• WANTED: Happy members who like to discuss audio and other topics related to our interest. Desire to learn and share knowledge of science required. There are many reviews of audio hardware and expert members to help answer your questions. Click here to have your audio equipment measured for free!

BACCH4Mac Pro Edition - For those considering BACCH

kthulhutu

Active Member
Joined
Mar 15, 2022
Messages
132
Likes
113
Hate to triple-post but there's no way to delete your own posts on this forum.

So I've gotten around to trying Bacch DSP, just the intro edition with no mics or measurements.
I know I said Mac only was a deal-breaker, but Bacch support kindly and promptly suggested Dante virtual soundcard as a solution. Using this I've been able to transmit all digital input from my Windows machine through ethernet to a Mac mini with minimal latency.
Buying a whole separate machine does seem excessive, but with the difference Bacch can make it's worth it.

The customer experience was exceptional. Upon purchasing Bacch I was immediately advised to book an interactive walkthrough session. Being somewhat technical and stubborn I ignored this initially and tried to setup things myself. I got quite far but unfortunately my complete unfamiliarity with Macs made me hit a wall so I scheduled the appointment.

The next day I get into a Zoom call with Edgar Choueiri himself and he remotes in to my Mac to assist me with the setup. This process went very smoothly and Edgar was very friendly and explained basically every feature of Bacch DSP and how it functions. He then took me through some of the binaural demos that ship with Bacch that being frankly honest were good, but not amazing.
Afterwards he answered all my outstanding questions.

(If you were curious, Theoretica use Genelec 8351s in their labs, big surprise ;))


So taking his advice to reduce the angle of my speakers (they were 42 degrees relative to me) and also reduce the distance to ultra nearfield levels in the process (you want as much direct sound as possible with Bacch) I proceeded to listen to my own library of mostly prog and classic rock and I was completely stunned. I was hearing instruments panned 180 degrees and a new sense of space from the reverb of the recording rather than my room. I haven't even tried finding any binaural tracks yet, it seems a good stereophonic recording has enough spacial cues regardless.

I am fully aware this isn't even Bacch at its full potential either. While the Genelec 8341 I use are certainly competent, they cannot completely account for my bare side walls. I left these untreated on purpose to try and breathe life and envelopment into recordings, but with Bacch this has a destructive effect. Of course I also haven't accounted for my own HRTF or room-response with the mics that Theoretica provide with the Audiophile edition, so that's certainly on my list for the future.

Overall I highly recommend that anyone with the willingness to use a Mac and fiddle around with some setup to get the intro edition of Bacch4mac. While you do pay up front, Edgar assured me that they would refund no questions asked within 14 days of having had the demo (so 15 days since I actually made the purchase).
The only caveat here really is that if you do have a reflective room and speakers with poor directivity or a long listening distance, the effect may not be so good unless you invest in room treatment and the Audiophile edition microphones. But once again, this is why you have a free evaluation period.

UPDATE 12/04/2022: Hate to gush but Bacch really deserves it. The effect is even more pronounced in video games and chamber music. Not only are you getting unheard-of levels of panning and depth but also reverb and spatial information completely absent from regular stereo (I've been A/B ing it constantly and Bacch is like lifting a veil). I even experienced height staging when Morgott was raining his swords down in Elden Ring.
Absolutely mind-blowing tech that hardly anyone seems to have experienced.
 
Last edited:

Zoomer

Senior Member
Joined
Oct 5, 2019
Messages
323
Likes
468
All the more regrettable that the business model / price point prevents wider adoption.
No amount of rooftop shouting will change this.
 

onion

Senior Member
Joined
Mar 5, 2019
Messages
338
Likes
379
It is mind-blowing. There is a big caveat to wider adoption - it's really only designed for one person to listen to at a time. I believe they are researching new types of speakers to see if they can deliver XTC at multiple positions in the room, but this is some way off.
 

kthulhutu

Active Member
Joined
Mar 15, 2022
Messages
132
Likes
113
It is mind-blowing. There is a big caveat to wider adoption - it's really only designed for one person to listen to at a time. I believe they are researching new types of speakers to see if they can deliver XTC at multiple positions in the room, but this is some way off.
I think a good strategy for adoption would be to market their Bacch for headphones tech more and make it a separately purchasable product rather than locked behind the expensive edition of Bacch4mac. There are a LOT of people that would want to simulate speakers over headphones without the drastic supply shortage of Smyth's realizer.
 

mcdonalk

Member
Joined
Feb 15, 2020
Messages
60
Likes
35
Cursory research has indicated that Bacch might not be good for me.

