The Hindenburg Syndrome

[Mallette]

From experience, I am proposing a new syndrome. 

 

I am calling it the "Hindenburg Syndrome" as it proposes this as recurring under a variety of circumstances:

 

Group of people are discussing advanced concepts in environmentally sound, efficient, safe, means of moving people and freight.  One suggests giant airships built with modern technology.  They might carry 600 or more persons at 150mph quietly and efficiently while requiring much less infrastructure than jets or high speed rail.  They could also deliver large objects to places otherwise not accessible, etc, etc, etc...

 

Everyone listens politely, then after a bit of uncomfortable silence, the conversation moves on. 

 

Why?  The science is totally sound and proven.  The reason is the Hindenburg.  Less than a third of those on board killed, but a death blow to a proven technology that was the 129th of her kind and victim of an accident that still may well have been sabotage and in any event was highly unlikely and would have been impossible if we'd provided the requested helium.  Nonetheless, it was fatal.  Why?  Hard to tell.  Certainly had to do with the Nazi's, US arrogance in getting enthused about the concept then refusing to learn how to fly them from the masters who built them, the onset of WWII, and such.  Regardless, the image of that burning ship totally destroyed all interest in this extremely effective, safe, and flexible means of transporting people and freight.  After all, 99% of the lift was from a non-consumed source.  Logical, but people aren't always logical. 

 

I can put this "syndrome" to the test with self-driving cars, the existence of inexhaustible resources only 300 miles away in space, fusion, and any number of other things...but here it's audio.

 

Precisely that same thing happens at this "table" when multi-channel is brought up.  The surround sound crowd is immersed in processed, steered movies and rock.  The 2 channel sound is, well, "immersed" really doesn't work because it's only in the front, but basically they hear only from the front so it's OK. 

 

Even though the basics of the concept are simple enough:  If two microphones deliver the best 180 degree soundfield, how can it be argued that two more won't deliver a 360 degree soundfield?  Do the math.

 

But, just as only a tiny percent of the population is still alive who actually witnessed the Hindenburg disaster yet the effect lives on, only a third or so of audiophiles remain with us who experienced the quad disaster of the 70s...but it lives on. 

 

Dave

 

 

[Mallette]

Yeah, I used to read that.  "Mix" was even worse.

 

However, these were always "mainstream."  There remain great, reasonable thriving companies like Gothic and Linn who care about clean, if conventional, record engineering.  But with the apathy of the audiophiles who buy for them for anything but the media and technology of the past they also have no need to improve fidelity.

 

Trust me, I am aware I am not only "crying in the wilderness" but there ain't nobody even listening, much less acting.

 

While I am well aware of areas of my behavior that are, well, diagnosable, I don't think my desire for true high fidelity is one of them.  Hence this thread to try to determine why my fellow audiophiles are so stuck in the past and have lost interest in the quest for anything other than what was pretty much perfected a half century ago.  The Hindenburg Syndrome is as good an answer as any.  

 

HD Tracks claims to have surround close to ideal, but they don't provide any easy ways to play them and I've had no luck getting them, or anyone, to point to a universal file format capable of binding any more than 4 channels.  I can do it in Audacity, but it seem proprietary.  Audacity will open and properly place all 4, but J. Rivers, which claims to be multi-channel capable, only opens 2.  It's absurd.  It isn't that hard.  Like recording two good channels with two mikes.  If you can bind 2 channels, you can bind as many as you like.

 

Dave

[russ69]

Dave, it is simple for me. Quality is everything for me and good 2 channel gear is pretty expensive. Two great channels sound better than four good channels so until I hit the lotto, one pair of 20,000 buck speakers is enough for my budget. No way I can do that in six channels.

[Mallette]

So, why not mono?  Cut your bill in half.  If "quality" is everything and fidelity is low on your list, your solution is fine. 

 

For 5k on the market you could have a Klipschorn in 4 corners if you look hard enough.

 

Dave

[Mallette]

Let me expand on "fidelity."  Certainly fidelity to the original recording is one thing.  However, I don't consider any acoustic stereo recording, no matter how good, "high fidelity" as my definition of high fidelity is to the original performance.  Stereo cannot deliver on that definition.

 

Dave

[derrickdj1]

True to the the live recording is impossible unless you are there.  Even then, sound engineer doctor things up for the consumer market.  A good 2 ch. system delivers a near close rendition of what was recorded in the studio.  The beauty of 2 channel is like a book compared to a movies.  The user can place the drummer, piano and other instruments  with his eyes closed due to the sound stage and imaging.

[djk]

"One suggests giant airships built with modern technology"

 

World helium shortage expected to balloon drastically  By Marc Lallanilla

The world is facing a critical helium shortage, which threatens much more than the party-balloon industry.

An odorless and colorless gas, helium (He on the periodic table) is the second-most-abundant element in the universe after hydrogen, but it's not easy to find or store in usable quantities — most of the helium in the atmosphere escapes into space, and our current helium supplies are largely extracted from underground natural-gas reserves.

