Beyond stereo?

[STC]

13 minutes ago, AJ Soundfield said:

Say what??

 

I know you will get to this. Did I ever say that you need all the 20 speakers turned on for all the music. Norah jones sounds better without the convoluted speakers except for the 90 degree ones. That  too because my room do not have much side wall reflection.  And again, the point is whether stereo is capable of capturing the soundfield suffieciently and the answer is yes. 

 

Are two speakers speakers enough to reproduce the stereo sound - No!

 

The role of the convoluted  speakers are to act as the wall of the selected impulse response. 

[STC]

2 minutes ago, AJ Soundfield said:

Ok, I think we are in agreement.

This is what I found online https://www.google.com/search?q=bacch+3d&source=lnms&tbm=isch&sa=X&ved=0ahUKEwj_76KInNrUAhWLOCYKHRMZCJgQ_AUIBygC&biw=1517&bih=708#imgrc=OO6WdobEhfysoM:

Speakers waaaay out in a heavily treated room, couple chairs dead center.

Like I said, would love to hear, but nearly the opposite of what I prefer physically, i.e regards to speaker placement and "living" room decor. Nothing on head. YMMV

 

Show me one stereo audiophile system where the chair is not in dead center. Sweet spot is sweet spot. That is only one spot. Even in concert hall, you will find a spot albeit larger where it sounds best. 

[STC]

22 minutes ago, AJ Soundfield said:

Ok, I think we are in agreement.

This is what I found online https://www.google.com/search?q=bacch+3d&source=lnms&tbm=isch&sa=X&ved=0ahUKEwj_76KInNrUAhWLOCYKHRMZCJgQ_AUIBygC&biw=1517&bih=708#imgrc=OO6WdobEhfysoM:

 

 

50 minutes ago, STC said:

AJ, I couldn't find the article related to your pictures above but this is what Audiostream wrote:-

 

 

 

Read more at https://www.audiostream.com/content/disruptive-tech-bacch-3d-sound#CRjsU4XoBhHQGWHD.99

 

Guess you too don't read the links.   

[AJ Soundfield]

7 minutes ago, STC said:

 

 

Guess you too don't read the links.   

I did

 

That looks like a very confined sweet spot...as expected from the physics of crosstalk cancellation. Note speakers way out in room and treatments everywhere, including chunks on floor!!

Quote

 

To answer your questions...

Submitted by Michael Lavorgna on May 26, 2017 - 2:07pm

...the sweet spot is defined by the user, more or less. For this demonstration, the sweet spot was defined for one person sitting and that person could move their head a few feet in either direction without disrupting the 3D effect.

 

I don't see how the person in the front chair can move their heads "a few feet" with that chair...but this is all semantics. The fact is crosstalk cancelled binaural with loudspeakers is a small sweet spot and lots of room conundrum. The pic says it all. I have no doubt the sound is super...for the one person in front chair.

 

[AJ Soundfield]

46 minutes ago, STC said:

 

Show me one stereo audiophile system where the chair is not in dead center. 

Not without advertising.

 

Quote

Sweet spot is sweet spot. That is only one spot. Even in concert hall, you will find a spot albeit larger where it sounds best. 

I've posted this already http://www.linkwitzlab.com/Links/Optimized-listening-area-Davies.pdf

 

When demoing my large CD system at audio shows I will have attendees get up from the sweet spot and walk to the sidewalls outside the speakers while playing music with vocals...which remains centered behind speakers

[STC]

2 minutes ago, AJ Soundfield said:

I did

 

That looks like a very confined sweet spot...as expected from the physics of crosstalk cancellation. Note speakers way out in room and treatments everywhere, including chunks on floor!!

I don't see how the person in the front chair can move their heads "a few feet" with that chair...but this is all semantics. The fact is crosstalk cancelled binaural with loudspeakers is a small sweet spot and lots of room conundrum. The pic says it all. I have no doubt the sound is super...for the one person in front chair.

 

 

 

OK,  if you did why repeat with the same link?   

 

Seeing the picture is not going to tell anything about the sound. The sweet spot mentioned in there only talks about the spot where you get the 3D effect. 

 

If you move away from the sweet spot ( in a non realtime headtracking BACCH) , you will hear the normal stereo sound that will sound like any stereo when you moved away from the stereo's sweet spot. 

 

Now room treatment is bad! Don't tell me you have not seen heavily treated stereo room. Google for various AV show pictures and you see some rooms are more heavily treated than this. Poor Edgar, he tried too hard to demonstrate how effective BACCH will be. Apparently, different law of physics apply regarding room treatment when it comes to stereo and BACCH. 

 

At least, I have tried both method to know now the difference. Have you?

[STC]

Just now, AJ Soundfield said:

Not without advertising.

