step response is a important part to show speed of speaker that is good enough for ITD. See measures

[markus]

your question make no sense. with a single speaker there does not happen any ITD from the music signals. ITD is only from the position of the loudspeaker hear whre he play sound and from the reverb of the room in this the loudspeaker play. then it doesnt matter if speaker is slow or not because the signal come only from one speaker and not 2 speaker.

maybe this is whats not clear. the ITD is inside the signals that are produce from the stereo speakers. you can delay a 500 hz tone around 40 microseconds of left speaker and it is hear from the right side a little. level is exact same

I have my JBLL very near, so there is very low room interactions. when i mix concert reverb in my music, i hear this big room because my speaker produce this ITD room information in low frequency. and not my room

So if your misguided "ITD speaker speed theory" doesn't matter in single speaker playback then why would it matter in stereo? Looks like you still haven't read the Lipshitz paper. Wake me up when you did.

P.S. Hint: in stereo you're listening within an interference field, i.e. signal from the left speaker reaches the left AND the right ear, signal from the right speaker reaches the right AND the left ear. Look up "stereo crosstalk".

P.P.S. Some German references from the late and great Eberhard Sengpiel that might help you: http://www.sengpielaudio.com/Unterlagen01.htm

 

[bennybbbx]

Ah, you still haven't read the Lipshitz paper. Wake me up when you did.

P.S. Hint: in stereo you're listening within an interference field, i.e. signal from the left speaker reaches the left AND the right ear, signal from the right speaker reaches the right AND the left ear. Look up "stereo crosstalk".

sure crossfeed happen. but when a speaker(JBL) sound much wider as kali s at same left and right distance, then problem is not crossfeed, its the speaker that is not so good. also iloud mtm and eris 3.5 sound much wider as the kali

 

[NTK]

Have you calculated how far sound travels in 10 µs? If I move my head more than that, what happens?

here is a diagram which delay cause which angle https://www.sfu.ca/sonic-studio-webdav/handbook/Binaural_Hearing.html .of course position detection do not work during you rotate your head. when you head is in a position you can hear the signal that it is not exact in front and come from side. see this post that contain hearing test https://www.audiosciencereview.com/...for-itd-see-measures.28585/page-2#post-998388

I can see that you absolute refuse to consider what contradicts your preconception, so I'll do the calculation for you.

Sound travels 3.4 mm in 10 µs. What is the difference between moving my head 3.4 mm closer to one speaker than the other, and if there is a 10 µs timing delay between them?

 

[bennybbbx]

I can see that you absolute refuse to consider what contradicts your preconception, so I'll do the calculation for you.

Sound travels 3.4 mm in 10 µs. What is the difference between moving my head 3.4 mm closer to one speaker than the other, and if there is a 10 µs timing delay between them?

when you move your head forward, then you hear the left and right speaker in same way earlier. brain can correct this.

when hear the brain can do correction when move sideways a littel to speakers. when i move my body to left 10 cm and head straigt forward, then the middle of stereo image shift too and it sound as music that is in middle (drums ) is out of mid but in front of my head. reverb sound a little diffrent. of course stereo and ITD do only work good at home when you sit in a chair and not good in a disco or cinema or on cinema need for every chair speakers

but disco and cinema is a large room which create itself a big reverb. but on home is a small room

 

[markus]

sure crossfeed happen. but when a speaker(JBL) sound much wider as kali s at same left and right distance, then problem is not crossfeed, its the speaker that is not so good. also iloud mtm and eris 3.5 sound much wider as the kali

This suggests that the response between the left and the right speaker of one speaker pair is more similar than the other speaker pair.

You also have to make sure that you're not sitting within the speaker's acoustical near field (this is NOT the same "near field" as in near field listening) where the individual drivers don't add the same way as they do at larger listening distances (and what they are designed for). Of course you could read one of the books mentioned above where all of this is explained in great detail...

 

[bennybbbx]

and here is a video that use headphone EQ. this have a crossfeed slider and can simulate how crossfeed sound on headphones. brain can correct stereo width when speaker is ok.when i move slider full right and hear a little then it sound not too small. and when i move slider back to left then stereo width get for short time giant big before brain reduce it. simular happen also on frequency, when reduce high and after some time switch linear it sound very bright in first moment.

