How holographic can a soundstage be?

[MakeMineVinyl]

I totally agree. If it's in the recording, and it is in least every one that I've heard, and if you aren't hearing it, there's something wrong.

The problem with this, I think, is that some people simply don't expect to hear it, so don't listen out for it. If they did, they would pay more attention to their rooms and speakers.

That's my experience as well - people who hear sound literally filling to beyond all the room's walls is startling if they have never experienced it. It can be a more coherent experience than with surround speakers. Most people who think of stereo don't think much beyond left-right. The room's reflections have to be minimized for this to work because the sound of the room is not the soundstage in the recording; its an added effect, and usually not a very good effect at that.

 

[Blaspheme]

Most people who think of stereo don't think much beyond left-right.

Yes, including me, originally.

 

[Blaspheme]

I purchased a pair of new speakers last year. In the store I asked my dealer to connect a Hegel 120 to them so that I could be sure that my Hegel at home will also be able to drive them. At the end of the listening session I asked my dealer to connect a Hegel H590 to the same speakers. I expected to hear tremendously improvement in sound quality. However, I could not hear any difference at all as compared to the H120. I looked at my dealer and said "To be honest, to me they almost sound the same." ...

Hegel was on my short list a while back when I needed a new amp, but the dealer was phasing them out and wouldn't send one of the remaining stock to my state for listening. Bummer. Hegel reckon "the digital section [of the H120] is taken directly from its bigger siblings" so it should sound much the same, until bigger speakers/loads demand more power/current.

 

[jsrtheta]

I totally agree. If it's in the recording, and it is in least every one that I've heard, and if you aren't hearing it, there's something wrong.

The problem with this, I think, is that some people simply don't expect to hear it, so don't listen out for it. If they did, they would pay more attention to their rooms and speakers.

Assuming you meant to say "it is in at least every one I've heard", I have to wonder what genres you are referring to.

Two-channel stereo is not a great limitation; I've heard amazing depth and placement on many recordings. It's astonishing.

But if the music isn't engineered for that in the studio, and/or if the production isn't done with it in mind (and by competent personnel), then it just ain't there. There is plenty of music recorded badly, or to a different end than the kind of three-dimensionality you're concerned with here.

And in my experience, if the room, speaker placement, etc. aren't right, it ain't happening no matter how well produced the recording is.

 

[Berlin]

Regarding soundstage and depth this is one of my all time favourites:

Bugge Wesseltoft - Heim

Bugge Wesseltoft's recordings are great. I agree, this one in particular provides the illusion of depth: piano in the front (almost in my living room) and all other instruments in the back on different layers. I would really like to listen to this recording (and all the others mentioned in this thread) on a reference system in a perfectly treated room. I am still thinking that I am expecting too much. Once this pandemic is over I will try to find someone in my city who really has the perfect set-up... Unfortunately Hans Beekhuyzen lives too far away. I really have doubts that his so called "set-up 1" keeps what it promises...

 

[Berlin]

The room's reflections have to be minimized for this to work because the sound of the room is not the soundstage in the recording; its an added effect, and usually not a very good effect at that.

I once read that the best location for listening to music would be a desert without any wind... It for sure helps choosing the listening position such that direct sound is dominant and reflected sound hits the ear at a much lower intensity and with a sufficient (whatever this means) time difference. If I would treat my living room in such a way that reflections are eliminated it wouldn't be my living room any more. I have doubts that EQ can correct reflections, i.e. make a room less reverberant...

 

[dasdoing]

But if the music isn't engineered for that in the studio, and/or if the production isn't done with it in mind (and by competent personnel), then it just ain't there. There is plenty of music recorded badly, or to a different end than the kind of three-dimensionality you're concerned with here

imo it is all about the reverb. the first reverb alogrythms were very bad, and they were over decades. so the reverb involved to be more of an effect, rather than an "ambience simulation". today we are used to this sound, so even the algos are now cabable of natural reverb, it is not realy been used since it is wont produce the mainstream sound. an artificial soundig reverb obviously gives a bad depth ilusion, since our brain wont be able to translate it to a real space

 

[dasdoing]

also, close-miking is the norm nowadays. though it has the advantage of avoiding the problems of the recording space, it also sucks out the natural sound out of the band. compression is than used to create "more space", and reverb to create the ambience. it is hard to make so much artificial processing sounding like listening to instruments played in a real place.