 

I've posted this already http://www.linkwitzlab.com/Links/Optimized-listening-area-Davies.pdf

 

When demoing my large CD system at audio shows I will have attendees get up from the sweet spot and walk to the sidewalls outside the speakers while playing music with vocals...which remains centered behind speakers

 

Great!  So Fas24 also could be right because his visitors too could hear his magical HT box. 

 

 

[AJ Soundfield]

8 minutes ago, STC said:

If you move away from the sweet spot ( in a non realtime headtracking BACCH) , you will hear the normal stereo sound that will sound like any stereo when you moved away from the stereo's sweet spot. 

Right.

 

Quote

Now room treatment is bad! Don't tell me you have not seen heavily treated stereo room.

No, I've stated many times that the iso-ward look/approach is very appropriate for audiophiles/studiophiles

 

Quote

At least, I have tried both method to know now the difference. Have you?

Sorry, what 2 methods? The thread is about 2 vs >2 ch

[AJ Soundfield]

7 minutes ago, STC said:

 

Great!  So Fas24 also could be right because his visitors too could hear his magical HT box. 

I had no idea he was allowed visitors at the institution.

He has posted AES papers about the design method and proof of concept measurements? Where?

[STC]

10 minutes ago, AJ Soundfield said:

Not without advertising.

 

So called world greatest system with "minimum"treatment 

 

 

Your criticism about dead center and room treatment is not relevant at all to OP.  

 

Yes, proper DTS, 5.1 SACD vs 2 channels. 

[AJ Soundfield]

7 minutes ago, STC said:

So called world greatest system with "minimum"treatment 

???

Quote

Your criticism about dead center and room treatment is not relevant at all to OP.

Ummm, I am the OP... 

 

Quote

Yes, proper DTS, 5.1 SACD vs 2 channels. 

???

 

Are there some invisible quotes being addressed there?

[STC]

8 minutes ago, AJ Soundfield said:

???

Ummm, I am the OP... 

 

???

 

Are there some invisible quotes being addressed there?

 

23 minutes ago, AJ Soundfield said:

2 vs >2 ch

 

43 minutes ago, AJ Soundfield said:

Note speakers way out in room and treatments everywhere, including chunks on floor!!

 

Sorry. Hard to do multi quote with mobile phone.

[STC]

AJ, I skimmed through the PDF link. Is there anywhere in there it is suggestion the best stereo effect is not in dead center?

[STC]

1 hour ago, AJ Soundfield said:

I had no idea he was allowed visitors at the institution.

He has posted AES papers about the design method and proof of concept measurements? Where?

 

My response was to your post

 

1 hour ago, AJ Soundfield said:

When demoing my large CD system at audio shows I will have attendees get up from the sweet spot and walk to the sidewalls outside the speakers while playing music with vocals...which remains centered behind speakers

 

We could so easily fooled when we have others to suggest where the sound is coming from. In one AV show I attended, the guy was doing some sort of magic trick where the soundstage expended I too heard that but I also noticed something else and when I enquirer about that he ignored me through the demo. 

 

Back home with my fellow audiophile friends, we talked about the demo and one guy actually purchased the magic box. So we decided to the demo with my AV system. 

 

Surprise, surprise! It didn't work!

 

With respect, bearing in mind that you are a manufacturer of loudspeakers, I am just suggestion that group listening sometime will make you hear what's not there. In no way, I am suggestion that your speakers couldn't  do that because I have not heard them. 

[STC]

8 hours ago, AJ Soundfield said:

Not without advertising.

 

I've posted this already http://www.linkwitzlab.com/Links/Optimized-listening-area-Davies.pdf

 

When demoing my large CD system at audio shows I will have attendees get up from the sweet spot and walk to the sidewalls outside the speakers while playing music with vocals...which remains centered behind speakers

 

What the image got to do with Davis paper?  That image got nothing to do with the link. What's the relevance here?

 

In the image, the best position is still in the middle. The four green circles. Same as BACCH or Ambiophonics. 

[semente]

10 hours ago, AJ Soundfield said:

Correct, but >2 does so much better than 2.

It's really only audiophiles stuck on 2 with their rock music. Nice explanation here: https://www.stereophile.com/asweseeit/1107awsi/index.html

 

You like to assume what people listen to, how they stand in regards to foo, that they've never heard of Toole...

Well often you are wrong.

@gmgraves only listens to "classical", which also makes for over 90% of what I listen to.

I also attend live recitals on a weekly basis.

 

10 hours ago, AJ Soundfield said:

How do you know he didn't wet his pants??

 

You got me there, he probably did. 

 

I didn't express myself clearly, I meant to say that JA's and the other guy's earth-shattering experiences don't make it a fact that you can accurately record and reproduce a live soundfield with JJ's multichannel processing technique, even if I can perfectly imagine how spatial rendition would be more involving and realistic.

[semente]

9 hours ago, AJ Soundfield said:

We're in diehard 2ch audiophile territory here 

Plus with typical speaker, the same drivers are creating the onset response and diffuse field simultaneously...

 

That's my point exactly.