 

[markus]

"Jugend forscht"

 

[bennybbbx]

"Jugend forscht"

only practice show the reality. They cant tell what i am hear in compare and direct compare and this is the kali sound very small and reverb sound strange on same hearing position in compare with other speakers and headphone. i hear a good speaker have more depth and width as headphone. The kali was 70 cm away or 1 meter. did not sound better with 1 meter. maybe it is because of large phase shift of steep LP crossover filter or phase shift of slow driver. doesnt matter. step response or maybe phase response show this

but anyway if you hear this or not, it is a pysical limit that a Mid speaker that can only play period time of 200 µsec is not able to produce correct phase for ITD 10 µsec. crossfeed maybe let all speakers sound a little smaller, but the meaasure results show on the JBL that it can get better in phase and bass of course

 

[markus]

Sorry bennybbbx but you very obviously don't understand what you're looking at when you see a complex waveform. I could post a scan of page 62/63 from Howard/Angus "Acoustics and Psychoacoustics" which would clear up your misconception but for copyright reasons I won't. Sorry, you need to buy the book.

 

[JRS]

Yes. Step impluse response will show the "problems" for crossovers in speakers. Cue in "active crossovers" which will solve such issues! expensive, though...

The first time maybe. After that, what are costly are those fat inductors and fancy capacitors which can be 30% of the speaker costs if one goes full Troels.

 

[thewas]

sure crossfeed happen. but when a speaker(JBL) sound much wider as kali s at same left and right distance, then problem is not crossfeed, its the speaker that is not so good. also iloud mtm and eris 3.5 sound much wider as the kali

And who tells you that the wider image is the more "correct" one?
And who guarantees you that other listeners also perceive it like that?
And who guarantees you that some of your speakers have not worse channel matching which could create a wider more diffuse imaging?
And what about directivity, edge diffraction and interaction with close boundaries which play by far the biggest role on the size and precision of imaging?

Like others have written to you, before you try to "re-invent the wheel" you should firstly make sure if your phenomenon is reproducible by others and not covered by the current state of the science.

You give the impression that you are fixed just on one parameter which you want to force it to fit your individual perception and explanation while ignoring all others which are known to play a significant role on the phenomenon you are trying to investigate. A bit like a policeman with a radar gun at the road close to the Ferrari factory who comes to the conclusion that the reason why some cars are are faster than the rest is their red paintwork...

 

[bennybbbx]

Sorry bennybbbx but you very obviously don't understand what you're looking at when you see a complex waveform. I could post a scan of page 62/63 from Howard/Angus "Acoustics and Psychoacoustics" which would clear up your misconception but for copyright reasons I won't. Sorry, you need to buy the book.

compley waveforms in books are mostly show as complex periodic waveforms. periodic mean that the cycles are continues. music is complex non periodic waveforms. it contain transients. think about a high hat or crash on left channel much louder as on right channel that is hit with a stick. so left and rigt speaker need play lots diffrence but phase should (position in time) should be 10 µsec so all hear no quality loss. the mid woofer need also play lower freq of this. and it behave as i write. if in the book is really complex non periodic waveform show and explain you can send me in a private message or find something in inet. filters or speakers see only the time from peak to peak. and so they react.

 

[bennybbbx]

And who tells you that the wider image is the more "correct" one?
And who guarantees you that other listeners also perceive it like that?
And who guarantees you that some of your speakers have not worse channel matching which could create a wider more diffuse imaging?
And what about directivity, edge diffraction and interaction with close boundaries which play by far the biggest role on the size and precision of imaging?

this can hear with my speaker records and compare with the original in headphones. the kali record stereo width is much smaller. you need look at the latest examples. the first examples are record with stereo bar.

here begin this records

Which Part have lowest stereo width of the synth sound in the attached mp3 ?

