still rather popular (opera especially) so there are still lots of people who are hearing acoustic concerts.

[nathanm]

Gordon's views are valid within the realm of classical music.  His model of what audio reproduction should be does not extend to the creative art of making records with anything beyond a stereo pair hanging over the orchestra.  If you only dig 2-channel orchestra recordings and focus solely on your own hearing whilst blocking out all the other stimuli that comes with live music then yeah, maybe you can pursue the high-fidelity angle and trick yourself into thinking you're at the performance and not in front of your stereo with your eyes closed.  Still, if live music is so great, the reference which we must worship, then GO TO SEE LIVE MUSIC.  Sitting at home listening to records will never ever be the same as seeing a live band and I think everyone knows this, accepts this and enjoys this disparity greatly.  They are apples and oranges, one cannot BE the other.  And the only way you can really judge this is if you are listening to a recording made at the same performance you just attended yourself.  Better yet, if you made the recording yourself.  How many people does this apply to?

It's also a mistake to think that playback equipment, if designed to some unattainable level of perfection, will be the difference between realistic and unrealistic sound.  The audiophile cannot control the recording process, he only controls the playback.   It's only part of the total equation.  The audiophile can only do so much.  Besides, most recordings are not designed to have aural cues which suggest a real-time performance in an external space, they are designed to be an internal, personal experience.  They're recording a song, an idea, a feeling, not the performance played at the ACME Music Shack on July 8th in Chicago.  Our brains happily fill in the rest.

I'd point fingers at the recording biz instead, who quite often produce overly artificial-sounding music with no natural reverb or interesting spatial cues. But of course this is just a subjective style, a creative choice, not a standard to emulate.  And again, it's not something the listener can control on a recording that's already been made.

[sunshinedawg]

Half of what you say is dead wrong and the other half is dead unrealistic.  We're nowhere close to the necessary power grid for "everybody" to be driving electric cars. 

It is you that is dead wrong. People are already doing it. At night, there is excess capacity, if we used that electricity, there would be plenty of energy to go around. When you factor V2G (vehicle to grid) in, it's a no brainer. Most people don't realize that you waste a lot electricity when you send it over long distances and there is no way for the grid to store it. With the V2G vehicles, you will have thousands of mini storage facilities that will keep the electricity closer to where its needed. That will save a lot of energy that would have been otherwise wasted during transmission. Open your eyes and get your head out of sand, there is an electric vehicle revolution coming. Do some reading and research about how all the car manufactures have some form of electric car coming out in the next 5 years.

[BrianM]

Half of what you say is dead wrong and the other half is dead unrealistic.  We're nowhere close to the necessary power grid for "everybody" to be driving electric cars. 

It is you that is dead wrong. People are already doing it. At night, there is excess capacity, if we used that electricity, there would be plenty of energy to go around. When you factor V2G (vehicle to grid) in, it's a no brainer. Most people don't realize that you waste a lot electricity when you send it over long distances and there is now way for the grid to store it. With the V2G vehicles, you will have thousands of mini storage facilities that will keep the electricity closer to where its needed. That will save a lot of energy that would have been otherwise wasted during transmission. Open your eyes and get your head out of sand, there is an electric vehicle revolution coming. Do some reading and research about how all the car manufactures have some form of electric car coming out in the next 5 years.

Let me rephrase. We are nowhere close to the necessary non-fossil-fuel-based electric power grid to support everybody driving electric cars.  As I see it, as long as fossil fuel companies can profit from a shift to V2G cars, we're going to be too slow switching away from fossil fuels.  "Some form of electric car coming out in 5 years" ain't a revolution, and ain't gonna cut it.  Should I assume that, like the current hybrid cars, these electric cars will be a novelty/fashion item for the next 10 years after that?  I think much more drastic action is needed, first and foremost by raising fuel efficiency standards immediately to buy more time.  The real advances you're hopeful about are being severely hampered by unimaginative, backward thinking leadership.

[BrianM]

I should add I'm at least as worried about global warming as I am about dwindling energy resources.  The steps to reduce pollution ain't happening fast enough.  Electric cars would help - you'd still have the power plants, but not the tailpipes.  But the scale of the reductions needed seems to elude people.

Update: the scale, and the time frame, that is.