Let's hope this was hyperbole.

But maybe Mr. Holt has sufficient knowledge of every generation of every region of the entire world over all of time to make such comparisons. Maybe he'll put together a comprehensive color-coded chart.

I love this kind of generalization.

Anybody have a link to a biography of J. Gordon Holt (in whose ears we trust?)

I'll hold off until I get my issue to comment further on the editorial, but it already seems to be serving its purpose...to generate conversation!

LOL, I had a 5 paragraph reply to this post yesterday, but I thought better about posting it. Some of us care about studio recordings and amplified instruments and Holt...not so much.

I'm with you Monty. I've been composing detailed responses in my head for the last 24-hours but the fact is I just find this sad. Mr. Holt has brought us so much enjoyment in the hobby and of course, in the magazine that he remains a personal hero. I'm sorry he hasn't found the joy in the high end that so many of us have.

Of course now I have the perfect example of "dyspeptic" to share with my students.

Poor J. Gordon.

I got my November issue.

I guess anybody whose "job" was the Hi Fi magazine industry since the fifties would be bound to go mad, but this was still a real surprise.

Regarding his 1992 diatribe: Sorry, but it was all I could do to suppress images of Jack Nicholson telling me I "couldn't handle the truth" as he tilted at the state of Hi Fi only 15 years ago.

J. Gordon obviously mistook descriptions of the abilities of a Hi Fi system to effectively portray the beauty of a musical event as being somehow different from the same system being able to portray the dissonance or "ugliness" of a performance.

As a "journalist," was he blind to the lack of consumer interest in systems that accurately reproduced harshness, vulgarity, or ugliness of the original signal?

I bet not.

That might work on the "Catcher In The Rye Audiophile Forums," but he discounts the ability of audiophiles to place all these factors in the proper perspective when making audio decisions. Even by 1992, Mr. Holt seems to have ceased giving his readers or the industry credit for striving to continue their pursuit of the "absolute sound."

Would he that reviewers be compelled to turn to describing the debauchery and decadence of a performance rather than focusing on the inspirational? Should they have sacrificed describing the art and instead focused on the mere anatomy of a component's abilities? Yeah, that's what we have in common - the baseness of our audio experience; the ugliness, the vulgarity. That would have saved the hobby, for sure.

I'm trying to recall when Mr. Holt wrote a review that focused on a component's ability to convey the harsh, vulgar, and ugly aspects of music. A little help?

By 1992, Mr. Holt had already become a door slammer. Why didn't I notice back then? He was a crank 15 years ago!

Next, Mr. Holt condemns the audio industry for failing to have "accomplished what we set out to do."

Well, that was certainly overly loquacious.

Let me summarize:

J. Gordon Holt has become a "nattering nabob of negativity"

It seems sad that one to whom we owe a debt of gratitude, (for founding this magazine), is so bitter about the way the hobby has turned out. I too had hoped that it would take a different direction, but I have found plenty to enjoy with where it has gone, and hope for where it is going.

On the other hand maybe he is trying to get folks to think. That in and of itself is no mean feat.

Wow! After hearing of the Holt article I was anxious for my copy to show up in the mail, now I almost fear its arrival.

Thank you, Buddha. Excellent summary and commentary.

Having now had the benefit of reading the article I personally question the rational behind its publication. Basically it's little more than a recounting of his comments from 1992 with his current comments doing little more than confirming his views have not changed (since then).

Hence what exactly was the point? Was it to serve up a sacrifical lamb for the so-called "objectivist" crowd who are predictably are making hay over his comments about blind testing (which contradict his own post statements on same I might add)?

Is there anything to be learned from witnessing what by all indications would appear to be his current state of despondency?... who is served by such a display?

I just don't get it. What exactly was the point?

Good points, all. I think JA is going to shed more light on this in the future. Maybe it will make more sense then. In the meantime it seems kind of sad that a man who put so much effort into the system would be so seemingly bitter.

