True to life recording? - We are fooling ourselves!

[fas42]

32 minutes ago, STC said:

 

1)How soundstage and real musicians in the room are related?  

 

If real musicians were in some space beyond the speakers, their music making would have a certain 'presence', create a 'vibe' in the room you were listening, irrespective of where you were sitting, etc. There wouldn't be pinpoint imaging, as beloved by audiophiles, but you would still have no trouble pointing to where each player was, have a strong sense of the location from where their contribution was coming - that's the sense of soundstaging I'm looking for, from an audio system.

 

32 minutes ago, STC said:

 

2)Looking at some of your examples, it looks like you (fas42) could still hear soundstage ( as happened in in actual recording) with one speaker place in front and the other places at the back. True?  

 

 

 

 

Don't understand your question here - the speaker are always placed in a conventional configuration, left and right, pointing directly or almost directly forward always. What I have said is that I'm aware of the sound happening in spaces completely outside the speakers even when behind them; the sound is bouncing off the wall that the speakers face, and that still gives sufficient definition to what I'm listening to.

[STC]

19 minutes ago, fas42 said:

If real musicians were in some space beyond the speakers, their music making would have a certain 'presence', create a 'vibe' in the room you were listening, irrespective of where you were sitting, etc. There wouldn't be pinpoint imaging, as beloved by audiophiles, but you would still have no trouble pointing to where each player was, have a strong sense of the location from where their contribution was coming - that's the sense of soundstaging I'm looking for, from an audio system.

 

A stereo creates soundstage by making use of two speakers’ sound level/intensity difference. You identify using the level difference between the two speakers to reconstruct the image. This image is known as phantom image because it isn't real. Technically, if you could also get one single timing difference between the two speakers then you get a more precise and sharper image; i.e. location of the performers.  

 

 In live performance, the sound from each performer is only from a single spot. Your ears only receives one level, timing, phase cues for each ear for each source. These cues will be consistent irrespective of where you are in the room. This is what distinguishes as natural and unnatural to us when we hear a sound. 

 

Unlike what you alleges, in life performance we would always able to to pinpoint accurately where the performers are because all the cues relating spatial hearing is received correctly to the ears. 

 

In a stereo playback, the position of instruments across the soundstage which is a sound field between the most extreme side where sound emerges. This is limited to the width of the two loudspeakers in a true stereo recording. 

 

It is simply impossible to claim that you could recreate the stage at any position outside the mid point of the triangle. Outside the mid point you would perceive the sound of the speaker closer to you more louder than the other which destroys the ability of stereo to fully utilize the difference of level between the two speakers to create the phantom image. 

 

It is not possible. But if you insist your brain could reconstruct the positioning information then it is definitely impossible because me and the rest of the people I know could not. Having said that, there can be some occasions where it is possible where the recordings have a very small number of instruments and the instruments are split between extreme left and right channels. For an example, the Sax could be strictly confined closer to the left speakers and a drum to the right. In such circumstances, it is generally possible to perceive a stage because you are can hear two distinct source. So in a way, what you are saying is possible for certain type of recording. 

[fas42]

1 minute ago, STC said:

 

Unlike what you alleges, in life performance we would always able to to pinpoint accurately where the performers are because all the cues relating spatial hearing is received correctly to the ears. 

 

This depends upon the intensity of the sound in the space - when the room is very strongly energised with sound, from live instruments and players, then the echos bouncing around like crazy make precision locating rather difficult, - but we don't mind, because the sense of immersion in the sound is what's driving the enjoyment; knowing precisely where one sound is coming from is no longer relevant.

 

1 minute ago, STC said:

 

In a stereo playback, the position of instruments across the soundstage which is a sound field between the most extreme side where sound emerges. This is limited to the width of the two loudspeakers in a true stereo recording. 

 

It is simply impossible to claim that you could recreate the stage at any position outside the mid point of the triangle. Outside the mid point you would perceive the sound of the speaker closer to you more louder than the other which destroys the ability of stereo to fully utilize the difference of level between the two speakers to create the phantom image. 

 

What appears to happen is that the brain's processing switches to another level of capability, to interpret what it's hearing - if one has experienced rigs for decades, that will allow the mind to access this 'higher order' of presentation, when they're firing; and for it to shrivel back to standard stereo fare when they're misfiring, then you have a good handle on what happens, subjectively ... simply, the mind "fills the gaps", beautifully, when the SQ is good enough.

