Michael Fremer Leaving Stereophile?

[DanielT]

The interesting question is whether Stereophile is leaving or not?

I haven't read the whole thread. You may have already addressed Stereophile's financial status,the basis of how they raise money and market shares and so on. The usual economic, that is.

 

[krabapple]

Multi-channel is, from my perspective, a gee-whiz, wow, isn't that cool gimmick, be it used in movie soundtracks or in music.
It is not realistic, much less real (again, from my perspective).

There are multichannel mixes that aim for 'realism' -- typically creating a sense of a real space. And others, not. Then again, much popular music (and a surprising amount of 'classical') are studio constructions, where what is 'real' is more complex than just setting up a mic in a space and hitting 'record . (I.e., instrument and vocal 'takes' recorded/ created separately at different times, and possibly sent directly to a board rather than existing in acoustic space, and subsequently edited)

(Things get further interesting when you consider that some bands used multichannel steering in their live concerts. A 'real' recording of that would be multichannel too)

Indeed, as I reflect upon the topic, I would think that it would be straightforward in 2022 AD (or CE, as one prefers), to measure quantitatively and objectively, some significant aspects of the "soundfield" (maybe intensity as a function of location and wavelength, I don't know) in an actual venue of an actual musical performance, and then to compare that matrix of data, quantitatively and objectively, to the reproduction of a mono, stereo, or x.y.z multichannel recording of the performance in an arbitrary domestic environment (i.e., somebody's hifi or HT "room") with commercial (domestic) hifi equipment.

I suspect the results might be enlightening.

3 or more channel multichannel would be more accurate than mono or 2, hands down.

 

[Timcognito]

Multichannel is alive and well in movie and home theater which includes a lot of music. I too, have not read all that has said so this has probably been said.

 

[MakeMineVinyl]

The total dominance of rhythm over melody.
Just Plain Garbage.

Most Africans would disagree.

 

[Sal1950]

It is not realistic, much less real (again, from my perspective).

Hi Fi luminarys from J Gordon Holt, to Floyd Toole completely disagree with you.
Maybe you should spend more time listening to good multich rigs and recordings.
I suspect the results might be enlightening.

 

[mhardy6647]

3 or more channel multichannel would be more accurate than mono or 2, hands down.

Cool.
How so?
Can you quantify -- or point to a resource that presents this clearly (graphically or in tabular form)?

Oh, I should say -- all of my multichannel baiting (I'll stop short of accusing myself of trolling if only because I do indeed believe what I wrote, with the caveat that it's no more than opinion, is my idiosyncratic way of saying that I think @John Atkinson probably made the right call back in 1999.

 

[krabapple]

Two channel cannot capture and accurately render the spatial information that further channels can. It is literally impossible.

I direct you to research at Bell Labs, and the teachings of Floyd Toole and James Johnston. I'm not convinced you're at all worth the effort of me digging up more specifics than that.

 

[Vacceo]

Except for the requirement that costs be controlled so that they don't price out the average person who is cost sensitive. How many times have you seen posts here on ASR along the lines of "what is the cheapest amplifier I can buy for.......".

Anthem has made, with the AVM70, a fairly nice processor with a contained price. It is doable.

 

[Vacceo]

Totally wrong my friend. Headphone listening is the driving force behind the Atmos and Spatial sound explosion on the streamers.
Your whole post reveals your complete misunderstanding of the multich music universe.

Tell the guys at QuadraphonicQuad.com that. LOL

Gamers, IMO, are the most promising market for the gear we typically use. As good as headphone Atmos may be, there are few things as impressive as playing on speakers.

 

[al2002]

Sal1950, Multi - channel and home cinema gear is covered in Stereophile’s sister publication, Sound and Vision. For unknown reasons they stopped publishing measurements some years ago which is a pity for they had the field to themselves Since then I’ve let my subscription lapse.

 

[teched58]

I have a 10-year-old budget Pioneer AVR in my living room, in a 5.1 setup with a $100 Andrew Jones Elac subwoofer. It outperforms the very fancy 2-channel system in the bedroom. I like it better, my kids like it better, etc etc. (Yeah, ok, it outperforms it subjectively. Before you throw popcorn, please note that I consider myself an objectivist and I'm an EE.) By "outperforms," I mean that everyday surround sound sounds better, is a better experience than any stereo system. Looking at it from the perspective of the normal, average person, is what I mean. (Sorry if I offended anyone by saying stereo sted 2 channel!)

I think a lot of the search for ultimate sound, and the bias here toward SOTA performance -- which I share -- is a tic. We are just more rational about it than the magical cable non-engineers at Stereophile.

The deprecation of regular, affordable gear, where it occurs, seems to be backstopped by an unstated by nevertheless real belief that there are some secret sounds hidden in the recording that we won't hear unless we have expensive gear with a SOTA noise floor. Why then is music mixed so that it sounds good on boomboxes and transistor radios? (Sorry, showing my age here.) This stems from a corporate event about 15 years ago with Thomas Dolby, where he told a story about how Paul McCartney makes sure all his stuff sounds good on cheap mono radio/boombox type gear.)

I feel like I should start a thread on "search for the magical, hidden sounds in recordings." I mean, audio is a mature technology. I like the fancy stuff (ASR fancy, not Stereophile waste-of-money fancy) as much as anyone, but come on. I think all those "bewieve your ears" (misspelling is deliberate) folks would have more of a case if they were "bewieving" good-quality inexpensive gear, instead claiming they need stratospherically priced but shittily measuring equipment to support their ear-based "bewiefs."

