Sanity Check

[pkane2001]

1 hour ago, mansr said:

This is a possibility. However, the starting point should still be accurate reproduction with tweaks added to taste. Also, such tweaking is best done in a controlled manner, these days probably through DSP, not by combining ever weirder cables in the hopes that the cumulative effect will resemble the desired outcome.

 

We are focusing on the wrong thing. We don't need accurate sound reproduction. We need quality, life-sized hologram video of the performers. I guarantee that the sound will become super-realistic. Luckily, we're almost there:

 

https://phys.org/news/2018-01-holograms-d-thin-air.html

 

[pkane2001]

1 hour ago, Ralf11 said:

any Wilson will obliterate a Magnepan if dropped from a sufficient height

 

You'll want to do this while blindfolded to eliminate expectation bias that might affect the outcome. And, you'll need a good supply of both speakers, so that the result can be statistically significant.

 

[pkane2001]

1 hour ago, STC said:

No no matter how you record, sound must reach your ears from the source and a lot of them from them as reverbs. This reverbs should come from around you and not from the speakers. 

 

I was with you up to this point. And while I know that speakers can't reproduce sound without room involvement, headphones can. So, given a good binaural recording with a set of excellent headphones and a transparent reproduction chain, why wouldn't the recorded reverb sound just as natural as the sound at the original position of the microphone? Is there some directivity to the reverb that isn't reproduced by headphones? What is it that's missing?

[pkane2001]

17 minutes ago, STC said:

 

 The problem with headphones is internalization of sound. You still need head tracking to sound natural. Binaural is close enough and the ratio of direct and indirect music is representative of what you hear at the location they were made. It is not accurate as everyone's pinna is different but it is still far better than stereo recording. All the cue are present except for the inability to the sound to move with the opposite direction of the head movements. Otherwise, it is perfect enough.

 

I think @Ralf11 posted a AES paper on head movement and internalization.  

 

 

 

I recall the discussion about this, but not a published paper on the subject. Would love to see it if anyone can point me to where I can find it.

 

After thinking about this, I still find it a bit hard to accept this explanation. It would imply that just keeping one's head fixed (even with a set of speakers) the sound should start to appear to come from inside one's head. Try as I might, I couldn't make this illusion happen with speakers or any other sound source... except for headphones.

 

Sitting perfectly still with a set of headphones also doesn't seem to cause the opposite effect of moving the sound to the outside, while crossfeed helps with this to some degree.

 

I don't have the equipment (yet ), but I'd like to try my hand at binaural recording with headphones for playback. Seems to me that this should be the easiest way to achieve the most natural sound field reproduction of the original venue. 

 

[pkane2001]

13 minutes ago, STC said:

 

You can use any headphones to listen to binaural recordings.

 

The internalization effect is due to the direction how the image shift. If you turn your head to the right, the left ear moves closer to the sound and the right moves further away.  In real life the sound should now appears to come from the left.

 

However, with headphones (even with binaural recordings) when you turn your head to the right, the left and right ears still will hear the signal at the same time difference as you are facing them straight ahead. The image will not appears to be coming from the left. This confuses the brain. This is also not natural as our movement will cause the sound to shift the opposite direction where else with headphones such shifts do not happen.

 

 

 

I get the thinking behind it, and it does seem logical, but I can't prove to my satisfaction that this is the reason for the in-your-head sound produced by headphones. When I was talking about trying out binaural recording, I meant that I actually want to make the recordings myself and then play them back to try to achieve the most realistic sound field possible. I have the playback system already, the recording part is what is still in the planning stage.

 

[pkane2001]

8 minutes ago, gmgraves said:

 

Don, I've tried to explain to him a number of times that microphones are not human ears. They don't "hear" the way that we do. When you are recording you have to understand that difference if you are to be successful. Sure, my microphones are closer to the performers than I would be while sitting in the audience, listening. But the recordings give me that perspective because I know how to place the microphones to give that effect. STC obviously doesn't understand the concept at all, and from my exchanges with him, it is becoming clearer and clearer that he doesn't want to understand it either!

 

IMHO, the purpose of a microphone is not to simulate a human ear but to capture, as faithfully as possible, the sound field near where an ear might be located. Once so captured, the information is to be faithfully recorded and then reproduced into the ear of the listener, so as to simulate the effect of sitting at the original venue. In effect, a perfect recording/reproduction chain is an audio transporter device, both in time and space.

[pkane2001]

20 hours ago, gmgraves said:

Well the head movements destroy the illusion. As someone who owns a flocked head (from JVC) and a pair of JVC Binaural microphones to go with it, I can tell you that I have made dozens of binaural recordings and have on CD and SACD many more. I have come to the conclusion that there is another problem at work here, other than just the fact that when the sound source (headphones) follows the head movement of the listener, it destroys that willing suspension of disbelief. That other problem is one that I think is being overlooked - at least I've never seen a discussion of it. That is that everyone has outer ear structural differences that affect the way we, as individuals, perceive sound. If that outer ear structure isn't reproduced by the artificial head containing the binaural microphones, then the binaural illusion is not complete. It is, in my opinion why most binaural recordings do such a lousy job of locating sound sources behind the listener. Seems to me that is part of the reason human's outer ears stick out and why the "funnel" opening on our ears is canted slightly forward. I believe that it's that mechanical part of the outer ear that gives us our sense of directionality. 

 

Opinions, personal experience?

 

So I've just spent some time listening to a number of Chesky's binaural demonstration tracks, and they really do sound great! There's definitely more 'presence' there than when using speakers. I can clearly hear the distance and location of the sound, and it never does sound 'in my head'. There are a few tracks that have sounds that are even a bit startling, where I had to check to make sure it wasn't someone talking outside my listening room  I didn't find any good test sounds coming from behind me, although it was possible to imagine that that's where they were, but it wasn't as clear as the sounds coming from the front. The reverberant venues were easy to identify and sounded realistic.

 

I had to turn off crossfeed when listening to binaural recordings -- it appears to just muddy up the sound for binaural,  where with regular stereo recordings it appears to help quite a bit.