 

1 minute ago, STC said:

 

It is not possible. But if you insist your brain could reconstruct the positioning information then it is definitely impossible because me and the rest of the people I know could not. Having said that, there can be some occasions where it is possible where the recordings have a very small number of instruments and the instruments are split between extreme left and right channels. For an example, the Sax could be strictly confined closer to the left speakers and a drum to the right. In such circumstances, it is generally possible to perceive a stage because you are can hear two distinct source. So in a way, what you are saying is possible for certain type of recording. 

 

It's a step change in what you hear - below the necessary quality, the sound is 2D, hanging between the speakers like a wet blanket; above the quality, everything springs out of the speakers and positions itself in  clearly defined areas behind the speakers; some such 'stages' are tiny, some are monstrous - completely dependent on how it was recorded.

[STC]

17 minutes ago, fas42 said:

This depends upon the intensity of the sound in the space - when the room is very strongly energised with sound, from live instruments and players, then the echos bouncing around like crazy make precision locating rather difficult,

 

Didn’t I say don’t bring what fas42 brain interprets into this discussion?  Unless, you live a room where the reflecting surface is less than 1 foot away what you said is nonsense. Sound delayed more than 1ms ( it could be lower depending on your pinna distance) does not affect localization. 

 

 

[PeterSt]

30 minutes ago, fas42 said:

when the room is very strongly energised with sound, from live instruments and players, then the echos bouncing around like crazy make precision locating rather difficult,

 

The contrary.

[Ralf11]

Both.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

at different levels of SPL and reflective objects in the listening env.

[fas42]

22 minutes ago, PeterSt said:

 

The contrary.

 

Obviously everybody has had different experiences of live sound from me - personally, if I'm in a smallish room full of people singing at the top of their voice, "deafening" levels; I have some difficulty in picking out a single voice in the 'mix', and saying, yes, it must be coming from that particular person, riiight there ... I bow to other people's greater abilities, .

[Blackmorec]

10 hours ago, STC said:

 

A stereo creates soundstage by making use of two speakers’ sound level/intensity difference. You identify using the level difference between the two speakers to reconstruct the image. This image is known as phantom image because it isn't real. Technically, if you could also get one single timing difference between the two speakers then you get a more precise and sharper image; i.e. location of the performers.  

 

 In live performance, the sound from each performer is only from a single spot. Your ears only receives one level, timing, phase cues for each ear for each source. These cues will be consistent irrespective of where you are in the room. This is what distinguishes as natural and unnatural to us when we hear a sound. 

 

Unlike what you alleges, in life performance we would always able to to pinpoint accurately where the performers are because all the cues relating spatial hearing is received correctly to the ears. 

 

In a stereo playback, the position of instruments across the soundstage which is a sound field between the most extreme side where sound emerges. This is limited to the width of the two loudspeakers in a true stereo recording. 

 

It is simply impossible to claim that you could recreate the stage at any position outside the mid point of the triangle. Outside the mid point you would perceive the sound of the speaker closer to you more louder than the other which destroys the ability of stereo to fully utilize the difference of level between the two speakers to create the phantom image. 

 

It is not possible. But if you insist your brain could reconstruct the positioning information then it is definitely impossible because me and the rest of the people I know could not. Having said that, there can be some occasions where it is possible where the recordings have a very small number of instruments and the instruments are split between extreme left and right channels. For an example, the Sax could be strictly confined closer to the left speakers and a drum to the right. In such circumstances, it is generally possible to perceive a stage because you are can hear two distinct source. So in a way, what you are saying is possible for certain type of recording. 

Its really very simple.

In real life an instrument launches a sound wave that creates a circular, expanding set of soundwaves in air. The soundwaves travel at a fixed speed, losing energy on the way as they expand and compress the air ahead.  As the soundwave reaches your ears, depending on your head’s orientation it will either reach both ears simultaneously (when the origin of the sound is at 90 degrees to both ears i.e straight ahead or straight behind or it will take longer to reach one ear than the other, in which case it will have slightly different timing, slightly different phase and slightly different amplitude. Your brain utilises the differential between the 2 signals to provide location. If there’s no difference, the sound originated from straight ahead...if it arrives first at the right ear, it’s origin is some distance off centre to the right and the same for left. 