 

[Blaspheme]

Bugge Wesseltoft's recordings are great. I agree, this one in particular provides the illusion of depth: piano in the front (almost in my living room) and all other instruments in the back on different layers. I would really like to listen to this recording (and all the others mentioned in this thread) on a reference system in a perfectly treated room. I am still thinking that I am expecting too much. Once this pandemic is over I will try to find someone in my city who really has the perfect set-up... Unfortunately Hans Beekhuyzen lives too far away. I really have doubts that his so called "set-up 1" keeps what it promises...

That album—Heim, did I get it right?—didn't show up in Apple Music/Tidal so I tried Moving (he was referred to as 'Scandi nu-jazz' which was fun) which had depth in spades (for me anyway). Smooth and relaxing—my other music discovery yesterday was Jack Off Jill, after seeing Poppy released a faithfully-rendered cover of Fear of Dying, so Bugge was the contrast.

I agree that almost everything new that I listen to has pretty good stereo actually, I imagine that reflects current studio/production techniques (reverb, delay, phase-shift, frequency shaping, etc built in to relevant algorithms) as well as my preferred genres. There's the odd exception of course, I discussed Godspeed You! Black Emperor via another forum and we concluded that their mono-adjacent mix was likely a political statement. Marxist mono for the people, maybe. No bourgeois holograms for you.

 

[Blaspheme]

Speaking of bourgeois, I checked Hans B's channel loudspeaker placement video—some of it, my ad-blocking killed the feed at the first break I I wasn't motivated to change browsers—I did like the effect where he zooms from the image on the in-frame monitor on his desk to full screen and back.

Back in the distant past I read a sidebar on Audio Physic—they do somewhat directional speakers favoured for the 'disappearing act' which basically means effectively rendered soundstage and imaging where the loudspeaker doesn't dominate as the obvious sound source/location—which described their original near-field listening recipe (basically a wider but very toed-in version of the studio mixing desk, but in your living room). Trigger warning for some of you as it's attached to a Fremer review in Stereophile, nonetheless a useful starting point for me in discovering the ingredients for stereo (beyond left-right as discussed). I'm not prose-phobic. I ended up going that way rather than the even diffusion model, but I reckon you can get good results from several different approaches.

Actually it's not the sidebar, but p3 of the review where the speaker placement discussion begins. Let's not start a discussion about MF though.

 

[MattHooper]

Speaking of bourgeois, I checked Hans B's channel loudspeaker placement video—some of it, my ad-blocking killed the feed at the first break I I wasn't motivated to change browsers—I did like the effect where he zooms from the image on the in-frame monitor on his desk to full screen and back.

Back in the distant past I read a sidebar on Audio Physic—they do somewhat directional speakers favoured for the 'disappearing act' which basically means effectively rendered soundstage and imaging where the loudspeaker doesn't dominate as the obvious sound source/location—which described their original near-field listening recipe (basically a wider but very toed-in version of the studio mixing desk, but in your living room). Trigger warning for some of you as it's attached to a Fremer review in Stereophile, nonetheless a useful starting point for me in discovering the ingredients for stereo (beyond left-right as discussed). I'm not prose-phobic. I ended up going that way rather than the even diffusion model, but I reckon you can get good results from several different approaches.

Actually it's not the sidebar, but p3 of the review where the speaker placement discussion begins. Let's not start a discussion about MF though.

I've had the Audio Physic Virgo 2, Libra and Scorpio in my room, and have listened to various other models. They really do a "disappearing/soundstaging" act like few other speakers. Really a sonic characteristic of the brand.

 

[Blaspheme]

I've had the Audio Physic Virgo 2, Libra and Scorpio in my room, and have listened to various other models. They really do a "disappearing/soundstaging" act like few other speakers. Really a sonic characteristic of the brand.

That's interesting! I think so too, at least based on the range of speakers I've spent time with. At times I listen to other (often very nice) speakers and think "but they don't do that thing". Oh well. I was thinking of your post regarding omnis btw. If memory serves adequately, can you elaborate compared to your MBLs? I think you said MBLs. No pressure.

