Properties of speakers that creates a large and precise soundstage

[tmuikku]

Emlin, yes, D/R ratio changes and also direction of speakers to ear (azimuth angle), and all early reflections change in delay, direction and amplitude including vertical early reflections. I do not know what details go into the change of perception as every room and speaker and positioning is different, and what detail had to go over some threshold, but it's not even necessary to know all the details: as the perception changed from one to another, then everything that matters for it to happen would have.

It might feel great difference, or feel minor, try various recordings and if they sound nicer on either side and which one you like, or does it matter.

If you find it fun and important, playing with toe-in and base width between speakers, and relative position of the whole listening triangle to room boundaries, is now possible to hear using the transition as kind of a root. Having two perspectives to the sound provided by the transition kind of helps to understand better what you hear, start resolving how everything affects and tune the system, and ear Now one could start working on the details inside out, basing on perception.

 

[Emlin]

Here are my points:

• This thread is about the properties of speakers that have good soundstage. Speakers are only one part of the combination that leads to the perceptual experience we call soundstage.
• Member @Suono wrote "It is sufficient to make a stereo recording and play it back in your system to understand how faithful it is and no particular imagination of the brain is needed. will fully respect what happened. intensity and arrival times at the microphones will reconstruct the stage and spatiality". This is incorrect because physical information is lost due to techniques involved in stereo recording and reproduction. For synthetic sounds, that information is simply not present.
• The lost/missing information is "volumetric". Standard microphones represent only what's happening at a single point in space using some combination of pressure and 1-dimensional velocity. More advanced microphones can represent what's happening at that point in the soundfield more precisely by capturing pressure and velocity along 3-dimensional axes (so three velocities and one pressure are necessary to understand the full picture at that point).
• Two speakers cannot represent volumetric information. What they do in combination with the room, to reproduce a stereo recording, cannot be optimized to match what is happening physically in the recording venue. But it is extremely interesting that room reflections and speaker directivity can, to some extent, replace that lost physical information due to the way our hearing system works and interprets directional sound.
• We have to live with the physical limitations of stereo and not imagine that it is more capable than it is. Better physical representation of the complexity of the soundfield would requires more complex audio systems.
• Within the limits of stereo, and this is the underlying subject of this thread, it is not completely clear what role speaker directivity and the room play. We do not yet have the studies that give a simple, comprehensive model. Work by Griesinger, like @tmuikku and @Duke discussed, has been very helpful getting us this far. And speaker design has not yet moved past work done by Toole, for the most part.

So the recording doesn't matter? Is that what you are saying?

 

[Duke]

So the recording doesn't matter? Is that what you are saying?

Of course that's not what he's saying.

The idea is to get the most accurate and/or most enjoyable and/or most convincing presentation we can out of the recording.

 

[Emlin]

Of course that's not what he's saying.

The idea is to get the most accurate and/or most enjoyable and/or most convincing presentation we can out of the recording.

Not the original soundstage, then. I know what you mean, but I disagree.

 

[Duke]

Not the original soundstage, then. I know what you mean, but I disagree.

If you don't mind elaborating, what exactly are you disagreeing with?

 

[Emlin]

If you don't mind elaborating, what exactly are you disagreeing with?

The assertions that soundstage should come from the room and speakers and not from the recording.

 

[Descartes]

Yes, psychoacoustics are very important. For example, listening to music in the dark, with the lights off, will give a very different soundstage compared to listening to music with the lights on.
No better way to make the speakers disappear than to turn off the lights so you don’t see them.
In my case, if I close my eyes, the soundstage gets completely ruined and chaotic.

While properly engineered speakers help provide a better soundstage, I think the most important part is to set up the speakers for proper stereo imaging, which, in a household usually conflicts with a lot of things.

After a nice Armagnac or Cognac the speakers disappear and the sound stage expands!

 

[Emlin]

After a nice Armagnac or Cognac the speakers disappear and the sound stage expands!

Those, along with a single malt, are the spirits of the audio world.

 

[Duke]

The assertions that soundstage should come from the room and speakers and not from the recording.+

Who is actually saying that?

The speaker and room are effectively in the signal path in most cases, are they not? And arguably that's the most critical part of the signal path.

 

[ahofer]

Those, along with a single malt, are the spirits of the audio world.

 

[Emlin]

Who is actually saying that?

The speaker and room are effectively in the signal path in most cases, are they not? And arguably that's the most critical part of the signal path.

Read above. Of course they are there, but to claim that a good soundstage is reliant on having early reflections is nonsense. You can get a wider one by playing with reflections, but that will apply to all recordings. Like turning on an effects box. I want the soundstage of the recording, not my room and speakers.

 

[Duke]

Read above.

Please provide a link or post number. I'm not interested in reading through a bunch of posts trying to figure out which one(s) you're referring to, especially when you already know which one(s) you are referring to since you made the claim.

Of course they are there, but to claim that a good soundstage is reliant on having early reflections is nonsense.

I am not an advocate of early reflections. I advocate for minimizing early reflections and encouraging later ones, as long as they are spectrally correct.

