Soundstage Width cannot extend beyond speakers

[fas42]

2 hours ago, PeterSt said:

What I always noticed (and people may reject this just the same) is that the sound does not go behind the speakers. At least in all my life time I never ran into that.

 

Not quite sure what you mean by that, Peter. If one stands directly in front of a speaker, then the sound will appear to originate from behind the speaker - but you're talking about something different?

[STC]

1 hour ago, adamdea said:

That does not mean that it could not produce an illusion it just measn that there is a good reason why that potential illusion might fail and why its success will be listener and room dependant. Hpow much colouration?

 

Stereo illusion is based mainly on timing and level difference. So the accurate recreation of the event requires the accurate recreation of the exact position of the instruments in the illusion. The alteration of the position of the instruments is no longer representative of the recorded live event in regards to the exact location or the fidelity of the original sound. 

 

Having said the above, I do not consider the coloration or the altered position of the instruments matters. What is important is recreation of the playback that is good enough to fool us that it is a real event.  

[PeterSt]

Maybe this helps too :

My system explicitly has been made to NOT require a sweet spot. And so it does not. I don't even have a listening chair.

Where-ever I am in the room, the image works out the same, though of course the whole "stage" may shift to the left with me walking to the left (remember, room is 8m wide).

Only when I am as close as approximately 1m to e.g. the left speaker (longitudinal direction) all breaks up. But 1m50 ? all still works (the other speaker 6 meter from the LH one).

 

In the Phasure forum we had an example of a seagull on some track. We used that track to measure each other's competence at finding coax interlinks. So envision a couple of dozen people buying all sorts of coax cheap cable to end up with a maximum seagull range (haha) and from there I developed an interlink. Without the coax no seagulls at all.

You don't want to know what some undertake to achieve something. Audiophools. 

 

Cables with BNC Connectors/Adapters Are Generating A Superor SQ

Don't read that, but search (ctrl-F) for seagull. It's not only in that topic because it became a measure. I still regularly try it.

 

 

Track 02 - Body of Light (Sophia Mix)

 

Here :

 

 

 

It is a best example. Why ? well, I just listened to the complete track and there is no flying seagull. Nowhere. Btw it is a crow someone (at 6moons ) pointed out later, so focus on the crow. It s there. Easy to hear. But does it fly overhead and everywhere ? Does it fly at all ? I don't perceive anything of it. But now my main system ... (and that of so many others)

Might you obtain the album, focus on it flying right under the ceiling (so reflections again).

 

 

[PeterSt]

2 minutes ago, fas42 said:

Not quite sure what you mean by that, Peter. If one stands directly in front of a speaker, then the sound will appear to originate from behind the speaker

 

If I stand right in front of my speaker (mind you, one) then the horn blasts in my face.

So no. Not in my case.

 

In the middle of both and right in between them - still not. Sound is up and behind me then.

When I am behind the speakers (I have ~50 cm space for that) the sound comes from the other end of the room (all reflected).

 

But I'm afraid this all has nothing to do with it ...

[adamdea]

2 minutes ago, STC said:

 

Again, it is a simple question. In your 60 degree speakers setup, it is impossible to hear soundstage extending the 60 degrees in a standard stereo recording such as using ORTF mic setup.   That’s law of physics and yet some hear them. The question is why and how?

 

Feel free to click the ignore button if you suspect I have other agenda. 

I have no agenda other than that I find muddled thought tiresome. Your new formulation is slightly clearer but continues to muddle the question of whether information can be reliably encoded with the issue of whether listeners may experience a particular phenemenon.

 

The reference to the laws of physics makes no sense to me at all, but it might make more or less sense depending on what you mean by "impossible to hear soundstage". Since we have established that plenty of people do indeed, at least sometimes,  "hear soundstage extending the 60 degrees" it is not a promising start to an intelligible discussion. It is obvious that speakers at a 60 degree angle might either be jammed in the corner of a room  or far away from the corners, depending on the size and shape of the room, and that these are likely to have different results. It is also worth bearig in mind that the ambient and reflected sounds picked up by an ortf mic will be different for really wide left right sounds and that although these may not be unambiguously encoded, the brain might make some guesses based on these. 

[fas42]

1 hour ago, adamdea said:

No. Why should the sound coming from two boxes appear to come from an area outside the two boxes? I do hope this isn;t going to be a tedious ambiophonics plug. The issue relating to stereo speakers is pretty obvious assuming one starts with how you hear and proceeds to how stereo creates an illusion.