When I first heard about this a few days ago, I quickly became very interested. Furthermore, when initial investigation revealed that a trusted audio professional with whom I had successfully done business before was the American distributor, I was even more interested.

But based on my cursory internet-based investigation, and on some hearsay from the audio-related internet in general, it is looking doubtful that Bacch is for me, for the following reasons:

1) The SW version is MAC OS-based; there is no Windows version. In our household, there are several Windows PC’s, one Linux PC, and two different Android devices. I do not care to add a MAC OS machine to this mix. I don’t think that this is a bias; I just don’t want to invest my time and finances in learning and maintaining another OS.
2) I realize that correlation does not equal causation, but my favorite classical recordings, which comprise at least 75% of my listening time, happen to be in the DSD format and were recorded in that format. They sound particularly good to me perhaps because of DSD, or perhaps they are well-produced, or both. It seems that Bacch would entail conversion to PCM for these streams for processing. In my system composition, I have always ensured the ability to play DSD natively, and giving this up would require more evaluation on my part, likely including a home trial in my actual system, and would have to be really worth it.
3) I had hoped that the Bacch algorithm was sophisticated enough that it could be “focused” on various listening spots. In my case, the center spot on the couch is reserved for dedicated serious listening, but I spend most of my evenings (and listening time) lounging on the couch when listening to music while reading, etc., with my head offset several feet outside of the ideal listening window (which isn't that narrow to begin with). I was hoping that Bacch could address this, but apparently not; Bacch requires a “sweet” spot, per my friends who witnessed the demo at AXPONA.

An ideal implementation for me would be for Bacch to be available as a plugin that could be accessed via jRiver Media Center's DSP menu in the Windows environment.
 

onion

Senior Member
Joined
Mar 5, 2019
Messages
338
Likes
379
I don't know about your point 2 but you are correct on point 3. Currently, it is designed for one listener sitting at one position with a limited range of head positions outside of that measured position. I understand that they are researching a theoretical phased array speaker system to enable head-tracking for multiple people. I don't know if they have developed a product based on this yet.
 

phoenixdogfan

Major Contributor
Forum Donor
Joined
Nov 6, 2018
Messages
3,297
Likes
5,079
Location
Nashville
I'm seriously considering upgrading to an M1 Mac Mini for a variety of reasons (supports HDR 10, and possibly Dolby Vision; could do Asio streaming audio to JRiver+Dirac without stuttering; faster; dead quiet; no obnoxious Windows App pop-ups that can't be turned off, no Microsoft account monetizing my data. Yeah, I'm talking myself into it even as I type). If I do that, I could dip my toe into this with the starter version, and decide if it's worthwhile. Right now, doing this is in competition with possibly expanding my home theater into a 5.1.4 of 7.1.4 ATMOS/DTS-X/Auro 3D layout, or possibly, upgrading from LS 50 Metas to something even better (March Audio Sointuvas or Ascend Sierra LX's).

I can afford one or at most two of these projects in the next year, so I'm going to chew long and hard on it.
 