 

What stereo does is to duplicate those same 2 signals that reach the ears from a natural sound and give them the same differential amplitude and delay as the original, so your ears can’t tell that the sounds are coming from 2 locations...rather it hears the same signal in both ears, with the same differential amplitude and delay as the signal from the single, natural source. When the 2 sets of signals (natural and stereo) reaching each ear are more or less identical, how can the brain tell if they come from a single source (as in nature) or a double, coordinated source (as in stereo). The short answer is it can’t, because all the qualities the brain requires to define location are present in both sets of signals...namely the differences caused by hearing a sound with 2 ears, placed at different locations around the head.    

[STC]

59 minutes ago, Blackmorec said:

Its really very simple.

In real life an instrument launches a sound wave that creates a circular, expanding set of soundwaves in air. The soundwaves travel at a fixed speed, losing energy on the way as they expand and compress the air ahead.  As the soundwave reaches your ears, depending on your head’s orientation it will either reach both ears simultaneously (when the origin of the sound is at 90 degrees to both ears i.e straight ahead or straight behind or it will take longer to reach one ear than the other, in which case it will have slightly different timing, slightly different phase and slightly different amplitude. Your brain utilises the differential between the 2 signals to provide location. If there’s no difference, the sound originated from straight ahead...if it arrives first at the right ear, it’s origin is some distance off centre to the right and the same for left. 

 

That’s what Blauert says too. 

 

59 minutes ago, Blackmorec said:

What stereo does is to duplicate those same 2 signals that reach the ears from a natural sound and give them the same differential amplitude and delay as the original, so your ears can’t tell that the sounds are coming from 2 locations...rather it hears the same signal in both ears, with the same differential amplitude and delay as the signal from the single, natural source. When the 2 sets of signals (natural and stereo) reaching each ear are more or less identical, how can the brain tell if they come from a single source (as in nature) or a double, coordinated source (as in stereo). The short answer is it can’t, because all the qualities the brain requires to define location are present in both sets of signals...namely the differences caused by hearing a sound with 2 ears, placed at different locations around the head.    

 

This can be debunked easily. Take a stereo recording. Delete one channel and copy the other channel to it. Adjust the amplitude. You still hear the phantom image. 

 

Secondly, get agood microphone and record a true stereo recording of a small live ensemble. At the same time, also record the same performance using a a binaural microphone. Now play the recording and record them with the binaural microphone. Listen to both and you would realize how fake and blur the stereo playback is. Interaural crosstalk is a well researched area and you can find many research papers on them. Anyway, it is hard to describe this to someone who is yet to hear what a binaural sound over loudspeaker is. 

[Kal Rubinson]

1 hour ago, Blackmorec said:

In real life an instrument launches a sound wave that creates a circular, expanding set of soundwaves in air.

I think that is a great simplification.  While the sound wave may expand in all directions, it does not usually do so symmetrically in a circular or, more specifically, spherical pattern but is decidedly asymmetric due to the shape and configuration of the instrument and the presence of the player.  For example, the sound pattern that is created by a violin comes from the strings, the body and the f-holes (which direct the energy in different ways) and all are greatly influenced by the position of the player who holds it on one side of his body.

[Blackmorec]

1 hour ago, Kal Rubinson said:

I think that is a great simplification.  While the sound wave may expand in all directions, it does not usually do so symmetrically in a circular or, more specifically, spherical pattern but is decidedly asymmetric due to the shape and configuration of the instrument and the presence of the player.  For example, the sound pattern that is created by a violin comes from the strings, the body and the f-holes (which direct the energy in different ways) and all are greatly influenced by the position of the player who holds it on one side of his body.

Kal, we are talking about sound waves, not sound patterns. A sound wave can be reflected, diffracted or refracted. A sound pattern is simply a collection of sound waves that may or may not have been subject to one or more of the above. But what reaches the ear and is analysed are sound waves. That they belong to a sound pattern is not relevant to the discussion beyond the fact that the sound pattern should be the same in both ears save for some amplitude, timing and therefore phase shifts caused by the waves travelling further to enter one ear vs the other.  

