A article on BACCH4Mac that answers a lot of questions.

[jimbill]

Theoretica Applied Physics BACCH4Mac Stereo Purifier Review

Some of you have asked for a faster unfolding of the point of these reviews. While I don’t think you can genuinely comprehend what I’m about to say

www.theabsolutesound.com

It's a bit long, but it does address the concerns about BACCH affecting the sonics of the recordings. It also does a nice job of explaining the spatial differences between BACCH and without BACCH.

 

[Ropeburn]

Something tells me this is little more than a good old Soundgoodizer™ in a fancy box for 6000 moneys. Works by frequency dependent phase shifting and distortion. Look, it even got the "stereo expander", I guess which you could also call "3D".

SPL Vitalizer MK2-T, with ~800 moneys at the upper end of these thingies. Even uses a tube for the distortion part.

 

[Curvature]

Something tells me this is little more than a good old Soundgoodizer™ in a fancy box for 6000 moneys. Works by frequency dependent phase shifting and distortion. Look, it even got the "stereo expander", I guess which you could also call "3D".

View attachment 469843
SPL Vitalizer MK2-T, with ~800 moneys at the upper end of these thingies. Even uses a tube for the distortion part.

It's not. BACCH allows mathematically rigorous crosstalk cancellation tuned to a specific person, their speakers and room.

 

[jimbill]

Something tells me this is little more than a good old Soundgoodizer™ in a fancy box for 6000 moneys. Works by frequency dependent phase shifting and distortion. Look, it even got the "stereo expander", I guess which you could also call "3D".

View attachment 469843
SPL Vitalizer MK2-T, with ~800 moneys at the upper end of these thingies. Even uses a tube for the distortion part.

You should read the article before passing judgement and coming to incorrect conclusions.

 

[Dialectic]

Something tells me this is little more than a good old Soundgoodizer™ in a fancy box for 6000 moneys. Works by frequency dependent phase shifting and distortion. Look, it even got the "stereo expander", I guess which you could also call "3D".

View attachment 469843
SPL Vitalizer MK2-T, with ~800 moneys at the upper end of these thingies. Even uses a tube for the distortion part.

If I had a dollar for every time I've seen this reaction on ASR.

I've not seen anything in audio documented as rigorously as BACCH is.

 

[mieswall]

Something tells me this is little more than a good old Soundgoodizer™ in a fancy box for 6000 moneys. Works by frequency dependent phase shifting and distortion. Look, it even got the "stereo expander", I guess which you could also call "3D".

View attachment 469843
SPL Vitalizer MK2-T, with ~800 moneys at the upper end of these thingies. Even uses a tube for the distortion part

The horror, the horror! Your steady musical world has been shaken, Colonel Kutz…

 

[Gwreck]

Something tells me this is little more than a good old Soundgoodizer™ in a fancy box for 6000 moneys. Works by frequency dependent phase shifting and distortion. Look, it even got the "stereo expander", I guess which you could also call "3D".

View attachment 469843
SPL Vitalizer MK2-T, with ~800 moneys at the upper end of these thingies. Even uses a tube for the distortion part.

BACCH also has a “room correction”
Called ORC which is head track and measured in the ear. It arguably makes as much or more of an improvement to the sound than the XTC.

 

[iGude]

The horror, the horror! Your steady musical world has been shaken, Colonel Kutz…

My name is Kurtz!

 

[mieswall]

BACCH also has a “room correction”
Called ORC which is head track and measured in the ear. It arguably makes as much or more of an improvement to the sound than the XTC.

I’ve had mixed results with ORC. Most of the time it has not been really successful, sucking bass and making all the presentation thinner.
But in my last calibration with the sweetspot closer to the maggies (even with the smaller .7’s in this case) in a perfect equilateral triangle, both XTC and ORC had a huge improvement. Now I’m using ORC at all times in this setup.
Even so, XTC is much a bigger improvement than ORC, imho.

Btw, the better the recording, the better the XTC improvement. A good example is any of the excellent 2L recordings. The sampler “nordic sound” has some really shocking tracks: the gregorian chant of track 5, for example, really immerse you in a stone church of the middle ages for the whole 5 minutes of the track. Turn off XTC and the magic is gone… even in the maggies, known for its spatial soundstage.
Even with these small speakers, with some well recorded music this may be the most realistic sound reproduction i have heard, other than live, not amplified music.

 

[mieswall]

Which ORC eq do you use? I’ve tried flat, Chesky, and Katz. Not sure, but I may prefer the last one.

 

[Gwreck]

Which ORC eq do you use? I’ve tried flat, Chesky, and Katz. Not sure, but I may prefer the last one.

Flat and chesky are my 2 favorite

 

[Dialectic]

Which ORC eq do you use? I’ve tried flat, Chesky, and Katz. Not sure, but I may prefer the last one.

I strongly prefer the Olive curve. Chesky and Katz sound hot in my room with lots of absorbers.