It is a test of 3 speakers record with 2 MTM MEMS microphones on a stereo Microphone Bar. Part 1(the first) of the compare.mp3 piece is the original. Part 2 Part 3 Part 4 are the recorded speakers i have test. I have EQ so all speakers sound in frequency near same. Is it for you clear hearable...

www.audiosciencereview.com

The forum software have a bug it post not the text that is in the post i link. in the post i link is this text

between original(1b) and the 3 b you hear stereo width diffrence ?. I have no UAD and can not test
Now have upload new records. First i record left channel then on a second play the right channel. then i mix the 2 mono records in DAW to stereo. this avoid crossfeed from left to right speaker due to microphones and the better speaker do not loss so much stereo separation as the stereo record. all records sound now in generel more near as the previous records with 2 microphones on microphone bar
i named it 5 b and 6 b. is it now better hear which record have stereo width or stereo separation smallest to original ?

Edit: there are more speaker records i do first record left channel then right channel.

Test Kali LP6 with step response and audio record example

The LP6 have a 6,5 inch speaker. the step resonse show it is very slow and i hear before i notice that it is the step response that transient sound worse and muddy and it have less stereo width. But test with other peoples show that there are people that did not hear less or more stereo width...

www.audiosciencereview.com

Test presonus Eris 3.5 with step response and audio record examples

it have a 3,5 inch small bass and mid so step response is very good and i hear lots more realistic stereo wide as on Kali 6.5 . It have a hifi FR with the hifi magic gap at 300- 700 hz. the gap at 10 khz have both speakers so it seem not a defect of the speaker or wrong measure. I verify many...

www.audiosciencereview.com

Test Ikmultimedia iloud MTM

The mtm have god step response and stereo width. in my room you can see the measure result too and look good. the bass range is enough when you hear not louder as 80 db. a little problem on this speaker i think the port noise. on some songs when hear louder as 80 db then port noise can hear. I...

www.audiosciencereview.com

I record first left channel then right channel with same microphone position and same speaker. So in Fact. this record way have no crossfeed and a diffrence in quality between the two speaker is also avoid.

the room reverb have also no noticable influence about stereo width. i record my room impulse, and can play the original over convolution reverb with my room impulse on headphone and it get no stereo width loss.

You give the impression that you are fixed just on one parameter which you want to force it to fit your individual perception and explanation while ignoring all others which are known to play a significant role on the phenomenon you are trying to investigate. A bit like a policeman with a radar gun at the road close to the Ferrari factory who comes to the conclusion that the reason why some cars are are faster than the rest is their red paintwork...

is it not clear because the thread title contain text "step response is a important part". I never have written that it is more important as FR or phase or something else. I only written that it is a important part and this mean that it is not bad that it is show in speaker tests. or do you think it is bad and should not show ?

this have low bass -3 db 52 hz they write. have very short step response.

Stereo: Produkt

www.stereo.de

 

[thewas]

this can hear with my speaker records and compare with the original in headphones. the kali record stereo width is much smaller. you need look at the latest examples. the first examples are record with stereo bar.

You ignore my previous questions, also a recording is limited in reproducing the 3D original soundfield, even more if done in the way you do it. You should first measure all other parameters like radiation pattern, pair deviation etc to see how those affect the imaging.

is it not clear because the thread title contain text "step response is a important part". I never have written that it is more important as FR or phase or something else. I only written that it is a important part and this mean that it is not bad that it is show in speaker tests. or do you think it is bad and should not show ?

If you want to prove it plays an important role you must keep all other parameters the same when doing a comparison. One way would be to use the same pair of loudspeakers (where you first check that their pair deviation is very low) and then for example apply a FIR filter that makes their response linear phase, even better though would be to have a pair of good loudspeakers with switchable FIR linear phase crossover. I have done such a comparison in the past with a state of the art equipment and room at a Neumann workshop with a pair of O500C and at direct switching while you could hear some small differences depending on the recording, there was no significant difference in soundstage width. Similar results I get at home when comparing my loudspeakers with their minimum phase crossovers with using Acourate DRC which makes their response linear phase and those match also reports of people with loudspeakers or systems where you can directly switch both modes like Dirac or Audiolense DRC, Neumann MA1, KEF LS50 Wireless I & II etc.

