I have all three editions of Dr. Toole's book (and a pile of other references, natch). The latest edition is a significant update from the previous and well worth the money and time to read it. Frankly, and with apologies to Dr. Toole, I found the second edition a little disappointing and only a fairly small update over the first. The third is a major revamp. IMO!

Just for clarification, you left out the last line in my quote of Chu’s post. I think it may have been misconstrued as being part of current discussion...which it wasn’t. I left it in because I just quickly cut and pasted. That as well as a slight nod to these discussions on how to place speakers for proper imaging (and imaging in general) have been going on for years and years on AVS.

It's amazing what one can get a patent for . . .

It ain't free if I have to download/install the apps.

What apps? I am not aware of any apps needed to look at the web page, and Acrobat Reader is free.

Floyd, again, thanks for your responses. From the mid 1940s I've been told that I hear just fine, but I just don't listen. My hearing, according to the audiologist is fine, but my eyesight is a different matter so I guess I'm turning into the typical geezer in a Buick. Cataract surgery coming up or I'll be Harman's blind' tester.

Anyway, my standard or maybe I should say my focus is a bit different when it come to sound reproduction. I'm into real music on real musical instruments by real musicians in a real space. I started out as a snot faced little punk in 1947 (age 3) off to a local big band, jazz or blues concerts with my grandfather at Country Dinner Playhouse usually or the Männerchor Club. My grandmother thought that where my grandfather like to sit was too loud so often it was me who went with him. We sat 10 -15 rows back. No amplification, which was typical in those days so the 'hall sound' and perspective of the sound stage was an aspect that was ingrained in me since age 3. My dad, who was a MSEE, but was still a hillbilly, took me to blue grass starting at age 10 or so, always in small smoky venues or occasionally outdoor festivals that were all over Southern Ohio. Didn't like the outdoor nearly as well as indoors for the obvious reason and that the richness that all of the room reflections add. Then progressed on so that when I got my license in 1960, I'd be at the drag strip one day and up to Cleveland for the Cleveland Orchestra at Severance or Blossom (in the summer) for Classical the next night. I also played Alto and tenor sax in band and the school's bari sax. So I've been in the middle of the band or orchestra as a player and probably hundreds of times in the audience in several halls and none of this amplified. So that's my early background. Also gave me chance to get these



To me the sound of the hall and the relationship of the music to the hall is just as important as the music itself. I had my Quad ESL57s in 1959 (actually my dad's but 'ended up' in my room) and if I realized that these were very nice midrange 75db one listener speakers and if I sat in just the right spot (nearfield with the speakers out from that front wall) I found that I could get a taste of the complete package ….. the orchestra, the space and the relationship of the orchestra to the space with a pair of stereo speakers. So at that moment I became an irrational, subjectivist, non-scientific, audiophile chasing that holy grail and it's never gone away.

I got very active in the hobby, but knew better not to make it my business, although I worked for a dealer and became a dealer, but for most of my decades, kept it a hobby only. I was going to all of the big shows starting with the last couple of years of the summer CES in NYC before they moved to McCormick Place in Chicago. I've listened to countless speakers of all types and associated equipment over the decades and owned my fair share of it. One factor that I've noticed since the beginning is that there's a big difference from how otherwise pretty good sounding speakers reproduce that three dimensional information. Still is a big factor, but not to the extent as back then best I can recall as many manufactures have upped their game.

I had a good friend who, in the early 70s turned me on to the Tympani IUs and then later the Dayton Wrights. Seemed he always bought first and then I followed along so I can't claim credit for the discovery. He had a local recording studio so I sort of became a 'grunt' and helped with the setup and teardown of live recording sessions, which just fascinated me to no end. Perspective was certainly different from siting row 10-15 for the duration, but was actually more interesting because of the venue. After we'd get the one mic and A77 loaded in the car and off to his house. True, he was going to do editing work the next day, but we couldn't resist listening to the raw unedited tape played back on his Magneplanars right after we got back to his house. What continued to surprise me is how real it all sounded including of course the sound of the venue and relationship of the band to the venue with just two carefully placed speakers in stereo with no DSP or alterations of any kind. This my not be everyone's propriety, but it is my BFD. Frequency response and all is nice, and as I've said many times, side to side tracking or constancy is very important, but all of the other stuff pales in comparison to the hand waving, no metric, hocus pocus stuff I've babbled on about since the 60s and certainly since I've been here. Just because "But, in terms of imaging and soundstage there are no references" doesn't mean it doesn't exist and it's not extremely important to some of us. For me it's my top priority in a system. And sure, of course, it has to be 'captured' in the recording, and I'm not talking about studio recording that are 'assembled', but unamplified, live, full orchestras, blues, bluegrass, etc., performance that are recorded. I now you've been in LA for years and I was there from 1980 - 2010. We have some great venues such as the new Disney and some real stinkers such as the old Hollywood Bowl, Dorothy Chandler and probably the worst I've ever been in, Royce at UCLA, unfair because that venue was designed for speech intelligibility.

There are several of us in this thread who are saying the same. Plus, there are designers/engineers who put every effort into make this experience as real to life as possible, although everyone tells me that's it's more of a 'seat of the pants' thing.

I just looked and it's just a pdf. I don't know anyone can function today without the free download of Acrobat Reader

I see what Kal is talking about. You can read it online, but if you want to print or save then there's an app.

If you want to save the text for free, can use copy/paste. And it's also available at the US Patent Office website.

You will enjoy your cataract surgery. I have been severely myopic all of my life, until cataract surgery. Now, with no glasses, trees have leaves! 4K videos look stunning, no glasses. I wish there was the auditory equivalent . . .

