SO ... HOW do we measure soundstage???

[audiofooled]

Really? That's the case for me with UNF.

Well, seeing thread about your setup, I guess that's another way of doing it. I do enjoy some of the "anechoic" effects myself, even though I listen far field. Simple volume control is what brings everything closer, but also more "tangible".

 

[UltraNearFieldJock]

I'm no expert, but for me, it's logical: the anechoic version comes very close to the sound stage of the recording (I'm thinking of sound engineers), the far field in a room is always a combination of the recording and the respective room acoustics. In both cases, however, the position and direction of the speakers are decisive.

 

[Justdafactsmaam]

You don’t get that we hear through the room. The reflective part needs to be sufficiently supressed in level or delayed. Ear compresses after 1 ms of the direct sound within ERB. There will be no other conflict than that of the models; they being here or I being there. There are many different recording setups; live , studio LEDE etc. Details are masked only when room effects get large enough so we use EQ.

I think I got what JJ was saying. But it seemed to me he was not addressing conflicting spatial cues between a recording and the listening room. It seemed he was talking about spatial cues of a single source of spatial cues in a given space

 

[Justdafactsmaam]

1. Hardly any mixes are made with crosstalk cancellation in mind except a very few ones made for headphones.

I am sure that’s true. And I am just speculating here but in the case of studio multi track recordings I doubt the following ever happens.

“Thank god for cross talk because when I do a hard pan I really did want the image to land directly on the speaker. How lucky am I that the speakers perfectly delineate my ideal sound stage?”

And for live acoustic recordings I truly doubt the following sentiment is ever expressed in the control room

“Thank god for cross talk and control room reflections! I am completely satisfied with this miniature soundstage I am achieving here at n the control room. I’d hate for it to sound a great deal more like the actual performance in size, depth, width, height, precision of imaging and concert hall reverb.”

I could be wrong. It’s pure speculation

A hard-panned sound object in a mix is just supposed to appear from that direction of the stereo field, the hard-panned sound object should be naturally heard from that direction with both ears in a similar way as we would hear a real sound object if it was coming from that same direction in our room. It would be completely unnatural if that sound were canceled out in the right ear just because it was coming from the left side of the room, that's not how our hearing works and that's not how loudspeakers set up in stereo are supposed to work either.

Hard pans land on the speakers when you have cross talk. So do you think that is the universal goal? Everyone who does a hard pan wanted the image to land on the speaker and are eternally grateful for cross talk preventing any imaging beyond the speakers?

 

[restorer-john]

I am sure that’s true. And I am just speculating here but in the case of studio multi track recordings I doubt the following ever happens.

“Thank god for cross talk because when I do a hard pan I really did want the image to land directly on the speaker. How lucky am I that the speakers perfectly delineate my ideal sound stage?”

And for live acoustic recordings I truly doubt the following sentiment is ever expressed in the control room

“Thank god for cross talk and control room reflections! I am completely satisfied with this miniature soundstage I am achieving here at n the control room. I’d hate for it to sound a great deal more like the actual performance in size, depth, width, height, precision of imaging and concert hall reverb.”

I could be wrong. It’s pure speculation


Hard pans land on the speakers when you have cross talk. So do you think that is the universal goal? Everyone who does a hard pan wanted the image to land on the speaker and are eternally grateful for cross talk preventing any imaging beyond the speakers?

There's a big difference between two channel recordings and stereophonic recordings and it's pretty clear most recording "engineers" have little to no concept of the latter.

 

[Justdafactsmaam]

I see what you mean. I don't hear my listening room either and a lot has to be done right for having preferable sound field. But that doesn't mean there are no reflections. Brain is used to resolving conflicting information and does this routinely. Many information that are deemed less important are simply being discarded.

Yes, we have been living with that handicap and accepting the massive limitations that come with it.

When you lose the cross talk a whole new world opens up

Listen to this:

But yes, it is also my preference of having as much of the direct sound as I can and let the recording do what it can. But I'm aware that some of the depth and spectral cues actually come from the reflections which normally can't be avoided. It's just that they are perceived as not being intrusive at all and have no effect on the overall timbre. After all, nobody ever listens in an anechoic chamber.

It seems that way until you lose the cross talk. The spatial cues on the recordings uninhibited by conflicting cues from the room and speaker cross talk are on a completely different level

 

[Blumlein 88]

There's a big difference between two channel recordings and stereophonic recordings and it's pretty clear most recording "engineers" have little to no concept of the latter.

Maybe they do have the idea of stereophonic recordings, but in how the music business is they get no chance to use it even if they wanted to do so.

 

[Justdafactsmaam]

There's a big difference between two channel recordings and stereophonic recordings and it's pretty clear most recording "engineers" have little to no concept of the latter.

But we are stuck with what was recorded. At least for now

 

[TLEDDY]

There's a big difference between two channel recordings and stereophonic recordings and it's pretty clear most recording "engineers" have little to no concept of the latter.

This is a thought-game, since I really don’t know what I am talking about.

location of an object in 3-dimensional planar space is determined by x,y,z point positions on the surface. Vertical positioning we can call gamma. It seems to me that if we could graph out the locus of the signal in those dimensions, we could measure sound placement in the horizontal listening field. Having the sound emerge from only two point sources seems to limit direct measurement to 3 dimensions x,y,z allowing for left/right/depth but no vertical component. Any gamma, or up/down is produced by listening room acoustics.