Fyi I couldn't afford Virgo 25 at the time, listened to Step, then bought Sitara (all 25 series). Recently, I bought Codex. Not reading too much into listening impressions just now though as I blew a tweeter/crossover (via my own stupidity) and that one is off to the speaker doctor. I guess it's been interesting to check the > 3800 kHz contribution, or lack thereof ... ... soundstage breadth/depth is still palpable, but image location and specificity is rather degraded.

 

[MattHooper]

That's interesting! I think so too, at least based on the range of speakers I've spent time with. I was thinking of your post regarding omnis btw. If memory serves adequately, can you elaborate compared to your MBLs? I think you said MBLs. No pressure.

Fyi I couldn't afford Virgo 25 at the time, listened to Step, then bought Sitara (all 25 series). Recently, I bought Codex. Not reading too much into listening impressions just now though as I blew a tweeter/crossover (via my own stupidity) and that one is off to the speaker doctor. I guess it's been interesting to check the > 3800 kHz contribution, or lack thereof ...

Wow, you have the Audio Physic Codex? That was on my "must listen" list when I was going through a huge speaker replacement search a couple years ago. That's the "one that got away" as I never heard it. I did listen to the newer Avanti, though. It did the usual Audio Physic stuff, though I preferred the slightly warmer tone (to me ear) of the older models. What a bummer about blowing the tweeter so soon.

I'd say the Audio Physic probably competed best with the MBL omnis for the sense of disappearing as sound sources, imaging/soundstaging.
(Though waveform speakers, my Joseph Audio and Thiel speakers do very well too). That sense of teasing out the tapestry of various elements in the mix, and each appearing in it's own space in the room.

The omnis just went beyond even the APs though, to truly spooky. It really was just performers beaming in to the room kind of stuff.
Also, I found the MBLs sounded somewhat more refined in terms of an effortless sense of resolution and smoothness (and the AP speakers are, themselves, well known for those qualities to begin with). With the AP speakers playing, say, a recording of classical guitar would produce a very holographic presentation of the guitar between the speakers with great clarity and detail. But it was a bit more of "I'm listening to a very impressive reproduction" than the MBL, so where the audio physic I could hear the fingers picking the strings it was a bit high-lighted and "hi-fi" or mechanical, a bit of an edge. Whereas the MBL produced a freaky life-like type of resolution that mimicked more what I hear in real life. So the finger picking on strings wasn't artificial or edged or hard, but just sounded like that super subtle sound of human fingers, human flesh, on the strings. I don't think I've ever heard a presentation quite that real sounding.

 

[Cadguy]

@MattHooper I've been interested in getting a pair of MBLs. How would you describe the vertical height of the ambient/reverberant field? Does the illusion seem to fill the front of the room up towards the ceiling?

 

[MattHooper]

@MattHooper I've been interested in getting a pair of MBLs. How would you describe the vertical height of the ambient/reverberant field? Does the illusion seem to fill the front of the room up towards the ceiling?

Hmm...as for vertical height of the soundstage I never noticed any deficits or limitation. When on speaker stands they were an average floor standing speaker height and sounded it. Though no sense of "ceiling" on the sound, very open.

The ambient/reverberant field depended of course on the amount of room reflection.

My room was constructed with the help of an acoustician and contains built in room treatments, including a felt drop down ceiling bulkhead over much of the listening area. The room floor was mostly covered by a thick shag rug, the listening sofa very large, and I have thick velvet curtains that I can pull to any portion of the walls in the room. Plus I can changed the reflectivity of the wall behind the speakers (4 way velvet masking system could cover or open up the sonically reflective projection screen behind the speakers). So the point is I had, and used, lots of flexibility in terms of dialing in the MBLs. The more absorbent I made the room, the more precisely it rendered the original acoustic between and around the speakers...getting close to a conventional speaker in that regard. The more reflective the room, the more spacious it sounded.