 

[mhardy6647]

Two channel cannot capture and accurately render the spatial information that further channels can. It is literally impossible.

I direct you to research at Bell Labs, and the teachings of Floyd Toole and James Johnston. I'm not convinced you're at all worth the effort of me digging up more specifics than that.

You're correct; I'm not.

 

[captainbeefheart]

I have only ever seen one pair but has anyone heard those weird balloon driver type speaker systems?

Basically there is I believe one voice coil in a vertical position, above it there are three different balloon style drivers with the woofer being the largest naturally. When the coil moves in and out of the magnet it pushes the balloon driver in/out for a full 360° displacement for omni-directional field spread. I don't know if they are supposed to be placed in the center of the room? Which would make sense to me given the operation.

 

[mhardy6647]

 

[Kal Rubinson]

ASR's own J_J has, in presentations and posts over years and venues, also noted the technical/psychoacoustic deficiencies inherent to two channel.

As with vinyl , it's really a case of 'even with these flaws......pleasing sound manages to happen'.

(And "you get to like what you like" -- there's no accounting for personal preference)

And really, this topic belongs in A NEW THREAD, not here.

Sure. Note that I made these statements in direct response to questions and not in an attempt to prolong a thread that is undergoing endless metamorphosis.

 

[Kal Rubinson]

I have only ever seen one pair but has anyone heard those weird balloon driver type speaker systems?

Basically there is I believe one voice coil in a vertical position, above it there are three different balloon style drivers with the woofer being the largest naturally. When the coil moves in and out of the magnet it pushes the balloon driver in/out for a full 360° displacement for omni-directional field spread. I don't know if they are supposed to be placed in the center of the room? Which would make sense to me given the operation.

I do not see any reference to a prior post so I cannot know to what device you are referring. mbl, perhaps?

 

[Kal Rubinson]

View attachment 220419
View attachment 220420
View attachment 220421
View attachment 220422

Some items are missing. Must be tagging issues.

 

[captainbeefheart]

I do not see any reference to a prior post so I cannot know to what device you are referring. mbl, perhaps?

Yes the "Radialstrahler" from MBL.

I would say most of our goals in that we want to get rid of the loudspeaker as a source point and through the recording and rooms early and later reflections the speakers vanish and you get the imaging of a live event, "as if you were in the room when recorded".

Curious if this design gets you closer or further to that goal and where do you place them? If not in the center of the room would reflections from close walls be bad? I would think so but they are charging so much for the design I wonder if any other companies have done it cheaper.

Omni-directional speakers are not really talked about as being great hifi speakers so I would hate to see these types of speakers as gimmicky. But then again I'm an electronics guy and spend much more time studying that discipline vs speaker designs.

http://www.mbl-northamerica.com/wp-content/uploads/2015/09/Secret_of_Radialstrahler_EN.pdf

 

[Sal1950]

Sal1950, Multi - channel and home cinema gear is covered in Stereophile’s sister publication,

Yep, I know all about it, I've been a subscriber for many years there also.
Sadly they got off on a kick of reviewing more 2ch gear and turntables than multich for quite a while.
Thankfully I've noticed a reversal in that trend, probably in response to the Immersive audio boom of late.

Sure. Note that I made these statements in direct response to questions and not in an attempt to prolong a thread that is undergoing endless metamorphosis.

Thanks Kal for all your activity here.
I wouldn't worry over the thread being taken too OT,
After all how much can be said about Mikey's departure?
He resigned and can now be found at TAS and it's web content.
Much of the how's and whys have already been detailed here by John and others

In case anyone should doubt my claims of following the industry's print media as closely as I do,
here's a photo of the last 2 months Stereophile, TAS, Sound & Vision.
That's as long as I hold on to them now.

 

[Kal Rubinson]

Yes the "Radialstrahler" from MBL.

I would say most of our goals in that we want to get rid of the loudspeaker as a source point and through the recording and rooms early and later reflections the speakers vanish and you get the imaging of a live event, "as if you were in the room when recorded".

Curious if this design gets you closer or further and where do you place them? If not in the center of the room would reflections from close walls be bad? I would think so but they are charging so much for the design I wonder if any other companies have done it cheaper.

Omni-directional speakers are not really talked about as being great hifi speakers so I would hate to see these types of speakers as gimmicky. But then again I'm an electronics guy and spend much more time studying that discipline vs speaker designs.

http://www.mbl-northamerica.com/wp-content/uploads/2015/09/Secret_of_Radialstrahler_EN.pdf

I do not think of them as gimmicky and I have heard them to sound spectacular on many occasions albeit with selected content. Since they radiate omni-directionally, they
inevitably create lots of reflections and, imho, require great care in placement as well as with room acoustics. The demos that I have enjoyed have always been in rooms much wider than any of mine (over many years).

OTOH, I cannot say that I've ever been able to have a "critical" audition in my own home with my own sources and my own control of placement. I have also never heard them in a multichannel set-up which is most relevant for me. I once visited mbl in Berlin as well as at their factory and can attest to the care used in construction and testing but I am not intellectually convinced that an omnidirectional "point-source" is really the right goal for a domestic loudspeaker.