Please, if you do know what you are talking about, critique and add to the thought-game.

 

[Justdafactsmaam]

This is a thought-game, since I really don’t know what I am talking about.

location of an object in 3-dimensional planar space is determined by x,y,z point positions on the surface. Vertical positioning we can call gamma. It seems to me that if we could graph out the locus of the signal in those dimensions, we could measure sound placement in the horizontal listening field. Having the sound emerge from only two point sources seems to limit direct measurement to 3 dimensions x,y,z allowing for left/right/depth but no vertical component. Any gamma, or up/down is produced by listening room acoustics.

Please, if you do know what you are talking about, critique and add to the thought-game.

Head transfer function is what gives us 3 dimensional spatial cues using two ears.

 

[TLEDDY]

Head transfer function is what gives us 3 dimensional spatial cues using two ears.

Thank you! I looked up the reference: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Head-related_transfer_function

Very interesting … so the multidimensional process is executed in our head/brain. I have to say the mathematics presented is far above my knowledge base. Perhaps others could present a layman’s explanation?

 

[Justdafactsmaam]

Thank you! I looked up the reference: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Head-related_transfer_function

Very interesting … so the multidimensional process is executed in our head/brain. I have to say the mathematics presented is far above my knowledge base. Perhaps others could present a layman’s explanation?

No way. Forget the math. The principles are easier to understand. Our heads, torsos and ears block, bend and filter the sound before it hits our eardrums. And millions of years of evolution has lead to this sound filtering and brain decoding that allows us to localize sound sources.

Great for enjoying imaging and sound staging but evolved for finding your next meal and avoiding being something else’s meal.

And when you apply it to stereo the issues become obvious. If the left ear is hearing the right speaker and reflections of both speakers off of all the room boundaries and same for the right ear the spatial cues on the recording are competing with the all those conflicting spatial cues from the speakers and room boundaries.

 

[Thomas_A]

I think I got what JJ was saying. But it seemed to me he was not addressing conflicting spatial cues between a recording and the listening room. It seemed he was talking about spatial cues of a single source of spatial cues in a given space

I just can't see the problem as long as you don't mess up the early reflections. Mixes are so different you can have both worlds if you have a the setup for it, they being here or I being there. What about Marcus King jamming in the van? I surely have no problems of they being in the next room in front of me. Works fine.

Edit: And this how they did it.

 

[Axo1989]

True. But talking about the "soundstage" of a DAC is like talking about the amount of cheese in a strawberry, IMO. Completely nonsensical.

Another soundstage thread, which I will read for sure. But at this stage (the first page) I'm really feeling like some strawberry cheesecake.

 

[goat76]

And when you apply it to stereo the issues become obvious. If the left ear is hearing the right speaker and reflections of both speakers off of all the room boundaries and same for the right ear the spatial cues on the recording are competing with the all those conflicting spatial cues from the speakers and room boundaries.

Can you please point me to some kind of white paper about stereo reproduction where it is described that the sound coming from the left channel is exclusively meant to be heard by the left ear, and vice versa for the right channel?

I don't think you will find any such information as that has never been the idea of stereo, but still, you seem to take it for granted and as a fact as if crosstalk information would be a fault that should be eliminated. That is simply not true, the information coming from the left channel in a stereo mix is simply meant to be heard by both ears, and the same goes for the right channel.

 

[Justdafactsmaam]

Can you please point me to some kind of white paper about stereo reproduction where it is described that the sound coming from the left channel is exclusively meant to be heard by the left ear, and vice versa for the right channel?

I don't think you will find any such information as that has never been the idea of stereo, but still, you seem to take it for granted and as a fact as if crosstalk information would be a fault that should be eliminated. That is simply not true, the information coming from the left channel in a stereo mix is simply meant to be heard by both ears, and the same goes for the right channel.

Have you ever heard it with and without?

 

[Justdafactsmaam]

Can you please point me to some kind of white paper about stereo reproduction where it is described that the sound coming from the left channel is exclusively meant to be heard by the left ear, and vice versa for the right channel?

I don't think you will find any such information as that has never been the idea of stereo, but still, you seem to take it for granted and as a fact as if crosstalk information would be a fault that should be eliminated. That is simply not true, the information coming from the left channel in a stereo mix is simply meant to be heard by both ears, and the same goes for the right channel.

But since you asked https://3d3a.princeton.edu/bacch™-filters-optimized-crosstalk-cancellation-3d-audio-over-two-loudpseakers

 

[SSS]

But since you asked https://3d3a.princeton.edu/bacch™-filters-optimized-crosstalk-cancellation-3d-audio-over-two-loudpseakers

Nice scientific work. But for what is crosstalk cancellation good for? Mastering in the recording studio is mostly done with listening via loudspeakers and thus natural left/right crosstalk through the air.

 

[Thomas_A]

There is the Keele paper as well.

 

[Justdafactsmaam]

Nice scientific work. But for what is crosstalk cancellation good for? Mastering in the recording studio is mostly done with listening via loudspeakers and thus natural left/right crosstalk through the air.

Would you limit the quality of your playback to all the other shortcomings of the systems used to monitor any given recording?