 

[markus]

compley waveforms in books are mostly show as complex periodic waveforms. periodic mean that the cycles are continues. music is complex non periodic waveforms. it contain transients. think about a high hat or crash on left channel much louder as on right channel that is hit with a stick. so left and rigt speaker need play lots diffrence but phase should (position in time) should be 10 µsec so all hear no quality loss. the mid woofer need also play lower freq of this. and it behave as i write. if in the book is really complex non periodic waveform show and explain you can send me in a private message or find something in inet. filters or speakers see only the time from peak to peak. and so they react.

And page 62/63 in Howard/Angus "Acoustics and Psychoacoustics" shows you what is wrong with your understanding of the matter Again, you have to buy the book as there's a lot more information you are not aware of, especially how our hearing works. "Place theory", "temporal theory", there's lots to learn.

Spending your time here repeating your misconceptions on a daily basis doesn't get you one step closer to your goal. It's impossible for anybody here to fill in the blanks in your knowledge in a couple of forum posts when others need several hundred pages in a book. You are wasting your time and you should realize that you have wasted the time of so many other people here or why do you think they have stopped posting? It's certainly not because you have convinced them of your "theory".
When everybody, really everybody has pointed out that you're dead wrong (and why) in your assumptions then don't you think it would be time to step back and learn a little more before alienating each and everyone that could be interesting to have a future conversation with?

 

[bennybbbx]

You ignore my previous questions, also a recording is limited in reproducing the 3D original soundfield, even more if done in the way you do it. You should first measure all other parameters like radiation pattern, pair deviation etc to see how those affect the imaging.

The radiation pattern of the kali is larger as of the JBL. I have not ignore your questions. I have written that i record the audio examples with only 1 speaker. did you not understand what i mean and how this record is done ?. see the screenshot there is no problem with pair deviation because i use only 1 speaker.

the original L Track play first on left speaker. and the original R track play later and route the right track to the left speaker output. so it is play all on same speaker and record with same microphone. and see the mic track. this is what is record from microphone. I set snap to bar grid. then i split the mic record on bar 57 and put this 2 mono tracks 2 result tracks that play together. 1 track is pan to left. one track is pan to right. all is sample exact position and cut because of bars grid snap.

Similar results I get at home when comparing my loudspeakers with their minimum phase crossovers with using Acourate DRC which makes their response linear phase and those match also reports of people with loudspeakers or systems where you can directly switch both modes like Dirac or Audiolense DRC, Neumann MA1, KEF LS50 Wireless I & II etc.

then post your measure results. have you hear the speaker records i do ?. did you hear a diffrence in stereo width ?.

 

[bennybbbx]

And page 62/63 in Howard/Angus "Acoustics and Psychoacoustics" shows you what is wrong with your understanding of the matter Again, you have to buy the book as there's a lot more information you are not aware of, especially how our hearing works. "Place theory", "temporal theory", there's lots to learn.

i dont beleive that there is a secret that can only read on this book and is not find on internet. here is about complex waveforms https://pages.uoregon.edu/emi/10.php this are only periodic waveforms but music have extreme selden periodic wavforms. think about 2 singers sing or choir and this is record with 2 microphones. the cannot all sing on same frequency and phase. so the waveform result is not periodic. the filter and speaker is input with lots of peaks and valleys at diffrent distance. in a stereo system it happen often that 1 speaker need change direction between forward and backward often and the other speaker do not change as see on this waveform screenshot overlay. or should i upload more ?. you can tell a youtube music video and second and i show you the wav. or do it yourself . us a lowpass filter at 1.5 khz and wav observer lite is free to show. to zoom more in you need press m. and freeze the wav you can with play button

step response is a important part to show speed of speaker that is good enough for ITD. See measures

How wide is a mono signal source on stereo speakers? And how wide should it be? And how change the 'spead' ohttps://www.sfu.ca/sonic-studio-webdav/handbook/Binaural_Hearing.html read also above post about records and stereo reverb that every good stereo song have. and herar this test wav files...

www.audiosciencereview.com

 

[thewas]

I have not ignore your questions.

You still do.

I have written that i record the audio examples with only 1 speaker.

That doesn't change the limitations of such a recording in reproducing the original soundfield you listen.

then post your measure results.

I have endless measurements of mine, for example Kali IN-8 first gen impulse and step response without Acourate

and with Acourate linear phase correction

only those don't tell us anything about the width of the soundstage or any other psychoacoustic metrics.

did you hear a diffrence in stereo width ?.