I go to about a dozen Disney Hall performances a year. It is a treat. I enjoy the wonderful sensation of space and envelopment just while people are taking their seats and the orchestra is "tuning up". When the orchestra winds up, it all comes together in a wondrous whole. My last concert was music of John Williams with 100+ musicians and organ - just breathtaking and substantially better than what we hear at cinemas or in our HTs. Nothing I hear at home is as good, but the best can convince me that it is close - none of that is raw stereo. I have mentioned elsewhere that Auro3D recordings of concert hall and cathedral organ have been dangerously close to the real thing - and there was no sweet spot. Until you have experienced it don't knock it.

It is not too late to admit that images can add something to one's pleasure - otherwise live concerts would not exist. When you get your "new eyes", treat them to a high rez image of a good concert. Most of my DVDs, BluRays and about a quarter of my new Kaleidescape files are music concerts of all genres. They are highly variable, but the good ones are very good - high entertainment, and that is what it is all about. Seeing the performers in action is very nice.

Oh yes, some the the surround sound tracks are very engaging.

Here's one that has me thinking about getting hooked up down there. Chad Kassem, who is one of the two individuals most responsible for the revival of vinyl, puts on a festival at the church he bought in Salina, KS every year in October. His mission is to record as many of the really elderly blues artists before they pass. Last year 85 year old Bobby Rush was one of them. So here we here have the other individual most responsible person for the revival of vinyl, Michael Fremer, doing the recording.

This made me think that I need to do this. When it comes to HT, I know nothing so a lot of boning up to do

https://youtu.be/TkSo0e1qYGM

4K videos look stunning, no glasses. I wish there was the auditory equivalent . . .

When you say "matching of the loudspeakers" are you referring to matching the time and frequency domains? IOW, if the arrival times from the L speaker are slightly different than the R speaker, this will be detrimental to the "Precedence Effect" and skew the imaging? Or, if the FR of the L speaker is different than the R speaker, these FR differences will skew the imaging? That seems intuitive, but just trying to understand.

I don't have your current book. I have the previous edition. I'll have to review what you said about this in there.

We all have our own opinions, and while they may be worthless to others they do work for us. There's nothing wrong with this. We're all looking for personal satisfaction, and we are generally the best judges of what works best for ourselves. Still, it pays to always have an open mind to new data. The more options we're exposed to the more likely we are to find something new that works even better for us than what we previously accepted as optimum. It's a bonus when the new data includes results from the best currently available scientific research.

I first became interested in high fidelity music reproduction as a kid more than 60 years ago and have enjoyed a variety of modest equipment over the decades. My opinions have continuously evolved over that time and this thread has accelerated the process, causing me to re-think my setup yet again. Since this thread started I've relocated my subwoofer and readjusted my mains to better fit what the best available scientific research shows. To my ears the sound has never been better and I'm playing different music non-stop, sometimes to my wife's annoyance.

The technical explanations from Dr. Toole and other knowledgeable professionals contributing to this thread have greatly increased my understanding of how to improve the level of personal satisfaction I'm getting from my current system and is influencing what I will consider for future upgrades. But I also appreciate reading and considering the unscientific opinions of what others think works best for them. For me all aspects of the conversation are entertaining, enjoyable and educational, and I need my daily fix. This is so much better than the bad old days of having to wait a month between issues of the monthly hi-fi magazines.

This is good music. The video adds content. Vinyl I can do without.

As for home theater, were you not looking for something worthwhile to get your teeth into?? Most of what you need to know is in my book, which you have, and the companion website with more content yet to come. I'm 80 - we're not dead yet!

Cheers, Floyd

Dolby Atmos is designed for 25.4.10 in the home! Guys on AVS are using 3 AVR's to get 7.4.6. The 2nd AVR is running the left height front, middle, and rear speakers and the 3rd AVR to run the right side.

You will enjoy your cataract surgery. I have been severely myopic all of my life, until cataract surgery. Now, with no glasses, trees have leaves! 4K videos look stunning, no glasses. I wish there was the auditory equivalent . . .

Researchers have taken an important step toward what may become a new approach to restore the hearing loss. In a new study, out today in the European Journal of Neuroscience, scientists have been able to regrow the sensory hair cells found in the cochlea -- a part of the inner ear -- that converts sound vibrations into electrical signals and can be permanently lost due to age or noise damage.

It ain't free if I have to download/install the apps.

Me, too, except I don't even have the screen for HT.

It is I who must apologize - for my current publisher. As I point out early in the new book, the "second edition" was a publisher's error. The ownership of Focal Press (my original publisher) changed and when the new one (Taylor and Francis/Routledge) took over they reprinted the book with their logos on it (OK) but also decided to call it a 2nd edition. NOTHING in the book changed. It was an obscene misrepresentation of reality. I complained loudly, but it was too late. "Sorry" they said. Sigh . . .

Dolby, even in its most optimistic frame of mind, would never think that 25.4.10 is commercially viable in homes. Furthermore it is not even close to being necessary (unless you sell such systems, in which case: more is better). I don't get the multiple AVR thing - where is the immersive decoding being done? Simply adding channels is not the point. They have to do specific things with specific soundtracks. Want to elaborate?

If you're asking me, nothing. I think the visual detracts/distracts from the auditory. I generally listen in the dark so the music paints its own picture.

Bummer - you’re missing out on many fantastic (both from a music and audio quality standpoint) concert blu-rays.

No, I am not. I can listen to them. To be clear, I have another HT system but, after a year or so trying concert BDs, I've found that the visual component usually detracted from my enjoyment of the music.