But I'd say they never lost the "omni magic." By that I mean, in really cutting down the reflections around the speaker, though the soundstage/imaging became more like a conventional forward firing speaker, it never went all the way. They still sounded "unboxy" in that electrostatic sense that you never quite get with box speakers, and still more effortlessly "disappearing" and dimensional. A recording of a guitarist still seemed to hang in the air in a more 3D way than regular speakers. It's just the exact acoustic character of a recording would become more defined.

I tended to have the room sort of "semi-damped," dialed such that the sound of the MBLs was really smooth, no "room hash," and recordings very particularly rendered, but with just enough reflectivity to 'open up' the sound a bit more, more spacious. The result, I found, was a best of both worlds: With just the right balance it wasn't like a very particular recording venue appeared "just between the speakers" like a portal - you know where you are in the acoustic of your own room staring between your speakers at a different acoustic. Rather, it's like the rest of the room around and beyond the MBLs BECAME the acoustic that was on the recording. The room would just melt away. It really produced some uncanny sensations with well recorded acoustic music, of say, sitting in the front row at a large venue listening to instruments being played or singing voices.

Hope that helps.

 

[Blaspheme]

Wow, you have the Audio Physic Codex? That was on my "must listen" list when I was going through a huge speaker replacement search a couple years ago. That's the "one that got away" as I never heard it. I did listen to the newer Avanti, though. It did the usual Audio Physic stuff, though I preferred the slightly warmer tone (to me ear) of the older models. What a bummer about blowing the tweeter so soon.

I'd say the Audio Physic probably competed best with the MBL omnis for the sense of disappearing as sound sources, imaging/soundstaging.
(Though waveform speakers, my Joseph Audio and Thiel speakers do very well too). That sense of teasing out the tapestry of various elements in the mix, and each appearing in it's own space in the room.

The omnis just went beyond even the APs though, to truly spooky. It really was just performers beaming in to the room kind of stuff.
Also, I found the MBLs sounded somewhat more refined in terms of an effortless sense of resolution and smoothness (and the AP speakers are, themselves, well known for those qualities to begin with). With the AP speakers playing, say, a recording of classical guitar would produce a very holographic presentation of the guitar between the speakers with great clarity and detail. But it was a bit more of "I'm listening to a very impressive reproduction" than the MBL, so where the audio physic I could hear the fingers picking the strings it was a bit high-lighted and "hi-fi" or mechanical, a bit of an edge. Whereas the MBL produced a freaky life-like type of resolution that mimicked more what I hear in real life. So the finger picking on strings wasn't artificial or edged or hard, but just sounded like that super subtle sound of human fingers, human flesh, on the strings. I don't think I've ever heard a presentation quite that real sounding.

Your comparison makes sense. I get those qualities also—from the AP—depending on the recording/genre/material. I've heard subjectively silkier systems also, but they've lacked the imaging precision and soundstage drama (overstating: pleasure perhaps, something to do with the sculptural form of the sounds in the room).

Which MBLs do you have btw? I'm not surprised if they are wonderful speakers.

Re Codex, yes I was taken with them. I bought Sitara originally because I could afford them and they had more bass than Step (floor stander vs mini-monitor respectively). They had a notably warmer mid-bass. Codex were pretty dry in my room—mid-bass was very flat both subjectively and measured—so both benefit from Sonarworks DSP as it happens, in opposite directions. Codex do bass extension much better, and macrodynamics, as you'd expect. Subjectively the mid-treble seems smoother and more detailed, though I couldn't see much in it in the measurements. Gen 2 vs gen 3 of the mid and tweeter drivers, with some different detail engineering maybe, plus different crossover points (2.5 vs 4-way) so potentially better optimised over smaller frequency bands. I didn't do enough measurements before the fuck-up in any case. Plus cicadas. They really messed up the distortion numbers.

