I’m ok with it. I didn’t like him then and still don’t. 
2 Likes
Mr. Smith. What are the technical possibilities and barriers to having some version of a fairy dust button? If Sunlight takes A+ recordings and makes them A++++ recordings, but casts yet another swath of Journey’s Greatest Hits type music to the scrap heap, why not have an easily switchable option to accommodate the vast amount of music we love, but was recorded in mediocre fashion?
Are the barriers technical, philosophical, or both?
Having owned the DSJ for a couple of years, I was stunned by what it could do with audiophile DSD recordings. Amazing. Can’t that same engineering ingenuity be applied to the plight of the common man who just wants to listen to some of those 1980’s hits he grew up with? Can we not have cake, and eat it too? The best of both worlds?
It seems you also suffer from the side effects of your genius.
Speak man, speak!
1 Like
I am not Ted Smith (I haven’t got the beard or the brains) but I could suggest an equaliser, an aural exciter, maybe a sonic maximiser,.
Between them you should be able to make more listenable no end of bad recordings.
Takes practice of course.
Problem is (as we saw in the 70s / 80s with graphic EQs), whatever “sweetener” is made available, especially a variable one, risks being used more and more, just like sugar in tea to those with a sweet tooth.
My own view is that it is down to the individual person to exercise restraint 
I am being serious though, buy a couple of tools (or if you use something that accepts VST plugins, then just get the software versions). It’s fun, and you can always hit “bypass” for your better recordings 
Also - I’m not sure the “but they are not super quality electronics with balanced whotsits etc” holds water here - since it is only bad recordings they would be used on anyway (and most of the “studio aimed” gear does have balanced )
Also - @Paul - THIS is why we still want a “tape loop” or processor loop in our preamps
1 Like
@joma0711 oh, believe me, I’ve tried just about every gizmo and software VST scheme reasonably imaginable. Like Princess Leah recording the distress call on R2D2 for Obi-Wan, the Decware ZRock 2 is my last hope! I’m optimistic about it having spoken to Steve Deckert directly, he really gets the issue. He wanted a one knob solution that could be adjusted for each recording rather than the tedium of a multi band equalizer approach. @lonson can speak in more detail than me, but from what I understand, the ZR2 has two modes. One is for bass restoration that extends up into the midrange. The second does that and attenuates the treble for overly bright recordings so indicative of the 1980’s. You can switch between mode A & B with a toggle, and then apply how much sauce desired with a knob.
I did try the Schiit Loki, the older version, and thought it degraded the signal. Haven’t tried the new version yet. But like Decware, I’m leery of multi band EQ’s, too tedious.
Only 38 more months for the ZRock 2’s arrival 🤷
2 Likes
they are a drag to set up, and parametric eqs likewise when listening to music is the desired goal, i’ve read a lot about Decware on here too of course and i can see the appeal of their approach.
ultimately until there is an AI (i use the term very loosely as AI doesn’t really exist. yet) that can learn your preferences and apply them the Decware nay be your best hope
1 Like
Lots of good reasons for a preamp tape loop. I use a tape out to drive an integrated amp that run my outside speakers. Considered the BHK pre until I saw no tape loop.
3 Likes
That’s interesting. I’ve been looking at the Marantz KI Ruby and PM10 reference integrateds, and wondered why they have a tape loop and no pre out. I thought maybe it was some peculiar Japanese trend that involves a cassette deck. Besides making your own mix tapes 
, what all does one use a tape loop for?
2 Likes
That’s where you plug in your BBE sonic maximiser
1 Like
My BAT VK50-SE has a a pair of variable Outputs (I use them for bi-amping my OB’s) and a fixed gain “Tape Out”. I use it for my STAX Headphone Amp which has a Volume/Balance controls.
I considered the BHK Preamp last year as well. But I need multiple XLR Outs. The BHK only has one set.
2 Likes
They’re the easiest way to put some kind of signal processor into your system if you want the flexibility of switching it in and out of the system. It was the usual way to connect things like EQs, dBX units, stuff like that. Some of those devices include a bypass switch of their own so you don’t need a tape loop to turn it “off,” but done that way there’s still at least some portion of their own internal circuitry/wiring that’s still in the signal path when you’re not using them.
2 Likes
Very good idea!
1 Like
Interestingly enough, a couple of days ago an ask Paul video discussed the BBC Dip. Paul explained that nearly all speakers, including the upcoming PS Audio speakers, happily contain the BBC Dip. That without said dip, the sound is too forward, harsh and aggressive. He said that completely linear speakers do not sound very good.
Therefore we can’t count on the BBC Dip to save us! It’s already here.
It’s in interesting question, just what is an audiophile? And likely many practical definitions. I see at least two types. One group wants to get to the core of a recording, to hear the recording, as much as possible, in it’s original, unmolested form. To me, that approach is not necessarily about hearing the best sound quality. It’s about revealing whatever is the essence of the recording. If it’s a great recording, it will sound great. If it’s a mediocre recording, the gear that got “to the root” of the original recording will make it sound worse than even the most budget of gear.
Then there’s another group who prefer to get the best sound possible, no matter what the original recording was like. The goal is not to venture to the center of the earth, to the core of the recording, it’s to hear the music, all music, the best it can sound. If that means using an EQ, or a ZRock, or a lava lamp, so be it! I’m in that camp.