I want the soundstage of the recording, not my room and speakers.

Agreed. But unless your setup does not have room or speakers in the signal path, imo it makes sense to pay attention to both, and how they affect the soundstage. Ignoring them does not make their effects go away.

 

[Emlin]

Please provide a link. I'm not interested in reading through a bunch of posts trying to figure out which one(s) you're referring to, especially when you already know which one(s0 you are referring to since you made the claim.



I am not an advocate of early reflections. I advocate for minimizing early reflections and encouraging later ones, as long as they are spectrally correct.



Agreed. But unless your setup does not have room or speakers in the signal path, imo it makes sense to pay attention to both, and how they affect the soundstage. Ignoring them does not make their effects go away.

I had to read it, why shouldn't you?
I don't ignore rooms either, but I do try to minimise their effect. I certainly don't try to use them for the sake of euphonics that tend to make all recordings sound the same.

 

[Duke]

I had to read it, why shouldn't you?

I'm not the one making the claim that others are asserting "the soundstage should come from the room and speakers and not from the recording."

Again, I invite you to show me a post that makes this claim. It may well exist, I'm not saying nobody ever said it, but I don't recall THAT assertion being made in this thread.

If extraordinary claims call for extraordinary proof, than ordinary claims call for ordinary proof. Posting a link or post number would be ordinary proof.

I don't ignore rooms either, but I do try to minimise their effect.

I agree with this approach.

I certainly don't try to use them for the sake of euphonics that tend to make all recordings sound the same.

And I agree with this approach.

 

[Emlin]

I'm not the one making the claim that others are asserting "the soundstage should come from the room and speakers and not from the recording."

Again, I invite you to show me a post that makes this claim. It may well exist, I'm not saying nobody ever said it, but I don't recall THAT assertion being made in this thread.

If extraordinary claims call for extraordinary proof, than ordinary claims call for ordinary proof. Posting a link would be ordinary proof.



I agree with this approach.



And I agree with this approach.

I'm glad that you now agree with me overall, but I'm curious as to why you disagreed with me before. Doesn't matter, I'm off to bed now anyway.

 

[Duke]

I'm glad that you now agree with me overall, but I'm curious as to why you disagreed with me before. Doesn't matter, I'm off to bed now anyway.

Must admit I was pleasantly surprised that you and I apparently agree on quite a bit.

It sounded to me like you were putting words into @Curvature's mouth, and maybe into others', in your posts number 662 and 666 above.

 

[witwald]

I had to read it, why shouldn't you?

Maybe it would be nice for us poor readers to quote one's sources? Such an approach is helpful to all. That way we could go straight to it and read what's there.

 

[Descartes]

Those, along with a single malt, are the spirits of the audio world.

To each their own I would rather drink this

https://www.thewhiskyexchange.com/p/67819/baron-de-lustrac-1940-armagnac

 

[jim1274]

FWIW, I was skeptical of a direct firing “box” speaker even coming close to an Omni (or even to a dipole), on the soundstage front, but changed my view today when trying some different “box” speaker placements. I was previously comparing the box soundstage too far from the front wall in a more near field listening arrangement. After some adjustments in location, the box soundstage became much larger. The soundstage has a different character with the box speakers, maybe preferable to many with better spatial localization of instruments in the mix. I’m p

I read through the 38 new posts since this post almost 2 weeks ago. Just thought I would weigh in after finally doing an instantaneous A/B for my Duevel Omnis vs “box” speaker. It’s really hard to compare without switching back and forth in real time. The difference in sound stage is pronounced when compared directly. When switching from Omni to box, the soundstage collapses by comparison, most notable in depth and also in height. The performers seem to occupy a much larger area with the Omnis. The box speakers never seem to completely disappear like the Omnis do, becoming more pronounced quickly as one moves off the dead center sweet spot. The increase in reflections from behind and to the side of the Omnis has a whole different character than the reduced reflected sound from a forward firing box speaker has an entirely different character, in a good way IMHO. The only other set of ears available is the wife, so I said nothing and just asked for impression and comment after
going back and forth on a few songs she knows well. She said the the Omnis sounded more like a real band in the room or some
Such and added that they sounded very different.

 

[Suono]

They will not. They will reconstruct arrival time and intensity alone for that location of the microphone in space alone. In stereo, all microphone signals are ported into two front-facing channels. In doing so all of the volumetric information is lost. This is spatial distortion. You cannot analyze a stereo signal and reconstruct, from a recording, the distance between sources, for example, and so speakers cannot reproduce it. However, room reflections to some extent augment that lost volumetric information but, at a cost, since the result depends on the room and speaker directivity.

"Soundstage" is a combination of speakers, room, ears/brain and recording. We need to understand the contribution of each to what we hear.

@tmuikku You might be interested in this from our previous exchange in this thread.

have you ever done the experiment? Have you ever listened to a stereo recording made with good microphones and recorder? obviously the listening result will depend on the quality of the playback system and the room. large room well treated acoustically and speakers with wide and regular dispersion
the spatial information will all be there