Again, it doesn't matter what is heard if the method is flawed, namely not just one parameter varies. Do first some experiments where only the parameter which you want to investigate is varied and then we can discuss.

 

[markus]

i dont beleive that there is a secret that can only read on this book and is not find on internet. here is about complex waveforms https://pages.uoregon.edu/emi/10.php this are only periodic waveforms but music have extreme selden periodic wavforms. think about 2 singers sing or choir and this is record with 2 microphones. the cannot all sing on same frequency and phase. so the waveform result is not periodic. the filter and speaker is input with lots of peaks and valleys at diffrent distance. in a stereo system it happen often that 1 speaker need change direction between forward and backward often and the other speaker do not change as see on this waveform screenshot overlay. or should i upload more ?. you can tell a youtube music video and second and i show you the wav. or do it yourself . us a lowpass filter at 1.5 khz and wav observer lite is free to show. to zoom more in you need press m. and freeze the wav you can with play button

step response is a important part to show speed of speaker that is good enough for ITD. See measures

How wide is a mono signal source on stereo speakers? And how wide should it be? And how change the 'spead' ohttps://www.sfu.ca/sonic-studio-webdav/handbook/Binaural_Hearing.html read also above post about records and stereo reverb that every good stereo song have. and herar this test wav files...

www.audiosciencereview.com

Everything can be found on the internet these days but for the novice like yourself it's much easier and a lot less time consuming just to read a good basic book. Your case is the best example. You have no way of getting past the information you've found above because you don't know how to "read" a complex waveform where the frequency content is changing over time, like in music for example. You come up with an explanation that makes only sense in your world. In the real world it is nothing but a misconception.

Read the book(s) I've mentioned and you'll understand within minutes. Continue reading through bits and pieces of partial or even wrong information you find on the internet and it will take you days, months, years before you begin to comprehend the topic.
Another drawback of looking for information on the internet on your own is that you run the risk of looking just for information that seems to support your opinion. That's called "bias". Another very interesting topic in psychoacoustics by the way. All in all, if you continue doing what you're doing you're just massively wasting your time and the time of the people around you.

 

[bennybbbx]

You still do.


That doesn't change the limitations of such a recording in reproducing the original soundfield you listen.

I hear on diffrent headphones and on all the kali is much smaller. eris 3.5 is a little wider as the iloud mtm


I also have the eris 3.5 change as a wide band speaker. because the bass/mid have no LP filter. need only disconnect the tweeter

I have endless measurements of mine, for example Kali IN-8 first gen impulse and step response without Acourate

View attachment 171260

and with Acourate linear phase correction

View attachment 171261

only those don't tell us anything about the width of the soundstage or any other psychoacoustic metrics.


Again, it doesn't matter what is heard if the method is flawed, namely not just one parameter varies. Do first some experiments where only the parameter which you want to investigate is varied and then we can discuss.

On your impulse response can see at 2.1 ms around the early reflections with at least 30%. so all after 2.1 ms have much more errors. on my measures can see at 0.8 ms only 10% reflections on kali. this is 3 times less noise of room and is alot because it reduce also the room influence when hear. on the jbl it is 20% room reflection noise. the kali measures are older

I test only 2 way speakers. maybe you can show 2 way speaker results ?. that the step response show usefull on 3 way speakers i have never tell and i write earlier that i mean 2 way speakers. dont forget that i only have test and measure 2 way speakers.

here are my impulse responses. On kali can see that the first peak up reach only 70%. the second reach -100%.

On the JBL and your IN8 can see the first peek reach 100% but the second a little less. Or maybe thats a measure argument that the kali sound so worse.

@markus Read the book(s) I've mentioned and you'll understand within minutes. a

@markus Read the book(s) I've mentioned and you'll understand within minutes.

are you a book seller ?. for the filter or the speaker it is as for a car driver. no car driver notice the wave length and frequency of the next curve he must drive. everbody know when less curves are in, then mostly can drive faster. but the life of a speaker is even more harder. It need move forward and backward. on stereo speaker it is as when 2 car drivers need diffrent routes to drive. thats logical