If ya give it enough time, EVERYTHING/EVERYONE becomes irrelevant. Everything is just dust in the wind. Sooner or later, what was something different is just another of the same. Woulda' been interesting for JA to get info on what JGH listens to in his waning years. How come Sydney Harman, running a multi BILLION dollar empire in audio, sounds relevant and asute and coherant? After reading this JGH episode, teh old saying is appropriate. Those who do do, those who can't teach, those who can't teach, teach GYM. JGH was/is just a critic, one who writes about the accomplishments of others. Pretty irrelavant. Obviously his concept of non advertising supported publication in audio didn't work, there are none, StereoPhile couldn't still exist, without mfgs paying. Seems only JGH is an old audio dude to go sour? Dave Hafler Henry Kloss, Edgar Vilchur, Sydney HArman and otehrs that pioneered teh industry, in any interview never sounded so sour on life....maybe his stereo sounds bad, and it's making him grouchy? JA, do a followup, what does JGH use and listen to? Do some measuremnts too. If he uses a BLOSE wave radio, then everything he ever wrote or said was false!!!!

Maybe he is suffering from a bad stereo!
I do however agree with his assessment of the hippy generation, most(not all)of them were & still are spoiled brats!! They never grew up!

The previous generations grew up, and look what happened to them, where are they now? Oh, all gone, just like anything else. So might as well have fun while it is still available. JGH is probabl suffering from a medical malady. Oldtimers disease. It makes one bitter, cranky, and pissed that he didn't get to where he thought he should be. Whereas those who actually did something, like pioneer audio stuff seemed quite content in their later life. Henry Kloss, went on to start more companies, Dave Hafler was a chess collector Avery Fisher built teh hall...what did JGH do? disappear, as irrelavant? Did they bring him back coincidently for Halloween? Cus' he sounds scaaaaaaarey. How come Sydney Harman and his $8 BILLION audio empire, sounds quite cheerful in his interviews, and look what he created....pretty cool. JGH should maybe start a new magazine, the oldman's guide to hi fi......the 100 year old Fritz Philips son of one of the original founding memebers of PHILIPS lived to 100+ and had fun all along, in interviews with him just under 100 years old, sounded more energetic and happy than the old grouch JGH. Man is this what subjective analysis of stuff does to ya? since all the happy old timers in electronics or audio that based things on science and test MEASUREMENTS seemd quite cheerful in their old age. So JA looks to be able to live long and happy...keep on measuring, it keeps ya young. Subjectivist apear to age quickly, and get angry at everything around em.....and then ya die, all gone and it all meant nutin'.

Quote:
I think JA is going to shed more light on this in the future. Maybe it will make more sense then.

Not really. I wanted to feature Gordon in our 45th anniversary issue, as without him, Stereophile would not exists. More importantly personally, I would not be doing what I am doing now in that it was Gordon's writings in the late 1970s, along with those of Harry Pearson, Paul Messenger, and Peter Aczel, that opened the door for me. I was saddened that he took advantage of the pulpit to spread doom and gloom rather than joy. But having offered him a pulpit, it would be dishonorable of me to withdraw that offer because I didn't like he wrote.

Quote:
In the meantime it seems kind of sad that a man who put so much effort into the system would be so seemingly bitter.

My erstwhile partner Larry Archibald described Gordon thusly: Gordon founded Stereophile in order to rail against the Establishment. Now that Stereophile and High-End Audio have become the Establishment, he rails against us.

John Atkinson
Editor, Stereophile

Thank you, John, for the background.

Quote:
But having offered him a pulpit, it would be dishonorable of me to withdraw that offer because I didn't like he wrote.

Very honorable. You are a class act.

Quote:
My erstwhile partner Larry Archibald described Gordon thusly: Gordon founded Stereophile in order to rail against the Establishment. Now that Stereophile and High-End Audio have become the Establishment, he rails against us.