Dialectic

Major Contributor
Forum Donor
Joined
Sep 26, 2017
Messages
1,740
Likes
3,100
Location
a fortified compound
I'm seriously considering upgrading to an M1 Mac Mini for a variety of reasons (supports HDR 10, and possibly Dolby Vision; could do Asio streaming audio to JRiver+Dirac without stuttering; faster; dead quiet; no obnoxious Windows App pop-ups that can't be turned off, no Microsoft account monetizing my data. Yeah, I'm talking myself into it even as I type). If I do that, I could dip my toe into this with the starter version, and decide if it's worthwhile. Right now, doing this is in competition with possibly expanding my home theater into a 5.1.4 of 7.1.4 ATMOS/DTS-X/Auro 3D layout, or possibly, upgrading from LS 50 Metas to something even better (March Audio Sointuvas or Ascend Sierra LX's).

I can afford one or at most two of these projects in the next year, so I'm going to chew long and hard on it.
If you are thinking of upgrading, the Mac Studio runs BACCH very well. CPU consumption while running BACCH is barely above background CPU consumption. Fan noise is not an issue with the computer in a cabinet.

The BACCH4Mac 3D audio mixer runs vastly better on the Mac Studio than it does on my 2012 i7 Mac Mini.

The only issue with the Mac Studio is not with BACCH: it is with the new M1 version of the RME TotalMix software used with the BabyFace Pro. Whenever the computer is restarted, this new version of TotalMix sets the optical out on the BabyFace to ADAT instead of SPDIF; this did not occur in the old version of TotalMix I was running on the i7 Mac Mini. The only way to set the BabyFace to output SPDIF over optical is to press a highly nonobvious sequence of buttons on the BabyFace itself (not in software) every time it starts up.
 

phoenixdogfan

Major Contributor
Forum Donor
Joined
Nov 6, 2018
Messages
3,297
Likes
5,079
Location
Nashville
If you are thinking of upgrading, the Mac Studio runs BACCH very well. CPU consumption while running BACCH is barely above background CPU consumption. Fan noise is not an issue with the computer in a cabinet.

The BACCH4Mac 3D audio mixer runs vastly better on the Mac Studio than it does on my 2012 i7 Mac Mini.

The only issue with the Mac Studio is not with BACCH: it is with the new M1 version of the RME TotalMix software used with the BabyFace Pro. Whenever the computer is restarted, this new version of TotalMix sets the optical out on the BabyFace to ADAT instead of SPDIF; this did not occur in the old version of TotalMix I was running on the i7 Mac Mini. The only way to set the BabyFace to output SPDIF over optical is to press a highly nonobvious sequence of buttons on the BabyFace itself (not in software) every time it starts up.
My understanding is that the 3D Mixer and HOA are features for the Pro Edition. I'm not sure what I could use either of those features for, perhaps you could enlighten me. Apart from that, how did the rest of Bacch run on your Mac Mini. I would obviously go with the M1 silicon, so I'm sure that alone will improve the Mac Mini's performance dramatically.

Also, I'd be interested in knowing what the Babyface is being used for in your use case. Surely you have a quality dac, so I doubt you need to use it for D to A conversion on a daily basis. Perhaps for initial measurement using it as a 48v phantom power source for the binaural mics? Perhaps for A to D conversion if you're running an analog component?

I'd be very interested in learning what role the Babyface, 3D Audio Mixer and HOA fill in your system on a daily basis, and if they would add anything of value to my use case if all I care to do is play existing digital media over my system.
 

Dialectic

Major Contributor
Forum Donor
Joined
Sep 26, 2017
Messages
1,740
Likes
3,100
Location
a fortified compound
Seems to me any competent interface would suffice, especially as that's probably a one time use and runs $1000 USD.
Not a one-time use.

You'll probably want to refresh filters semi-regularly, and the TotalMix software can be used for loopbacks in MacOS. In addition, I run the optical out on the Babyface to an AES EBU converter that drives the Dutch & Dutch loudspeakers.

It has long been possible to use other DACs with BACCH, and, IIRC, some months back, use of TotalMix for software loopback became optional.

I find RME products to be more than competent from an audio perspective but perhaps less than competent from a UI perspective. But I haven't done any recording work since 2008, so what do I know?
 