Edit: re room, interesting that you've described acoustic treatment. I'm currently set up in a mezzanine loft, glazing on the sidewalls add reflection and widen the soundstage (even more than usual, I imagine). Open space behind/below the listening position mid-room, which is interesting. The room is quite dry overall, early decay time and T30 are both ~200 ms or less from 125 Hz up (and about 400 ms below that). The eventual listing space below (slowly renovating) has glazed sliding wall panels, so reflectivity can be varied significantly (temperature permitting). I'm thinking of adding sliding absorber and diffuser panels so sidewall first reflections can be fine tuned, as you use your curtains. Serendipitous absorption and diffraction occurs via architecture/materials (tatami floor, raked ceiling with timber slats over rockwool, lots of exposed timber structure posts/purlins/rafters). I had a conversation on another forum a while back with an apartment-dweller, whose concrete structure had EDT/T30 at roughly double my numbers (he taught me how to measure/interpret those things). That's a significant difference in acoustic environment to factor in (when thinking about soundstage and imaging) as well.

 

[MattHooper]

Interesting about the Codex, thanks.

Which MBLs do you have btw?

The MBL 121 stand mounted radialstrahlers.

I couldn't afford the bigger MBL 101s that I'd always lusted after. And couldn't countenance even the $18,000 Canadian for new 121s.
But an amazing bargain turned up: an MBL dealer had shipped a pair of 121s that got damaged in transit. All cosmetic, some scratches and a bent grill. I got them for just under 3 grand for a way of finally trying the MBL sound in my home. It worked out great since I never would have used the grills anyway, and cosmetically they looked perfect, super high quality, unless you knew were to look up close.

When I sold them a while back they went faster than any item I've ever seen. Upon listing them my inbox was flooded with offers - 37 as I remember the first day - and they sold in something like 30 minutes.

 

[Blaspheme]

Interesting about the Codex, thanks.

The MBL 121 stand mounted radialstrahlers.

I couldn't afford the bigger MBL 101s that I'd always lusted after. And couldn't countenance even the $18,000 Canadian for new 121s.
But an amazing bargain turned up: an MBL dealer had shipped a pair of 121s that got damaged in transit. All cosmetic, some scratches and a bent grill. I got them for just under 3 grand for a way of finally trying the MBL sound in my home. It worked out great since I never would have used the grills anyway, and cosmetically they looked perfect, super high quality, unless you knew were to look up close.

When I sold them a while back they went faster than any item I've ever seen. Upon listing them my inbox was flooded with offers - 37 as I remember the first day - and they sold in something like 30 minutes.

Re bargains, my Codex were someone's trade-in, I was looking for subwoofers to pair with Sitara, listened (my afternoon was free) and bought them instead, almost an impulse buy. I listened to Avanti briefly, not dissimilar sound until you really cranked them up (which I did). Almost the same price as new Avanti, so I didn't have to think about it.

I'm not surprised by the quick MBL sale.

 

[dasdoing]

If you have a dry (treated) room throw this freeware reverb in the chain: https://github.com/michaelwillis/dragonfly-reverb/releases/tag/3.2.5
use the "room" version. use 15% for early/earlysend/late and 100% for dry. the choose the clear(!) room which best translates to your fisical room (small/medium/large). with these settings the effect will be very sutle, but will create bigger soundstage

 

[Deleted member 24508]

That's interesting! I think so too, at least based on the range of speakers I've spent time with. At times I listen to other (often very nice) speakers and think "but they don't do that thing". Oh well. I was thinking of your post regarding omnis btw. If memory serves adequately, can you elaborate compared to your MBLs? I think you said MBLs. No pressure.

Fyi I couldn't afford Virgo 25 at the time, listened to Step, then bought Sitara (all 25 series). Recently, I bought Codex. Not reading too much into listening impressions just now though as I blew a tweeter/crossover (via my own stupidity) and that one is off to the speaker doctor. I guess it's been interesting to check the > 3800 kHz contribution, or lack thereof ... ... soundstage breadth/depth is still palpable, but image location and specificity is rather degraded.

I have Sitara 25's bought last year, upgraded from Yara 2 Classics. I tried larger AP's but my dedicated room is small (3.2 x 4.5 m) and bass was a problem especially from side firing woofers. I now use 2 subwoofers and block the ports on the Sitara's. This seems to suit my Vincent pre power amps and keeps all my listening within the class A range, they switch to AB at 10+ watts? I constructed large bass traps and added diffusion elements in the room, an enormous recliner also helps to suck bass and prevent rear reflections. Very happy especially since upgrading to Denifrips Aries II Dac. Exceptional soundstage for a small room.