John Atkinson
Editor, Stereophile

That may be but it is worth noting that in the Holt interview conducted by Steven Stone in 1997 one can easily recognize the active (albeit highly opinionated) mind that was characteristic of Holt in his Stereophile days. In that interview, which was (5) years after the 1992 speech that was featured prominently in the recent article, Holt elaborated in some detail upon his concerns with the direction of the hobby and while one may or may not agree with his views it is clear that they were based upon serious and, I would argue, passionate thought.

None of that was reflected in the recent article. Rather I would argue the material from the 1992 speech juxtaposed against his dismissive and even dispondent present day comments *do* create the impression of a mind irrationally railing against "the Establishment".

I don't know if such was intentional or not, it matters little as far as I'm concerned, but I will say that greater care could have avoided such an impression, a care mindful of the man's past accomplishments, with his legacy.

Personally I feel the recent atricle was damaging to the Holt Legacy and as it appeared in Stereophile, the publication I would have hoped that above all others to have afforded Holt some deference, I have to say I am dissapointed.

My 2 cents.

Quote:
I would argue the material from the 1992 speech juxtaposed against his dismissive and even dispondent present day comments *do* create the impression of a mind irrationally railing against "the Establishment"...I will say that greater care could have avoided such an impression, a care mindful of the man's past accomplishments, with his legacy.

I am not sure what you mean by "greater care," bjh. The text I attribute to Gordon was exactly what he wrote, both in 1992 and in response to my questions in 2007. It therefore accurately represents the way he now feels.

Quote:
Personally I feel the recent article was damaging to the Holt Legacy and as it appeared in Stereophile, the publication I would have hoped that above all others to have afforded Holt some deference, I have to say I am dissapointed.

I agree that the article was damaging, but even with the magazine's founder, I am not in the business of whitewashing what writers have to say. While doing so might make something acceptable or make it conform to what some might expect, that's not what I am about. I don't alter my writers' thoughts on the equipment they review; I don't do so when they write on other matters, as in this case.

John Atkinson
Editor, Stereophile

Well hey I'm hardly going to argue the point needlessly, after all I'm more than a little aware [from exchanges elsewhere] you can be insensitive from time to time (hard to imagine you could be the Editor otherwise), but do allow me to make a comment on your last paragraph as I feel it may cause confusion in the minds of some... Holt ain't one of your writers! Not anymore anyway and in any case surely he was contacting upon the recent anniversary due to his role as founder not merely as some former contributor.

What specifically would you want John to have done as editor?

Are you suggesting that he should have edited out or changed Mr. Holt's words?

Not published the article at all as it is in a sense damaging?

Added an editorial postscript of his own?

Challenged Mr. Holt to change what he wrote?

While Mr. Holt's message may be upsetting to some, it is his message.

I thought I had made it clear that I thought the article to be unnecessary. Even if the purpose was not to deliberately damage Holt's legacy I fail to see what else was accomplished. I don't think I can make my POV more clear, that's it, take it or leave it...it's just my 2 cents after all.

View from outside. I like the line that Mapingo discs are popular while SACD didn't take off. JGH might be right. Like 911 is a joke, is hi end becoming the same realm. Maybe hi end scammers did it in, with nonsense wires, blocks, etc. Not REAL designing, electronics, acoustics, etc. http://www.avsforum.com/avs-vb/showthread.php?p=12047916

"Oldtimers disease. It makes one bitter, cranky, and pissed..."

It's odd you'd use those terms so freely Sir DUP, as it's exactly how you come off on the majority of your other posts. All this talk about getting out there, doing good things and being happy? Huh? WHERE is DUP, and what have you done with him!?! Clearly you've hacked his alias and substituted your postive attitude for his!