Dialectic

Major Contributor
Forum Donor
Joined
Sep 26, 2017
Messages
1,740
Likes
3,100
Location
a fortified compound
If you are thinking of upgrading, the Mac Studio runs BACCH very well. CPU consumption while running BACCH is barely above background CPU consumption. Fan noise is not an issue with the computer in a cabinet.

The BACCH4Mac 3D audio mixer runs vastly better on the Mac Studio than it does on my 2012 i7 Mac Mini.

The only issue with the Mac Studio is not with BACCH: it is with the new M1 version of the RME TotalMix software used with the BabyFace Pro. Whenever the computer is restarted, this new version of TotalMix sets the optical out on the BabyFace to ADAT instead of SPDIF; this did not occur in the old version of TotalMix I was running on the i7 Mac Mini. The only way to set the BabyFace to output SPDIF over optical is to press a highly nonobvious sequence of buttons on the BabyFace itself (not in software) every time it starts up.
CORRECTION - the RME FireFace can be configured to output SPDIF over optical through the Fireface USB settings app (as opposed to RME TotalMix). My mistake.
 

onion

Senior Member
Joined
Mar 5, 2019
Messages
338
Likes
379
No, I don't believe so. I had to get paid up on my maintenance fee before it was made available to me.
Thanks - I have put in an inquiry about this. What differences did you find between v10 and v11?
 

adLuke

Member
Joined
May 2, 2022
Messages
61
Likes
27
Hello all Bacch users, thanks for your impressions about this amazing technology.
Looking forward to being able to try it and (at a much later date) afford it.
I was wondering if any of you had experience with the 'ambiophonics' filters
From the looks of it, it's a dead endeavor. But from what I understand it's a 'poor man's Bacch' or at least a vague impression of it and it was (is?) free. Plus it looks like a 'simple convolver' could replicate the results.
Now for me, there is nothing 'simple' about creating a filter by myself, but I thought it would be good to try a ready-made ambiophonics filter and see if it can really improve my enjoyment of the current hifi setup.
Is there anyone who has had experience with that? Any indication of where to find a way to try it?
Thanks in advance
 

Tim Link

Addicted to Fun and Learning
Forum Donor
Joined
Apr 10, 2020
Messages
722
Likes
638
Location
Eugene, OR
Hello all Bacch users, thanks for your impressions about this amazing technology.
Looking forward to being able to try it and (at a much later date) afford it.
I was wondering if any of you had experience with the 'ambiophonics' filters
From the looks of it, it's a dead endeavor. But from what I understand it's a 'poor man's Bacch' or at least a vague impression of it and it was (is?) free. Plus it looks like a 'simple convolver' could replicate the results.
Now for me, there is nothing 'simple' about creating a filter by myself, but I thought it would be good to try a ready-made ambiophonics filter and see if it can really improve my enjoyment of the current hifi setup.
Is there anyone who has had experience with that? Any indication of where to find a way to try it?
Thanks in advance
One software solution that I tried recently is Sound Pimp http://www.soundpimp.com. It looks like the web site is down right now. This was kind of tricky to set up on my Mac but once I got it working I'd say it's the best sounding digital crosstalk elimination I've tried so far. It's $50 and a little troublesome to use but really does sound good, especially for the price. Mini DSP has the ambio plug in for their 2x4 series hardware: https://www.minidsp.com/products/plugins/ambiophonics-detail I haven't tried it. Another way to do it that I think is interesting is to run regular stereo through your front speakers and then have another set of speakers, time delayed and attenuated near each of your ears to eliminate crosstalk. What's good about this is that it doesn't interfere with the sound if you're not in the sweet spot. The effect comes on when you sit in the spot, and then goes back to sounding like regular stereo when you walk around the room.
 

Zoomer

Senior Member
Joined
Oct 5, 2019
Messages
323
Likes
468
Another way to do it that I think is interesting is to run regular stereo through your front speakers and then have another set of speakers, time delayed and attenuated near each of your ears to eliminate crosstalk.
Sounds interesting, especially as I have a pair of spare mains standing around. Any references to how this works and setup?
 
Top Bottom