 

Because the brain processes all the cues in the sound field, and allocates an origin depending on that information. If the cues are poorly rendered then the typical stereo imaging is all one gets - lift the SQ sufficiently and the full illusion manifests; one's brain has the smarts to work out what it all means, this is the next level of perception from the purely mechanical one.

[PeterSt]

7 minutes ago, STC said:

Stereo illusion is based mainly on timing and level difference. So the accurate recreation of the event requires the accurate recreation of the exact position of the instruments in the illusion.

 

I think it may not the best idea to define the happening as "illusion" as such. Sure, some things are an illusion all right (like the coloring which is harmless up to an extent) but what I talk about is math plus it can be measured. Phase angle stuff and how we deal with that with TWO ears (one would not work).

 

To get the idea better, would anyone know why a cuckoo can not be localized (by us humans) ?

Try to find this answer. It is crucial to the subject (which we all changed 180 degrees but alas - haha)

[fas42]

4 minutes ago, PeterSt said:

 

If I stand right in front of my speaker (mind you, one) then the horn blasts in my face.

So no. Not in my case.

 

Okay. There is another level of quality possible where the horn doesn't "blast you" - the audible anomalies need to be attenuated just a bit more for this to happen; there is a clear transition in how it becomes impossible to "hear the speaker" listening like this.

 

It takes throwing everything at the rig to get this consistently - the current NAD combo has not yet delivered on getting this, but that's OK - there's plenty to do still, to push it to the necessary level.

[PeterSt]

I have so many examples of an upright double bass coming plainly from one speaker only.

I have as many or more examples of people bringing their DAC for comparison and how the double bass comes plainly from the middle.

I'd go as far as that everybody receives a bass from the middle because, well, basses always do. Right ?

 

By now I would even be able to show you e.g. 24 Hz (within music) to clearly spring from one speaker only. But then I have a speaker for that (and no sub woofer).

 

Nice hobby.

 

 

[fas42]

1 hour ago, Nikhil said:

STC,

 

The sound stage can and does position instruments and singers outside the speakers. But it requires a tremendous system to do it.

 

 

 

Not a tremendous system, but a tremendous degree of attention to detail in optimising an ordinary system. The problem is that human hearing is pretty sharp, and the slightest aspect being untoward shatters the illusion - it can be extremely frustrating trying to tune a rig to the required standard - so all sorts of extra 'tricks' well done can be a good shortcut to achieving that subjective presentation.

[STC]

28 minutes ago, PeterSt said:

My system explicitly has been made to NOT require a sweet spot. And so it does not. I don't even have a listening chair.

 

So now we got stereo system where everywhere is sweet spot?

are we still talking about stereo sound?

[fas42]

36 minutes ago, PeterSt said:

Where-ever I am in the room, the image works out the same, though of course the whole "stage" may shift to the left with me walking to the left (remember, room is 8m wide).

Only when I am as close as approximately 1m to e.g. the left speaker (longitudinal direction) all breaks up. But 1m50 ? all still works (the other speaker 6 meter from the LH one).

 

 

That tells me how close you are to full invisibility. What was so unusual for me is that I had the whole shebang happen in one go, that 30 years ago event. That is, the image didn't break up even when I was cms from a driver - of course I was completely astounded by this, and only recently have I understood why this sort of experience could be possible.

[miguelito]

3 hours ago, STC said:

Why is that the soundstage never extends beyond the actual location of the speakers? Unless, there is phase manipulation it is impossible to hear stereo sound going outside the speakers outer boundary. Thoughts? 

Only with phase. But "manipulation" is not necessary - if you have a pair of microphones properly aligned it would come naturally from the distance from the source to each mike.

 

Consider for example Amber Rubarth's "Sessions from the 17th Ward". No processing whatsoever in this recording.

[fas42]

8 minutes ago, STC said:

 

So now we got stereo system where everywhere is sweet spot?

are we still talking about stereo sound?

 

Competent stereo sound has an "everywhere" sweet spot - that's the good part of the experience.

[STC]

2 minutes ago, miguelito said:

Only with phase. But "manipulation" is not necessary - if you have a pair of microphones properly aligned it would come naturally from the distance from the source to each mike.

 

Consider for example Amber Rubarth's "Sessions from the 17th Ward". No processing whatsoever in this recording.

 

I need the check whether I got this album. IOW, this recording will have soundstage beyond the equilateral triangle? And if you don’t mind, what’s your reference to say that no whatsoever processing done to this recording? I ask because one famous audiophile label which claimed not to have any processing appears to have added ambience. My email query wasn’t replied. 