The United States is the global leader in helium production, producing about 75 percent of the world's helium. About half of that is stored outside Amarillo, Texas, in the country's Federal Helium Reserve, a vast subterranean complex of storage reservoirs and pipelines that extend to natural-gas fields as far away as Kansas. [End of the World? Top 10 Doomsday Fears]

But the looming helium shortage is actually the government's fault, according to Science magazine. The U.S. Bureau of Land Management (BLM), which manages the Federal Helium Reserve, sells off helium at below-market rates, encouraging waste and discouraging the development of new sources.

"If … companies can buy the federal helium gas at a relatively low price, there is less incentive to develop it," physicist Moses Chan, a member of the National Academy of Sciences panel studying the helium reserve, told Marketplace.org.

Helium sales scheduled to end
In 1996, Congress mandated that the federal government get out of the helium business altogether, so the BLM is selling off its existing supply until it recoups the costs of producing it. That point will come in October, after which point the government cannot sell any more helium.

As a result, the United States and much of the industrialized world now faces an imminent "helium cliff." Legislation that intended to address this problem by allowing continued helium sales after October was passed by the U.S. House of Representatives in April, but the Senate has yet to pass its own version of the bill, according to the Wall Street Journal.

"We're running out of time," David Isaacs, of the Semiconductor Industry Association, told the Journal. "We're positioned to get it done, but there's certainly no guarantee — certainly not in this Congress."

An irreplaceable element
The Federal Helium Reserve got its start shortly after World War I, when helium was used to float military reconnaissance aircraft. Since then, helium has proven to be indispensable in a wide range of industrial and medical uses.

Magnetic resonance imagery (MRI) relies on helium to regulate the powerful magnets needed to create MRI scans, which are cooled to minus 452 degrees Fahrenheit (minus 269 degrees Celsius). Indeed, the fact that helium has the lowest boiling and melting points of all the chemical elements — liquid helium is the only liquid that cannot be solidified by lowering its temperature — is what makes it so irreplaceable in so many industries.

Helium is also essential to the manufacturing of computer chips, optical fiber and medical lasers. It's often needed for rocket-engine testing, arc welding, air-to-air missile guidance and other civilian and military uses, according to the BLM. (Party balloons and parade floats use just a tiny fraction of the world's helium supply.)

There are some plans in place to address the current helium shortage, including a new helium plant in Wyoming and increased development overseas. And assuming that demand for helium remains strong, "new technologies for extracting and refining helium … would bring new sources of helium to the market," according to the BLM.

[Ceptorman]

Isn't it true we can't hear in stereo the sounds behind us?

[Mallette]

rue to the the live recording is impossible unless you are there.

 

And you arrived at this abosolute by what scientific method?

 

Dave

[Mallette]

As to helium...which isn't the topic...there is an infinite supply only a short, easy distance from here.  Helium is the second most abundant element in the known Universe (after hydrogen).  But there is no demand.

 

Dave

Edited January 16, 2015 by Mallette

[oldtimer]

Isn't it true we can't hear in stereo the sounds behind us?

You can definitely hear directionality, so I don't see why not.

[CECAA850]

Isn't it true we can't hear in stereo the sounds behind us?

 

 

Face away from your gear next time your listening, you'll see.

[minermark]

"only a third or so of audiophiles remain with us who experienced the quad disaster of the 70s...but it lives on"

So why was it a disaster?

[russ69]

So, why not mono?  Cut your bill in half.  If "quality" is everything and fidelity is low on your list, your solution is fine. 

 

For 5k on the market you could have a Klipschorn in 4 corners if you look hard enough.

 

Dave

Quality, as in the quality of the sound. I started with a mono rig and I'm finishing with a stereo rig. This is the two channel forum and I'm firmly in that camp, sorry.

[russ69]

"only a third or so of audiophiles remain with us who experienced the quad disaster of the 70s...but it lives on"

So why was it a disaster?

That's an easy answer from my perspective. The first and biggest problem were the competing formats. That made everything more complex in those days. Then you needed to throw your electronics away and buy 4 loudspeakers. People found out that 4 good loudspeakers cost money and two great loudspeakers sounded better than 4 good loudspeakers and cost less.

[muel]

I'd love to hear what you are describing but as far as doubling my 2 channel budget it just ain't gonna happen.  I will have to get as close as I can with a good setup in the room and treatments to keep the room from screwing up the sound too much.  

 

I really don't want to hear much of what I hear from behind me at a live performance... from the paper shufflers playing with their programs to the coughers who I'd like to pelt with lozenges .  

[Mallette]

Yep, the Hindenburg Syndrome.  Just wanted to confirm.

 

This was an experiment.

 

Dave

[oldtimer]

Dad gummit Dave They gave you several of your favorite issues to pontificate on and you step out of the ring.  I guess I'll have to settle on just listening to music for my entertainment tonight.

[minermark]

Yep, the Hindenburg Syndrome.  Just wanted to confirm.

 

This was an experiment.

 

Dave

[Mallette]

Oh, no, Brian.  I ain't done until I am in a box!  The rut our hobby is stuck in will see it become more and more irrelevant and I won't stand by for it. 

 

Just pulling chains...and confirming a theory.  I find some of the comments absolutely FASCINATING.

 

Dave

Edited January 16, 2015 by Mallette