The fact that a violin is a complex instrument has no bearing on how we hear it naturally vs reproduced from a stereo system 

[Blackmorec]

1 hour ago, STC said:

 

That’s what Blauert says too. 

 

 

This can be debunked easily. Take a stereo recording. Delete one channel and copy the other channel to it. Adjust the amplitude. You still hear the phantom image. 

 

Secondly, get agood microphone and record a true stereo recording of a small live ensemble. At the same time, also record the same performance using a a binaural microphone. Now play the recording and record them with the binaural microphone. Listen to both and you would realize how fake and blur the stereo playback is. Interaural crosstalk is a well researched area and you can find many research papers on them. Anyway, it is hard to describe this to someone who is yet to hear what a binaural sound over loudspeaker is. 

Nope. Take one channel of a stereo signal, duplicate it and adjust the amplitude and play it back over a stereo system. What you’ll get is a centre image and NOTHING else. In other words a mono sound. Why? Because the entire content has the same delay and the same amplitude difference. In the original stereo recording, musicians and vocalists all have their individual locations and therefore their individual differences in delay and amplitude, but you throw away that difference when you take only one signal, so all you are left with is a single centre image with musicians playing at different levels (according to the level that was on the channel that was duplicated) . 

 

Regarding your example, I presume you mean, “take a good stereo microphone” right? 

Anyway I’ve had a passing interest in binaural recordings over the years but you’re right in that I’ve never heard them on anything other than headphones, which is where they’re generally demonstrated.  I actually wasn’t aware of any real interest in binaural recordings for speakers. 

However I can clearly explain why your example would sound strange. A binaural microphone is still just a microphone with the very simple ability to transduce sound pressure waves into voltage. They are nothing like the human hearing system, which involves massively complex cognitive and psycho-acoustic processes, so what you hear vs what you re-record and then hear are bound to be very different because you’ve stripped out all the brain’s functions and recorded stuff in each channel that our normal hearing would ignore. Once its recorded in the opposite channel, our hearing can no longer ignore it because you’ve completely changed its characteristics.   

 

 

[Kal Rubinson]

37 minutes ago, Blackmorec said:

The fact that a violin is a complex instrument has no bearing on how we hear it naturally vs reproduced from a stereo system 

Unless we are talking about dummy-head binaural recordings, it does.

[Blackmorec]

1 minute ago, Kal Rubinson said:

Unless we are talking about dummy-head binaural recordings, it does.

OK, we’re not talking about binaural recordings so kindly explain how the complex shape of a violin changes how we hear it (not what we hear obviously). 

[Ralf11]

1 hour ago, Blackmorec said:

OK, we’re not talking about binaural recordings so kindly explain how the complex shape of a violin changes how we hear it (not what we hear obviously). 

 

Let me offer a few tidbits.  The complex waveform is distorted as it bounces off the pinna, and then experiences more distortion as it propagates thru the ear canal.  It then hits the eardrum which further distorts it due to the sluggish response of the physical membrane, and the inertia of the 3 small bones attached. 

 

The bones provide a 3x amplification but smear the transient response even further.  They also have a particular resonance frequency that can gum things up.  The mangled result is delivered to the oval window which is sluggish too, like the outer ear drum.

 

More distortions follow and eventually the sound waves cause vibrations in the Organ of Corti (which has NOT been tuned by any organ-meister, I assure you!).  But as it spreads along the deeply buried tapered wedge that is for some screwball reason wrapped into a spiral, parts of it resonate from different frequencies so it is kinda "tuned" - and I mean kinda!

 

Hair cells (if any remain after your life of live concerts, jack-hammers going outside your apt. window, and bus horns) are stimulated by this mechanical energy and emit neuro-chemicals, which then have to cross a FREAKIN' synapse to trigger another damn nerve and its impulse.  My grandmother could design a better system and she is dead.

 

You can nit-pick but that's the gist of it.  It is a messed up system, full of distortions, transduction of one type of energy to another, losses everywhere, filtering,  and a parade of horribles.

 

And we didn't even get into the psycho-acoustic or cross-sensory problems.

[Blackmorec]

1 hour ago, Ralf11 said:

 

Let me offer a few tidbits.  The complex waveform is distorted as it bounces off the pinna, and then experiences more distortion as it propagates thru the ear canal.  It then hits the eardrum which further distorts it due to the sluggish response of the physical membrane, and the inertia of the 3 small bones attached. 

