Oh I agree with you. No problem there. It just seems like an unnecessary warning.
Some people ask “Why use BACCH if you have a surround sound system? Don’t they both do the same thing?”.
Technically no, not at all. But in a way, sure. But it misses the point of what the differences are.
With any technology change, someone likes to say why would anyone want that. Logically, they feel the have raised an obvious point. But sometimes logic changes with greater understanding. I am overly sensitive to people who say we have had surround sound for many years, what does BACCH add to the picture?
A personal flaw if you will. I beg your forgiveness.
No prob. Sorry myself to have been snippy! The A-acronym should of course be in another thread and not mentioned here! Maybe it is a little inevitable on occasion tho. I do live near some of the best A-acronym sound studios in the world. Artists from the US fly in regularly to get mixed here (Cologne, home of TV show studios in Germany). A neighbour lets me sit in sometimes when he is mixing.
Thanks for explaining what ATMOS is. I can understand why the two systems are so different with specific music encoded for the ATMOS system. I am sure it is impressive!
BACCH is much more impressive for listening to music… much of which is in stereo. A lot of material is being repackaged and schlocked off as ATMOS now that was never conceived for it. Plus many folks surround systems for home theatre do not have center speakers that match musically with their main front and left speakers. Usually, center speakers are mainly meant for the voice channel in a film. And since Macs have optional 10G ethernet, plus ATMOS support, I can probably sneak one into the house behind the back of my anti-Apple prejudices for BACCH without getting caught.
Isn’t this (better sound) the reason that BACCH is deployed – by its inventor and users?
It seems anyone who has figured it out says their computer-synthesis system sounds better…as you have. The inventor’s videos and marketing say so, which have brought many to BACCH in pursuit of better sound.
I think that before the latest BACCH4Mac software release and my upgrade from the Intro version, I would have said that the sound quality had not changed. What changed was how the sound was presented. With the Audiophile version, basically creating a filter calibrated to your ears and head, I could hear improved clarity. In talks by the inventor, he mentioned that filters vary greatly from person to person due to the shape of their ears. Before I retired I was responsible for the metrology or calibration for a medical device manufacturer. I know how greatly proper calibration can influence results. The concept of making filters so that your right ear will hear what is coming from the right speaker and our left ear will hear what is coming out of the left speaker is fascinating. I also understand that the software is implementing tools to use how our ears and brains determine the 3D locations of sounds. I have not heard of people returning their BACCH systems for a refund, but I am sure there are some. I try hard not to say that anything is the latest and greatest, just because I know my desired tastes in sound and audio system are different from others on this forum. I applaud the pursuit of better sound by forum members by obtaining better components, cables, room treatments, speakers, etc. I just hope some of them will consider giving the BACCH (components-expensive, or software-relatively inexpensive) system a try.
I actually own the only BACCH-SP that has ever been resold according to Edgar. The first time it was sold was do to a very messy divorce. The second time it was sold was because the owner wanted to try BACCH4MAC. It is possible that no one has decided “not 4 me”.
I have tried the SP and allthough we made a proper setup there was no noticeable improvement. Cross Cancelation Level was 13.
We assume that the activated roon dsp filter might be a reason so I will give it a new try to find out…
That’s an interesting topic. I’d also be rather a BAACH than a surround sound guy.
As a quick statement for differentiation I’d say BACH optimizes the ‚3D stage illusion‘ without rising the number of speakers (detaching image more from them) while surround sound (with rising number of speakers and not detaching the image better) optimizes the ‚room/reflection feedback illusion‘ in the best case. That surround sound can also offer sitting in the middle of performers isn’t a quality criteria for me, related to a more realistic experience.
It appears that BACCH is coming to the Dutch & Dutch 8cs. Maybe this is one of the (first?) examples of how this tech will be licensed to other devices that combine hardware and software. I own the 8cs and am very excited to give this a try.
A little more detail — or gossip — is in this forum thread, which includes some confirmation from the owner of Dutch & Dutch:
I have requested to be a trial user. I will report back if I am and what difference it makes. I use the REW filters currently with good results. I have used HAF filters as well but I moved and have to have Thierry redo them for my new room.
Edit: I should add I am excited about this. I was looking for a way to use BACCH but my system is very simple: Nucleus+ → ethernet → D&D 8cs. I didn’t want to add a component. The 8cs have only AES input with no USB so I would have to deal with that as well.
This is a very interesting way of adding the BACCH filters to your system. I expect if dealers demonstrate these speakers with and without the BACCH filter it should influence many buyers to prefer the D&D 8cs over other brands.
I purchased and connected the new IR camera recommendation for DSP-13 IR tracking. Much wider FOV covers entire couch-width.
I also used my Inakustik Referenz USB for the Baby face to M1 Mini binaural microphone digitization. While the Inakustik pure Silver Air Referenz USB doesdigital feed to DSMK2. Lowernoise floor and flatter FR curves compared to USB cable provided by theoretica I was using previously for microphone head transfer filter
It is crazy how well. he audiophile edition responds to cable tweaks. The vocals improved lost a bit of harshness that the stock theoretica USB cable provided comparing microphone filters.
Did you notice any decrease in the effective distance when using the IR camera? I bought the model that was recommended and it looks like I’ll need to find a way to locate it about 18-24” closer to the listening position to get head tracking to work properly in low light conditions. Field of view is definitely wider now.
Thanks - I just ordered one and should have it next Monday
I’m hopeful this will do the trick as moving the IR camera closer is not a great option in my situation.