2 out of 3.....I'm not out yet. How did the magazine stray from the founders cause? The founder wanted DBT...now they are villified as no good, evil....I think DBT would end all cable ads, and magic wood blocks, and all other sources of ad income. And put many of these companies where they belong. Stereophile had to go to ad revenue to survive, it's become another magazine selling stuff. It is enertraining, has some interesting articles, but you can see it leans towards, making sure stuff is sold. If they really did DBT on teh 90% nonsense products, like mapingo discs, green pens, plastic demagnetizers, and MF TT's..they would not take out ads, nor would they survive without the pump by the writers hype. Again, just teh JA measuremtns bring teh stuff back to earth, and it is too their credit, that they do print the measured specs that show how insane most of the claims by those who have bat ears, make claims. Or those who pretend they hear things, that are so great, when teh product is DEFECTIVE, and mis performing, love it. That's what i wait for, and yet, with no sense of defeat the fiction writers go onto their next story.....JA measurements matter, the other musings are personal preferences, and or deluded desires...$45K mis wired CD only players, $100K TT's....amps that miss by 500W, yet they all sounded GREAT, better than last months magic...is any writer gonna just once fes up and say, I can't hear any difference betwen any 10 of these extremely over priced players....And my are they not doing at least side by side comparisons...let's see an EMMLABS under $10K (still pricey) smoking the $45K miswired underperforming sonic miracle though....DBT on all these "great sounding wires"....At least one writer wrote about how his overpriced great sounding wall outlet fell apart!! It cost how much? A standard $1. Leviton never falls apart!!! But then the Hubbell or Leviton for $1 ain't cryo audio blended F'd up...ever think that maybe freezing them destoys them, oh but they sound so good....hahahahahha, until they fall apart? Did that PS have a UL sticker? I don't think UL has the deep freeze as part of it's test for wall devices, that's not what they are inteneded for use

Upon re-reading said interview it all comes down to this: JGH is pissed that the world didn't stay the way he thought it should. Meaning hi-fi being dedicated to reproducing live classical music. In his mind the Boomer with their infernal rock ' roll ruined it and everything about music reproduction. He's sort of right on this, but SO wrong about that it's a bad thing. HiFi as I understand it today is about accurately conveying recorded music first, but most agree now that it's not ever going to sound like live acoustic concerts. Live acoustic concert recordings are probably far les than 1% of anything ever recorded. In that light, why would recording and HIFI be dedicated to such a small and anachronistic experience?

Yeah, boomers can be a pretty smug and self centered lot, but I can't imagine a more truly destructive "generation" than JGH's father's generation which produced the REAL Axis powers, plus Mao and Stalin on top. But even then, can you really pin them on a whole egneration? Let's get real here. Rock n Roll did not ruin the world, and few people have died of it, except by their own excess.

DUP- your rants about cables and tweaks are kinda getting old my friend. Stereophile hardly devotes ANY editorial or review space to this stuff, and even the ads are small compared to speakers and other big gear. It's not what drives the magazine at all and most reviews are serious and well thought out. Don't just keep pulling out MFs reviews and say that the entire staff is all about crazy magic cables and 100K turntables because they really aren't.

Makes sense now. Thank you.

I am neither old nor cranky, just selective and I have my correct opions. It's better to be selective and right, than non selective and taken without knowing.

I hadn't been going to chime in on the forum site until JGH answered JA's email with his comments. I cannot tell you how sadden I was to read them.

Here is a person who is partly responsible for keeping me interested in a hobby we all seem to love with his writings and sense of objectivity and truthfulness. For him to be so turned off by our hobby solely due to the fact that, in his opinion, "realism" is lost in today's high end equipment is lost on me.

For me this is a recording engineer's problem, not generally a gear problem per se. I will say that IMHO I do not see how you could "really" recreate Carnegie Hall in even a decent sized room 20' x 30' with 12" plus ceilings. Even if you owned a Sony 777 reverb unit with all the Oxford programs you might get somewhat closer, but close is no cigar for JGH.