No matter how many channels/ speakers you add, no matter how much processing sci-fi messing you do, the speakers will always be reproducing both instruments and room cues.

[STC]

8 minutes ago, semente said:

 

That's my point exactly.

No matter how many channels/ speakers you add, no matter how much processing sci-fi messing you do, the speakers will always be reproducing both instruments and room cues.

 

How can a speaker produce the room cues? Speakers suppose to output what's in the recording. 

[semente]

42 minutes ago, STC said:

 

How can a speaker produce the room cues? Speakers suppose to output what's in the recording. 

 

I meant reproducing both recorded instruments and recorded room cues:

 

the speakers will always be reproducing both instruments and room cues

[STC]

6 minutes ago, semente said:

 

I meant reproducing both recorded instruments and recorded room cues:

 

the speakers will always be reproducing both instruments and room cues

 

Ok. Thanx. 

[AJ Soundfield]

10 hours ago, STC said:

AJ, I skimmed through the PDF link. Is there anywhere in there it is suggestion the best stereo effect is not in dead center?

What the image got to do with Davis paper?  That image got nothing to do with the link. What's the relevance here?

In the image, the best position is still in the middle. The four green circles. Same as BACCH or Ambiophonics.

Yes, it's clear you didn't like what's in it. The paper and the image coincide. The paper describes the required loudspeaker polar pattern that given a much wider/larger sweet spot than can be realized with any form of binaural with crosstalk cancellation, like BACCH and Ambiophonics, which basic physics dictates cannot be effective over a wide area, again, unless with head tracking to adapt. The Davis method does not require any head tracking and the image does not collapse to the L and R loudspeaker as one moves off center as happens with typical loudspeaker polar response. Like the ones used in the BACCH photos. The Davis approach requires a physically large speaker to control the directivity and resulting polar pattern. Unless one was to use the B&O approach with multi-drivers and lots of DSP. I get that you don't understand this stuff I'm linking, but that's ok.

The image is from a large 15" waveguide 2 way by Geddes, that partially creates the Davis polar response and much wider sweet spot than an binuaral based system can. It can be improved further if the directivity control extends downward of the waveguide.

Of course, if one is an audiophile who prefers to be constrained in a tight sweet spot by oneself in an iso-ward room, this approach would be unnecessary. YMMV.

[AJ Soundfield]

10 hours ago, STC said:

We could so easily fooled when we have others to suggest where the sound is coming from.

So you weren't there but assumed this was suggested? Interesting.

 

Quote

In no way, I am suggestion that your speakers couldn't  do that because I have not heard them. 

Right.

[AJ Soundfield]

3 hours ago, semente said:

 

That's my point exactly.

No matter how many channels/ speakers you add, no matter how much processing sci-fi messing you do, the speakers will always be reproducing both instruments and room cues.

So you don't understand how it's possible to encode each separately and then render using different driver compliments separately with each signal. Nor apparently comprehend the research about 4ch minimum for envelopment and the separate encoding already linked.

Ok then.

[STC]

8 minutes ago, AJ Soundfield said:

Yes, it's clear you didn't like what's in it. The paper and the image coincide. The paper describes the required loudspeaker polar pattern that given a much wider/larger sweet spot than can be realized with any form of binaural with crosstalk cancellation, like BACCH and Ambiophonics, which basic physics dictates cannot be effective over a wide area, again, unless with head tracking to adapt. The Davis method does not require any head tracking and the image does not collapse to the L and R loudspeaker as one moves off center as happens with typical loudspeaker polar response. Like the ones used in the BACCH photos. The Davis approach requires a physically large speaker to control the directivity and resulting polar pattern. Unless one was to use the B&O approach with multi-drivers and lots of DSP. I get that you don't understand this stuff I'm linking, but that's ok.

The image is from a large 15" waveguide 2 way by Geddes, that partially creates the Davis polar response and much wider sweet spot than an binuaral based system can. It can be improved further if the directivity control extends downward of the waveguide.

Of course, if one is an audiophile who prefers to be constrained in a tight sweet spot by oneself in an iso-ward room, this approach would be unnecessary. YMMV.

 

There is nothing to like or dislike. You gave the  impression that the chart is related to some existing speakers. That paper was about some processor that meant to do what you described above. 

 

Btw, head tracking is not even in the picture unless you are using BACCH and I don't. 

 

The picture did not show what you allege. 

[mav52]

11 hours ago, AJ Soundfield said:

I did

 

That looks like a very confined sweet spot...as expected from the physics of crosstalk cancellation. Note speakers way out in room and treatments everywhere, including chunks on floor!!

I don't see how the person in the front chair can move their heads "a few feet" with that chair...but this is all semantics. The fact is crosstalk cancelled binaural with loudspeakers is a small sweet spot and lots of room conundrum. The pic says it all. I have no doubt the sound is super...for the one person in front chair.

 

What a perfect product for our times - $54k and it will work for exactly one person at a time.