With the right headphones, some EQ, and basic Meier type crossfeed I get externalization similar to that of nearfield speakers.
-
WANTED: Happy members who like to discuss audio and other topics related to our interest. Desire to learn and share knowledge of science required. There are many reviews of audio hardware and expert members to help answer your questions. Click here to have your audio equipment measured for free!
How do you hear headphone 'soundstage'
- Thread starter solderdude
- Start date
With the right headphones, some EQ, and basic Meier type crossfeed I get externalization similar to that of nearfield speakers.
This supports my initial comment that it takes more than a specific set of headphones, it needs some sort of binauralization, in your case this is achieved with the Meier crossfeed.
I guess you can look at like that. OTOH I basically consider crossfeed a necessity for headphone listening, externalization or not, as I get headaches otherwise. I don't get the externalization with all headphones either, even when EQed to similar targets and using crossfeed, while some have quite a bit or externalization without crossfeed.
IME there is a fairly continuous progression as you improve raw FR, pinna interaction, and signal processing and not a discontinuous leap.
Of coruse all of this is highly personal. Some people don't get any externalization at all, even with binaural recordings.
I'm not involved in the music business at all, so certainly not my creation, ha! I don't know how they created that effect of her voice radiating front to back as it was panning side to side, but it's certainly baked into the track, the whole track hasn't been recorded as a binaural recording, but that one effect might have been recorded binaurally perhaps and then mixed in - I'm guessing.....or maybe they applied an artificial HRTF to her voice and moved it around "electronically", in fact her voice pans so quick left & right and backwards & forwards that I don't think she'd be able to move that quick around a dummy head during a binaural recording, unless they pre-recorded her voice and then panned it around a 7.1 speaker system with the dummy head in the middle, but really I don't know how they did it! It's probably the most extreme externalisation I've experienced in a 2-channel recording, but there are some other tracks where similar stuff happens.
Yeah, maybe, I've not listened to any significant number of binaural recordings, I think I listened to a short demo once, but not been exposed to binaural recordings really.
D
Deleted member 58722
Guest
Waves Abbey Road studio 3........
Ah, in relation to what?
I achieve substantial externalisation purely by parametric EQ of my LCD-2s, that is fairly consistent across recordings and placement (because Audeze planars are relatively insensitive to seal and placement). This EQ substantially deviates from Harman but is nonetheless the best balance between FR and spatial properties I've experienced yet. As I have written about, the average HRTF for "Asians" insofar as there can be a meaningful average, appears significantly different from "Caucasians". Chesky binaural sounds like ass to me, EQ or not for that reason. The Amber Rubarth recording sounds like a mass of indistinct sounds clinging to my scalp, flitting in and out of my head.
My EQ headphones do a real good illusion of nearfield monitors on recordings with relatively stronger reverb -- think Bon Jovi's Livin' on a Prayer. As in I can distinguish where the instruments emanate from relative to each other in a left-right arch with depth, where the drum kit is, and I can localise each cymbal, and the ambient reverb envelopes me to the back of my head.
Even poorer recordings like Eva Cassidy's magnificent rendition of Wade in the Water provide me externalisation of Eva's voice, backing vocals (I count five men, 2 on the left, 3 on the right) and all instruments. The externalisation exists even for the ground loop that's clear in the recording!
The best part? I'm a skeptical listener. I would have Genelecs if I had the space. I am rarely impressed by headphones, and I know enough about spatial audio to be thoroughly unconvinced by reverb gimmicks/poor HRTFs/crossfeed (for the latter, except in extreme cases of hard panning like Sam and Dave's Soul Man). The externalisation is so compelling I cannot deny it. But I don't pretend that these are the spatial cues that are meant to be heard. Hence I have refrained from calling it accurate. I prefer to call what I have spatially and tonally plausible in a way I find deeply satisfying and moving to speakers would frankly mostly down to communal experience and the industrial design.
kemmler3D
Master Contributor
I've got some very convincing externalization by using the Shannon Pierce BRIRs https://github.com/ShanonPearce/ASH-Listening-Set but the effect on FR is too extreme. If I mix it in at -10dB or so, the headphones still sound pretty natural / normal, but the soundstage moves slightly out and in front of me - which you should expect with a binaural impulse response of speakers that are slightly in front of the mics. The soundstage is also subjectively "smoother" in that things seem to be placed further apart and continuously, if that makes sense. Pretty nice effect overall, I think I prefer it to dry.