The greatest sense of scale I have ever heard, other than hearing the $5 mil Jaeckel Organ at Emory University in Emerson Hall, was at a demo in the early 70's put on by an audio dealer at a local theater. He had 3 pair of Bozak Concert Grands lined across a 100' stage each powered by a Phase Linear 700 amps. The sources were some excellent LPs and some RR to tapes at 15ips. To say that it sounded real to me would be an understatement, even with the less than steller Phase Linear amps. This was a huge presentation that was spread across the stage much the same way the orchestra would have been. I think this may be what JGH is missing is the Hugeness of sound-sage. The recording must be equally as good with no compression and proper onmi mics (or a multi-spaced uni's, or fig-8's) with low noise components and equally pristine mic pre's.

One of these days I am going to try the same sort of set up in my 14 x 17 foot room with 3 pair of speakers and 3 stereo amps with one of JA's stellar recordings. For Classical I would think that the SACD layer of K622 for Antony Michaelson would do the trick as well.

I stopped blaming the equipment long ago for stuff many recording engineers screw up. Listen to some of John Mark's recordings...and don't tell me that this is not real or life like. I have many Maple-Shade, Telarc, DMP, and even some SACD remasters of the RCA Red Seal recordings that sound great to me. When I listen to Kind of Blue it sounds pretty darn good to me. I bet when JA and John Marks heard to master tapes is was like "being in the Vatican after closing", as Mr. Marks stated.

At least JGH was not so frustrated to break out the 901's to get that huge, full room affect. Is it live or is it Memorex? I find this to be a great time to be infatuated with audio. I feel so bad for JGH. I want him to be beyond happy in his retirement, what ever that is for him.

I think Buddha's comments are definitive. They are precise, comprehensive, and laced with a proper irony. Still, I must add my own brief notes, since I am closer to Holt's age than Buddha is, and I have thus been reading him about as long as anyone still listening to music has.

When Holt took on the high-fidelity establishment, there really weren't any speakers or electronics (no matter how well you matched them into a system) capable of transporting the octave-to-octave tonal balance of the concert hall experience of a full symphony orchestra into the listening room. You could spend a lot of money, those days, in constant US dollars, and still get nothing between the extremes of screeches and whumps. JBLs, Altecs, and Klipschorns put a needle through your ear, substituting an air-raid siren for massed violins, and Bozaks, AR-3s, and even the later KLHs sounded like they had varying thicknesses of pillows stuffed in front of the grills. And this is just tonal balance. The KLH 9s brought sanity into the arena, with silky, massed violins, and a glimpse into the kind of soundstaging we take for granted in modern systems. But they were impossible to drive, lacked dynamic capabilities, and were a bitch to set up. I remember them all, because I owned them all.

Holt goaded, prodded, and laughed the industry into better efforts. For that, I am eternally grateful, because I am a music lover. His biting commentary got the industry going, and probably put 10,000 garage-bound innovators to work striving for something better.

However, his recent comments about the current state of the industry are simply not true. Sorry, Mr. Holt. I have gone to (and currently go to) as many live concerts as you do, and there are 1,000 system combinations currently being manufactured that will supply STUNNING realism in a home listening situation. I call that progress. Especially, since you can go out, now, and buy a $600 pair of speakers, $2000 worth of amplifiers, source components, and cables, and truly experience realistic soundstaging, dynamics, and tonal balance.

I call that progress. I can remember when things weren't so good for music lovers.

Boomers? I won't comment. I saw this coming. Anyone who didn't is blind or ignorant. I started buying gold and silver a decade ago. Mr. Holt, you have to take care of yourself. Whining doesn't help. Besides, your generation is part of the problem.

Happy listening, all.

Clifton, thanks for adding your real-world experience commentary.

I realize DBT will probably be argued until the end of time, but I think JA has good points about it in his "Watching the Detectives" column from October.
As for JGH, I'm interested to read a follow up.
Since I'm still fairly new to the High End, I'm only somewhat familiar with his work.

