Why evaluating the sound of a single speaker is essential

[DonH56]

Mark is an ASR member, might loop him in and ask. I forgot his username. We met long ago but neither of us remembers the other...

 

[MattHooper]

Mark Waldrep, who produced 'stage' and 'audience' mixes for customers to choose from, has noted that "As a musician, the ability to listen from among the musicians is preferable to me over being in the audience. I'm particularly careful to capture the music and not the mechanics of producing sounds." So there we see another potential distinction: how it sounds to musicians. He is also reported to comment that "the “stage” perspective mixes provide a level of involvement and space that I haven’t heard from any other label."

I wonder how much of the objection to being sonically on stage with the musicians is a result of preconditioning. If so, the opportunity for deconditioning raises its attractive head.

cheers

No reason in principal a different perspective, such as being among the musicians couldn’t be pleasant. (I certainly never had any problem with it when I was a musician, myself jamming and rehearsing with my fellow musicians).

I’m in the “ if it works, it works” camp.

I’ve listened to music in surround, both discreet mixes and stereo aggressively up mixed, in which instruments and voices have come from the sides or around me. Sometimes it doesn’t work. Sometimes it’s lovely and quite a lot of fun and seems to work with the music.

 

[AJM1981]

As explained in AES papers and my books, the most revealing music in multiple-loudspeaker comparison tests tends to have complex instrumentation - a dense spectrum - wide bandwidth - especially bass extension - and reverberation. The musical genre is unimportant.

For listening pleasure or demonstration the choice is yours.

Thanks for sharing your views and the included PDF, that I read with interest. Just a spin-off question. Mono went to stereo and stereo gave the wilder "60s-stereo-effect" in production with voices at one end and drums on the other end of the panorama. Still interesting on stereo gear in a living room. But in car it does not make any sense as it totally does not sound coherent anymore. Was it also the upcoming stereo in cars that changed how stereo mixing changed? Or was it something else.

 

[Mike123]

stereo gave the wilder "60s-stereo-effect" in production with voices at one end and drums on the other end of the panorama.

I read a perfectly logical explanation that the stereo vinyl needles of those days had such crosstalk between the channels that the stereo panorama was quite realistic.

 

[sceptical1]

I've lived with a 5.1.4 setup in the past and enjoyed it. However, I have decided that, in my current domestic situation, the encumbrance of additional speakers was not worth the return in musical enjoyment.

To be clear, you still listen in surround and use only one sub instead of four?

Dr. Toole has decided much the same.

What is it that Dr. Toole has decided?

 

[NTK]

To be clear, you still listen in surround and use only one sub instead of four?

What is it that Dr. Toole has decided?

The height channels of Atmos aren't all that necessary for music listening.

I'm setting up a new, downsized, home theater in our new fancy condo in Ottawa. With 10 inches of concrete separating me from my downstairs neighbors it is clear that cinema sound levels are not possible (ceiling is dropped and sound isolated). It is still evolving, but I may stop at 7.1 (with two vibration reduced subs now, possibly four). I don't watch superhero movies and the gratuitous violence in blockbusters has lost its charm, so I am finding that elevation is not missed. Good sound, good stories and good acting prevail, but harder to find. Getting old, I guess.

 

[sceptical1]

"With 10 inches of concrete separating me from my downstairs neighbors it is clear that cinema sound levels are not possible."

This is not clear at all. With 1 inch of carpeting and 5/8" of plywood separating me from my downstairs neighbors it is clear to me that cinema sound levels are not possible. This makes sense.
Is what Toole said a mistake?

 

[sceptical1]

The height channels of Atmos aren't all that necessary for music listening.

Hardly and encumberance. Unless he insists on using Blade Meta 2s for every channel.

 

[Kal Rubinson]

To be clear, you still listen in surround and use only one sub instead of four?

Not quite. I listen in surround and my system is 5.3, so 3 subs. That other system, which was in another house, was actually 5.3.4, so it had three subs also (but not the same 3 subs).

Hardly and encumberance. Unless he insists on using Blade Meta 2s for every channel.

Sure they are. Floor and ceiling are reinforced concrete which cannot host speakers. The walls also have a number of large reinforced concrete columns which are unfortunately placed. No nothing in-wall and nothing in-ceiling and the remaining options are not aesthetically acceptable.

 

[sceptical1]

"10 inches of concrete separating me from my downstairs neighbors"

"reinforced concrete"

Are we talking about listening rooms or end of days bunkers. It must be a coincidence.

 

[Kal Rubinson]

Are we talking about listening rooms or end of days bunkers. It must be a coincidence.

It is what it is. If it was a wood frame house or wall board and framing, it would have permitted other options.

 

[Sal1950]

The height channels of Atmos aren't all that necessary for music listening.

But they are an enjoyable addition.
Stereo reproduction isn't necessary for music listening.
Mono is just fine for simply that.

 

[MaxwellsEq]

But they are an enjoyable addition.
Stereo reproduction isn't necessary for music listening.
Mono is just fine for simply that.

I agree and I suspect a large majority of stereo music is actually heard in mono from kitchen radios, lifts, store PAs etc. Or very unbalanced stereo - in vehicles.

 

[RDoc]

But they are an enjoyable addition.
Stereo reproduction isn't necessary for music listening.
Mono is just fine for simply that.

Agreed. I've recently added height speakers purely for music listening and turning them on doesn't produce a revelatory difference, but having them on does increase the "presence" for both myself and my wife. Adding the surround heights made less difference than the fronts, but it's still nicer. Going to ATMOS did make a gigantic difference.

 

[Sal1950]

It is what it is. If it was a wood frame house or wall board and framing, it would have permitted other options.

Yep, as we always said in auto racing, talk is cheap but ya gotta run what ya brong !

 

[kyuu]

I have angle brackets anchored in concrete supporting a 2 ton (not literally ) air conditioner. Your comments were either strictly about aesthetics or you currently rent and modifications to the property are frowned upon.

Don't get the impression that your relationship with Stereophile is going unnoticed here. ASR does not keep it civil.

He literally said that other options are not aesthetically acceptable. Why are you harassing him?

 

[kyuu]

Why do you care?

Because you're being a jerk over nothing.

I'm harassing him because of his choice of attire. The same reason Stereophile makes a decision about relevance in audio, not objectively.
You need to investigate the history of the magazine to understand what I am talking about, Rubinson being a nice guy notwithstanding.

I literally have no idea what Stereophile has to do with whether Mr. Rubinson cares to hang speakers on his concrete walls or not. No one here is unaware of his position with that magazine, it's literally spelled out in his signature, but it's completely irrelevant except insofar as you have brought it up as an excuse to harass the man.

 

[Duke]

Don't get the impression that your relationship with Stereophile is going unnoticed here. ASR does not keep it civil.

@Kal Rubinson is an absolute gentleman. There is no reason whatsoever for you to be rude to him.

 

[Jim Taylor]

@Kal Rubinson is a absolute gentleman. There is no reason whatsoever for you to be rude to him.

 

[MAB]

I could go on.

To the door.