 

The bones provide a 3x amplification but smear the transient response even further.  They also have a particular resonance frequency that can gum things up.  The mangled result is delivered to the oval window which is sluggish too, like the outer ear drum.

 

More distortions follow and eventually the sound waves cause vibrations in the Organ of Corti (which has NOT been tuned by any organ-meister, I assure you!).  But as it spreads along the deeply buried tapered wedge that is for some screwball reason wrapped into a spiral, parts of it resonate from different frequencies so it is kinda "tuned" - and I mean kinda!

 

Hair cells (if any remain after your life of live concerts, jack-hammers going outside your apt. window, and bus horns) are stimulated by this mechanical energy and emit neuro-chemicals, which then have to cross a FREAKIN' synapse to trigger another damn nerve and its impulse.  My grandmother could design a better system and she is dead.

 

You can nit-pick but that's the gist of it.  It is a messed up system, full of distortions, transduction of one type of energy to another, losses everywhere, filtering,  and a parade of horribles.

 

And we didn't even get into the psycho-acoustic or cross-sensory problems.

That is possibly the most hilarious message I think I may have ever read on any forum. Well done Ralf 

[Kal Rubinson]

3 hours ago, Ralf11 said:

The complex waveform is distorted as it bounces off the pinna, and then experiences more distortion as it propagates thru the ear canal. 

The ear canal (external auditory meatus) is tuned by its length and being closed at one end.  And, of course, the pinna keeps moving in normal people.

3 hours ago, Ralf11 said:

The bones provide a 3x amplification but smear the transient response even further. 

It can be spoken of that way but it is more of an impedance transfer (like a transformer), increasing force at the expense of displacement.

3 hours ago, Ralf11 said:

My grandmother could design a better system and she is dead.

Did she think up the protein springs that link the tips of the hairs (cilia)?

 

Interesting cook's tour.

[Ralf11]

Thanks - I was able to channel the ghosts of matriculated grad. students in my post...

[STC]

5 hours ago, Blackmorec said:

What you’ll get is a centre image and NOTHING else. In other words a mono sound.

 

😂 so going by your logic, if I invert one channel then you get absolute silence because you said stereo creates one sound to the ears. 😂 😂 😂 

[STC]

10 hours ago, Blackmorec said:

Nope. Take one channel of a stereo signal, duplicate it and adjust the amplitude and play it back over a stereo system. What you’ll get is a centre image and NOTHING else. In other words a mono sound. Why? Because the entire content has the same delay and the same amplitude difference.

 

Just to prove you're wrong. Stereo can work with just level difference although timing can sound more accurate. There is no such thing as stereo creating one image. Number (5) sample shows you how the original right channel can now sound like the left channel of the original recording.

 

Here is the original 10 seconds of Money track from DSOTM album.

 

1) Listen to the "Shhhhhss" sound at the extreme right.

 

Moneyori.wav

 

 

2) Same track. But the left channel is deleted and replaced by a copy of the right channel. You will hear all sound in the middle like Mono. 

 

Moneyequal.wav

 

3) Now the same track in (2) is modified by reducing the level in the right channel. In the original track the "Shhhhhss" was heard on the right side. The same right track is now producing "Shhhhhss"  from the left side.

 

MoneyRightlevel.wav

 

 

4) Same file in (3) now added 250 microseconds delay to the right channel. Listen to this with headphones and loudspeakers. Which one is clearer and why?

 

MoneyrightD.wav

 

 

 

5) This is the most important one. Here you can see why stereo replay over loudspeakers' cannot retrieve all the information due to crosstalk. Listen with headphones and through loudspeakers. This the mono track (2) with identical copies of original right channel in both. The only difference in this there was a 250microseconds delay added to the right channel which will shift the position of the "Shhhhhss"  to the left and can be heard clearly with headphones but almost centred with loudspeakers playback.

 

Moneyequalbutdelayed.wav

[Blackmorec]

4 hours ago, STC said:

Just to prove you're wrong. Stereo can work with just level difference although timing can sound more accurate. There is no such thing as stereo creating one image. Number (5) sample shows you how the original right channel can now sound like the left channel of the original recording.