You are most welcome, Elk, and thank you for the kind words.

I think Mr. Holt was always somewhat of a diva. Talented people usually are, and Mr. Holt was (and, I am sure, still is) extremely talented. Thus, I think buried in the subtext of Mr. Holt's surface bitterness is a bit of regret that he is no longer king of the high-fidelity hill. He is no longer sought after as the ultimate authority on things musical. This is amateur psychology on my part, of course, since I know Mr. Holt only through his writings on musical playback equipment, but it makes sense. For a long time, Mr. Holt was the uncontested, ultimate authority on home music systems. Now, the industry has outlived his niche in it. It is always a big come-down when you are no longer number one.

Few of us, though, ever get to be number one in anything. I hope Mr. Holt remembers, with both pride and fondness, his contributions to our current cornucopia of high fidelity abundance. Perhaps he will mellow out with the passage of time.

Cheers, and happy tunes.

Wasn't Julian Hirsch the most known name in audio testing review stuff? At least in vols, and mass fi? This magazine sure did go through some equipment, for the masses. http://www.roger-russell.com/magrevsr.htm I thought Audio was teh best of the mass magazines, not of teh "underground" variety. Audio did a much more technical test, and a much better presentation, SR mag just blew through most of it, too glossy image. Audio was more technical, seemed more knowledgeable, SR was too general. Now it seems StereoPhile is getting too imaginary, with words that mean nothing, but weird perceptions, that seem cosmic. Only the JA measurment sections bring it back to earth. Some reviewers perceptions, might be born of too late nite writings, and they may be in a dream sequence. Home come in video, it's measurable for differences, but in audio, they wanna keep it all mystical, and just so unatainable, mostly maybe a marketing ploy on the parts of many makers of really not so unique stuff. Video is probably more complicated, and it's all measurable, it either is or it ain't. Audio, is too, but maybe it's better for writers to keep it bizzare, it gives em something to say next month, like another month makes such big changes in this week's magic product....it all went into bizzaro world, when a piece of wire became a component.

"Words that mean nothing." Hmmmm. Now, how would you know about that , Mr. Hammertongue?

So. Get this, y'all. DUP, the literary critic. The master of all elements of style, the pundit of prose. The authority we all seek, concerning matters of syntax, pith, and (shudder) spelling.

DUP, it's okay if you criticize somebody else's taste in music or playback equipment -- there's an element of subjectivity in these matters that barely lets you squeeze through the cracks in the edifice of informed opinion opened by vagaries in personal taste.

But WRITING? YOU are going to critique somebody else's WRITING?

BWAAAHAAAAHAAAAHAAAHA...

Good one, DUP.

Maybe we can get you on the editorial board at The New Yorker. Your mastery of the mother tongue can amaze larger and more sophisticated audiences than we poor music-obsessed dupes.

Go for it. DUP for Wit of the Year. DUP, the Shakespeare of Audio!

Right.

since the day i received this issue i have tried to figure out how to interpret mr.holt. on one hand he deserves the respect of everyone who enjoys quality reproduction of music in a home setting for he surely had as much a hand in its development as many engineers, marketing and manufecturers did. but his final comment reminds me of a grumpy old man, similar to many who wish that todays generation of young people were more respectful of alot of things. it is a view simiar to a group of people in each of many past generations. if any readers out there are lucky enough to still have your father, uncle, or grandfather, ask them if they are happy with today's generation versus their generation. so taken in that context, maybe we should not be so disappointed or saddended with just mr. holt. we should realize that even though we hold his writings and knowledge throughout his career with high esteem, he is still becoming a man of advanced age and looking at life through eyes of a different generation.

Foresutheth, a fuse is a fuse, by anyother name, it would sound teh same

Foresutheth?

I can't be certain but I beleive he's saying that the early days of recovery following a foreskin removal operation aren't the most ideal for judging the benefits of fuse swapping.