I get what you mean about a continuous soundstage. Often I perceive sound from headphones only at 9, 12 and 3 o'clock. My PEQ consistently allows me to localise instruments diagonally in front. I have a couple of other EQ profiles with even more externalisation but wonky FR. Too little treble or some treble peaking. But considering my LCD-2 revision has no real measurements yet, getting as close as I have by ear is really gratifying.
There are plugins that do this for you, but I have great fun imagining this some 40 years back, the artist running around a dummy head microphone trying to sing properly at the same time and some producer yelling from the control room to run faster since this is what the kids want to hear these days
D
Deleted member 58722
Guest
The Plugin I use for headphone listening... puts me ( virtually ) in abbey road studio 3 control room listening to either the nearfield monitors, or the main speakers. very cool. https://www.waves.com/plugins/abbey-road-studio-3
9/12/& 3 o'clock is sometimes related to what headphone you use in my experience. My HD600 gives me 9/12/& 3 o'clock, but my other headphones are better at providing smoother & more accurate panning. I think this is related to the classic "3 blob effect" that people often talk about with the HD600/650/6XX.
Ha, yeah, that is funny, but surely they weren't trying this out 40 years back were they, or were they??There are plugins that do this for you, but I have great fun imagining this some 40 years back, the artist running around a dummy head microphone trying to sing properly at the same time and some producer yelling from the control room to run faster since this is what the kids want to hear these days
Yes, I think it's a composite of many variables, some of which pertain to the source recording, and can't be manipulated through headphone design or EQ. The FR at the eardrum is a result of the driver angle, driver response, EQ response, pinna response just to name a few variables
Soundstage is quite an unknown property in headphones, how it's created, and which if any measurements relate to it. So it is the dark art side of headphones!
I think a little bit of crossfeed can mitigate some of that 3 blob effects
Doesn't work for most recordings in my experience, except for extremely hard-panned ones. Messes up the perceived FR into something that's very elevated in the pinna gain range. I think it's because you are adding another layer of inter-aural cues to recordings, which may interfere with some inter-aural cues already embedded in the recording and just in need of headphones and/or EQ that allow a realistic HRTF to be reproduced.
They were, at least for recordings of radio drama.
charleski
Major Contributor
One thing to note is that these are designed for use with headphones that are EQ’d to a diffuse field target. Bass, in particular, needs to be flat, and I’ve found I need to bring down the broad 3kHz hump by a few dB.
I’ve found these work quite well in terms of placing the sound in an imaginary space in front of you, with a feeling of depth that’s absent from simple crossfeed. Unfortunately it doesn’t feel ‘real’, it’s more like my hearing has been transplanted to an alternate space (and works better if I close my eyes). But these IRs are the best I’ve found, certainly superior to some plugins I've tried.
An example of a mainstream recording with sufficiently plausible interaural cues that, when combined with my EQ'd headphones, gives significant head externalisation while sounding tonally plausible.
On Tidal, Alicia Keys' main vocal feels about 5m away, with the keyboard to her right at 1 o'clock and slightly behind. Her dubbed voice is in front of her main vocal and diagonally lower. To the left at 11 o'clock is the drum kit, I can localise each cymbal on the drum kit. Electric guitar is 4 o'clock, slightly behind me and projected outside of the headphones. The backing vocals ("Yeah, she is") emanate from an arc from 10 o'clock to 2 o'clock. I count six voices, possibly eight, split evenly left and ride.
Similar threads