STC, with respect, this thread is starting to behave like the Oozlum bird. 

 

There was never any doubt that manipulating levels and phase causes image shifts. Its how stereo works  and what I been arguing since the beginning, so I’ve no idea why you went to so much trouble simply to prove what I’ve said all along.  If the 2 signals in the stereo channels are similar or the same, save for some subtle shifts in amplitude and phase, the brain will combine the 2 signals into a single signal with direction/location.  Its been like that since man hunted with stone tipped spears, because its based on our innate hearing ability. 

 

As for there being no such thing as stereo creating one image, simply switch your pre-amp to mono. Your 2 speakers will now both receive the same signal, with no differences in amplitude or timing and they’ll produce ONLY a centre image. Why? Because there’s no differential signal. All the information is there, buy its now combined and delivered as 2 identical L&R signals, played through both loudspeakers equally loud.  Your brain picks up 2 matching signals,  from 2 spatially different sources. In nature when 2 signals match perfectly in frequency content, time and amplitude, with the only difference being caused through headshape, the only logical conclusion is that both sounds came from the same single source, so that is what you hear. 

 

BTW, I no longer own headphones. I used to use AGG K1000 ear speakers then some Stax but that was when my daughter was studying. The experience was great but very different to loudspeakers. 

[STC]

@Blackmorec  I just showed you that there need not be phase shift or timing difference for phantom image in stereo. The original Blumlein stereo microphone technique was known as intensity stereo. The only thing that mattered in stereo reproduction to create the soundstage is intensity. 

 

The only consistent cue in stereo reproduction via loudspeakers is intensity or level difference. The brain is still confused and knows a stereo production is fake because the timing and pinnae cues do not tally with the level different cues. 

 

The (5) sample clearly shows that a loudspeakers cannot produce the image shift based on timing because it is receiving two timing difference which cause the phantom image to be smeared. 

[Blackmorec]

Here’s why I’m confused and why I reference the Oozlum bird. 

40 minutes ago, STC said:

The (5) sample clearly shows that a loudspeakers cannot produce the image shift based on timing because it is receiving two timing difference which cause the phantom image to be smeared. 

 That’s what you just wrote

 

Now lets look at what you wrote previously 

 

4 hours ago, STC said:

5) This is the most important one. Here you can see why stereo replay over loudspeakers' cannot retrieve all the information due to crosstalk. Listen with headphones and through loudspeakers. This the mono track (2) with identical copies of original right channel in both. The only difference in this there was a 250microseconds delay added to the right channel which will shift the position of the "Shhhhhss"  to the left and can be heard clearly with headphones but almost centred with loudspeakers playback

Let me summarise

Timing can’t shift an image

Timing does shift an image 

If your point was that you have to cut out crosstalk as head phones would for timing to shift an image then that’s a good point. BUT, I’ve never written that phase or timing ALONE will alter the location of an image. Amplitude differences are an essential part of the brain’s ability to detect location. In fact, frequency content, amplitude and timing are all critical elements. 

BTW, a 250ms delay is massive in terms of distance, so a bit of an out of context example. 

 

Both phase and frequency aspects are more centred around the brain’s evaluation of the signal to confirm whether its a single source or not. Amplitude is related to location. If frequency and phase relations don’t match, the brain won’t combine the signals and you will hear 2 separate locations.  If phase and frequency do match then the chances are very high that in nature we are dealing with a single point source, so the 2 signals are combined, using the amplitude shift to give location. 

[STC]

In the case of identical signal from each speakers but one is inverted, you do not hear silence because the ears receives two different sound. However, if you were to listen to one speaker only at a time both will sound exact the same unless you the one of the rare person with sect who could hear absolute phase. 

 

When the the wind reaches the ear at the same time, what was heard as two do not merge into one image because the ears are still hearing two separate sound which provides their own ITD and ILD. However, since the sound from one speaker reaches the other by a delay of 250 microseconds, the sound which hit the ear at the exact moment from each speaker cause confusion as the two phases were different. The brain becomes confused and loses the ability to locate them. What you hear is like sound coming from every direction. 

[STC]

46 minutes ago, Blackmorec said:

BTW, a 250ms delay is massive in terms of distance, so a bit of an out of context example.

 

Who said 250ms?