I’m attempting to sell my Sonus Faber speakers locally as shipping them to the mainland is cost prohibitive. A nice orthodox audiophile came for an audition. While he liked the speakers, he thought they would be a lateral move. He took the “don’t mess with the signal” orthodoxy to depths far beyond what’s commonly expressed on this forum. He thought subwoofers were completely heresy!
This evening I watched a YouTube video on the Sabbateans. It was a 17th century Jewish movement that believed Sabbatai Zevi was the messiah. Apparently it had spread across much of the Jewish world at the time. When he proclaimed he would assume the Ottoman throne and rule the empire, that was enough for the actual Ottoman emperor to arrest the messiah, and give him the ultimatum to convert to Islam or die. He converted, and that was that. I don’t blame him, being a messiah is not enviable work, though supposedly the afterlife retirement plan is pretty sweet
Listening to the wide ranging mix of belief systems that were percolating around the Sabbateans at the time made me think how similar our audiophile hobby is to religion. We have our camps, cables matter, cables don’t matter, upsample, don’t upsample, on and on. And we have almost as little actual science behind our beliefs as a messianic movement. We believe what we believe, we rely upon our unreliable brains to tell us what is true, and we follow those peculiar conclusions with great conviction.
The human mind, and it’s follies, are such a remarkable force. Truly. BBC Dip and all. What’s my point? I have none, except as a tribute to pointlessness.
2 Likes
I have not seen “nearly all speakers” include a Gundry dip. The measurements by third-parties, such as Stereophile, indicate otherwise. But certainly a good number do.
I continue to suggest you listen to a pair of speakers which decidedly include a significant dip as I suspect you will enjoy them.
1 Like
Again, locate and listen to a pair of speakers with a pronounced Gundry dip rather than writing about it hypothetically.
Speakers vary tremendously to the degree to which the incorporate this voicing, ranging from none at all to a great deal. That is, speakers do not all sound the same.
2 Likes
@Elk I’ve only conveyed what @Paul said in the video about the BBC Dip. Those are not hypothetical opinions. They are Paul’s, who apparently has extensive experience with the BBC Dip. It seems Arnie had it even named after him.
It’s Paul’s expressed opinion that most speakers utilize the BBC Dip. Not all, but most. And it’s Paul’s opinion that purely linear speakers don’t sound very good.
Once again, that’s not hypothetical. It’s the very experienced opinions of Paul, as expressed in the video.
If you have issues with those opinions, I suggest you take it up with Paul. I merely wrote about it because I found it a very interesting coincidence that shortly after you brought up the Dip, a Paul video appeared on that very subject. A video likely recorded long before your post.
Beyond that interesting coincidence, I have no personal opinion about the virtues or ills of the BBC Dip as I only first learned of it through you 
I would love to knowingly try a BBC Dip empowered speaker. Unfortunately, “BBC Dip” is usually not listed in the specs. But I do thank you for the suggestion 
For anyone that would like to experience the dip or exaggerate an existing xover dip any PEQ can apply it in the digital chain.
Find the xover frequency of speaker mid/tweeter or use 2.5kHz if unknown. Use -1 or -1.5dB with a Q=1.
My ATC are quite flat and I enjoy the added dip for less than stellar recordings.
For example, it looks like this in Roon DSP (though I apply it via convolution for better/controlled phase response)
3 Likes
My comment of “writing about it hypothetically” refers to your reliance on words rather than listening. Get out there, listen to some speakers, try some EQ (as suggested above), discover what solves what you perceive as a problem.
Look up the response curve on your speaker in Stereophile or the like. They probably do not have a Gundry dip. Then find some speakers you can audition in your area with a pronounced Gundry dip and listen. Better yet, but a cheap EQ and experiment. If it works for you, purchase a quality EQ.
By the way, engineer Keith Gundry developed the presence compensation curve under discussion.
According to Harbeth:
"A very interesting thread this, so here are the facts for your
consideration:
Many years ago I asked Dudley Harwood, my predecessor about the ‘BBC dip’ or
to be fair ‘The Gundry Dip’.
(Gundry senior worked at the BBC but passed away some years ago: Gundry
‘junior’ works or worked for Dolby Labs)
First take a look at the ‘How we hear’ pages on the Harbeth web site. Yes,
incomplete but note the huge boost in the ear’s sensitivity centred around
3.5kHz.
Next, consider that all Harbeth (and probably the vast majority of other
speakers crossover at 3kHz-ish … that’s a most unfortunate choice of
frequency unless your are extremely careful in blending the midrange and
tweeter … seems that we are, hence the ‘Harbeth sound’.
Then, as Harwood stated, there was significant colouration in the ‘presence
region’ with early conventional plastics … so reducing the energy in this
high-sensitivity region partly masked the colouration … and finally …
BBC monitors were designed for virtually near field use i.e. you could
(probably) reach out and touch them from the studio managers position at the
desk. A little depression in the 1-4kHz region pushed the stereo image
backwards, subjectively, (i.e. the performers seemed to recede a little into
the cabinets) and made the speaker less oppressive to work with. (As a side
issue this image positioning is why a speaker designer should never design
a new model as a single, mono speaker and then clone into stereo. I know,
because it is one of the first traps I fell into as a novice some 20 years
ago … mercifully the product never went into production. Do all the
listening tests in stereo right from the very start of the design coming
together.)
That’s the whole story. Anything else you may hear is, I’m sorry to say, not
factual.
Alan Shaw
Harbeth"
2 Likes
Thanks, @brett66. A great example.