[psjug]

1 hour ago, Nikhil said:

The sound stage can and does position instruments and singers outside the speakers. But it requires a tremendous system to do it.

 

 

It's not unusual for me to perceive a soundstage much wider than my speaker spacing, and my system is certainly not extraordinary.  Really I would guess I could swap out just about any speakers and I would still hear it.  I assume the causes are mostly the recording and the room.  It would be interesting for those of us who hear it to note recordings where soundstage is extremely wide.  I will pay attention and offer something if I come across it.

[STC]

Maybe, more can suggest different true stereo recordings. Amber is a good start. Anything else?  Maybe we can list the room dimension and speakers position and describe the soundstage. 

[semente]

3 hours ago, PeterSt said:

 

Are we being ignorant ?

Even if I am 2 meters (!!!) in front of the speakers which are 6 meters apart, the room being 8 meters wide, it happens. Always.

But I understand I must go find my hidden DSP machine, right ? 

 

Maybe someone can do some math about the "damping" of soundwaves which radiate to the side walls and are reflected there. In a normal living room ? nothing damps and the only thing what matters is the propagation distance. So day that the speaker is 1m from the wall then possibly each reflection towards you travels 2 meters further/longer and is therefore attenuated by, what ? 6dB (2x 3).

 

How does it come that you are so definite / persistent on your claim ?

 

From what I understand, with a real stereo two-track recording you can't get images produced outside of the are between the speakers. You do get phantom images from reflections of untreated room surfaces but these will act like reverb.

 

phantom images.pdf

[semente]

Also, different microphone techniques produce different dispersion width of images within the space between speakers:

 

http://www.sengpielaudio.com/Visualization-XY-E.htm

[adamdea]

3 minutes ago, semente said:

 

From what I understand, with a real stereo two-track recording you can't get images produced outside of the are between the speakers. You do get phantom images from reflections of untreated room surfaces but these will act like reverb.

 

phantom images.pdf

slides 6, 10 and 14 suggest that there is not much problem with the width of stereo image providing you dont mind sitting in row 10-15 in a concert hall. 

[semente]

3 hours ago, STC said:

I never heard sound outside the boundaries in a well treated room with 60 degrees setup.

 

I think you mean images, not sound.

Perhaps this is what confused @PeterSt ...

[psjug]

As others have said, the effect could be partly/mostly a creation by our brains.  Sometimes I even get a hint of some soundstage in mono recordings.

[semente]

2 hours ago, Nikhil said:

STC,

 

The sound stage can and does position instruments and singers outside the speakers. But it requires a tremendous system to do it.

 

At Munich 2017 there was the BACCH SP seminar by Theoretica Applied Physics in which Prof Edgar Choueiri repeatedly demonstrated the abilities of his remarkable Bacch SP processor to - on the flick of a switch - expand the sound stage from within the speakers to outside the speakers.  It was a stunning experience to say the least.    The demo as I heard it clearly placed a singer at 9:00 o clock and an instrument 2 o clock which were clearly outside the speakers positioning (speakers were at 11 and 1 o clock so to speak).  The theory I believe is in the elimination of cross talk to some extent but also involved some calibration of the digital processor to the listening seat.   

 

Here is a picture of the demo.  There is one limitation in that you have to be seated in line behind the listening seat to experience the 3D soundstage. 

 

 

This is of course not the only way to experience this but as they say there are many ways to Rome.  Do look up the Theoretica website for more info.

 

Regards.

 

 

  

 

It's not about the quality of the system but the type of recording, and I think that STC is talking about real stereo two-track not studio processed recordings with phase manipulation.

 

For those effects you have these online test files:

 

https://www.audiocheck.net/audiotests_ledr.php

[semente]

2 hours ago, STC said:

 

Again, it is a simple question. In your 60 degree speakers setup, it is impossible to hear soundstage extending beyond the 60 degrees in a standard stereo recording such as using ORTF mic setup.   That’s law of physics and yet some hear them. The question is why and how?

 

Feel free to click the ignore button if you suspect I have other agenda. 

 

Have you read these?

 

What Can and Cannot Be Expected from Stereo, Logically

http://www.regonaudio.com/What Can and Cannot be Expected from Stereo.html

 

Directional Hearing: How To Listen to Stereo

http://www.regonaudio.com/Directional Hearing How To Listen to Stereo.htm

[semente]

2 hours ago, PeterSt said:

My system explicitly has been made to NOT require a sweet spot. And so it does not.

 

I thought you were using horns, not omni-directional speakers...

 

Stereo's sweet spot affects different aspects of sound, not just imaging.