Natural high frequency spectral notches introduced by the outer pinna help us hear height. You can fool your perception by creating these notches through phase manipulatin between channels. Take one of your tweeters, wire it out of phase, and height galore! You'll hear it in an arc, with greatest height for mono-coded stereo signals, dead center.
Dave
I found out by sitting close to the speakers and keep them well apart ( even up to 3 meters ) makes the height perception even stronger. My wideband dipols ( MPL Slim ) can make an effect that i hear the sound from 3m over my head, stuck to the ceiling or even project into my head. If that is natural or not is not the question here i think but it is exiting, especially on electronic music.
Joachim, I've found a similar effect with that placement. Had forgotten about it until you mentioned it.
Phase can play some weird tricks. Yesterday I heard some song on the radio where there was a "ping, ping, ping" in the music that was on the wall behind me, slightly to my right. It was the only part of the music to do that, but it was very distinctly on the rear wall. Funny.
Phase can play some weird tricks. Yesterday I heard some song on the radio where there was a "ping, ping, ping" in the music that was on the wall behind me, slightly to my right. It was the only part of the music to do that, but it was very distinctly on the rear wall. Funny.
Roger Waters and Madonna made Q-Sound recordings where you can hear sound most everywhere. On the Roger Waters a dog is barking outside of my house in the yard.
I think what is discussed here can be had from any decent speaker when the software allows it and the speaker is setup right. That has to do with directivity index and we have discussed that at length on my ZDL thread. In a nutshell a highly directive speaker can be setup further away from the listening seat and a speaker with a wide dispersion like the original Pro Ac Tablette has to be closer. In a big room when the speakers are far away from walls and you sit also far away from walls this rule of thump can be lightened provided that this room does not have bad echos. A friend of my has a wooded house with a very big listening room and we can setup nearly any decent speaker to image like crazy.
I think what is discussed here can be had from any decent speaker when the software allows it and the speaker is setup right. That has to do with directivity index and we have discussed that at length on my ZDL thread. In a nutshell a highly directive speaker can be setup further away from the listening seat and a speaker with a wide dispersion like the original Pro Ac Tablette has to be closer. In a big room when the speakers are far away from walls and you sit also far away from walls this rule of thump can be lightened provided that this room does not have bad echos. A friend of my has a wooded house with a very big listening room and we can setup nearly any decent speaker to image like crazy.
Doesn't this boil down to "maximise the reflection free zone" - which could be made easier with directive speakers, but would be easy with big rooms anyway?
Rudolf
Rudolf, more or less yes but not all people can afford or place directive speakers because they are usually bigger and more expensive then a mini monitor. I would also say that a highly dispersive speaker has more "space" and a directive one has more "focus".
We could demonstrate that at Klangbilder in Vienna where we had a LÀrt du Son ZDL besides a 1.7 Maggi.
Rob, yes, we use this recording on shows for setup.
We could demonstrate that at Klangbilder in Vienna where we had a LÀrt du Son ZDL besides a 1.7 Maggi.
Rob, yes, we use this recording on shows for setup.
Hello Joachim
Yes the effects are bizarre and quite convincing! I use the Roger Waters disk as a set-up disk to make sure everything is in phase and to tweek for the best imaging.
Rob
I've often heard reference to a particular Roger Waters disk as being a good example of Q-Sound, can someone name the album so I can have a look at it ? If there's more than one he's done then I'd be interested to know which one would be the best example of Q-Sound effects.
Also does anyone know what surround effect was used on the original Deep Forest album ? Q-Sound ? It's quite subtle and unless you have your speakers set up well its not necessarily that noticeable but certain tracks have sounds that traverse a full 360 degrees around the listener over a period of a few seconds.
Last edited:
Sure you can do that. But not with a stereo recording alone. You would need excessive manipulation of phase and frequency response afterwards. Only rather humble effects (like Ms. Saigon or the choir) can be achieved with "normal" stereo. I have convolved an anechoic Denon orchestral recording with the impulse response of a cathedral - no increased height to speak of.
How about showing that ZDL at the end of your ZDL thread? Up to now it ends with your comment of "balls are coming into fashion again lately"
Time you steer that thread back it into less troubled waters ...
The Roger Waters' recording mentioned by DBMandrake earlier was from his "Amused to Death" CD.
A list of other Q Sound recordings is found at:
Who's Using QSound Audio Technology: Recording Artists P - Z
Jim
A list of other Q Sound recordings is found at:
Who's Using QSound Audio Technology: Recording Artists P - Z
Jim
Joachim, I'm guessing this is Radio Kaos? I've only heard it once at my old house probably 10 years ago or more, but I was sitting listening (must have been in the sweet spot) and distictly hear a dog bark at least 20M away outside my house. Just curious but for me it was to the right of me sitting, I assume the same for you? I ask because of the mention earlier of where we expect to hear sounds, and for me that is where I would have expected it.
Hi Simon, I've heard the dog that Joachim mentions on Radio Kaos (but it is possible there is more than one Waters album with a dog outside). The dog on Radio Kaos from memory is during some of the dialog between tracks. I actually listened to it with my new setup a month or so ago, but didn't hear the effect
The other Roger Waters album I have seen mentioned a lot for great imaging effects (though I don't have it) Is Amused to Death.
Tony.
The dog is on "Amused to Death". There is also a coach riding from the left side out of my room, through my head ( or even a little bid behind my back ) and then disappearing to the right outside of my room.
Thanks for the list, Jim.
Yes, Rudolf, the ZDL thread is frelled out of many reasons. The major one is time i do not have. The other one is the frustration that the midrange does not sound good in a plastic sphere ( ball ).
I have now wooden spheres that are more promising and i will try to steer that thread back into more clear waters.
Thanks for the list, Jim.
Yes, Rudolf, the ZDL thread is frelled out of many reasons. The major one is time i do not have. The other one is the frustration that the midrange does not sound good in a plastic sphere ( ball ).
I have now wooden spheres that are more promising and i will try to steer that thread back into more clear waters.
Last edited:
Since we are having fun with reverb, I thought I'd try to put some sounds behind the head. I wasn't able to (yet).
But here is an anechoic horn track with various reverb added. These are convolved reverbs, meaning that are taken from the impulse response of real spaces.
I certainly hear hight on some of these, not the horns themselves, but in the space. Listen for what you think. Two mp3 files in each zip.
But here is an anechoic horn track with various reverb added. These are convolved reverbs, meaning that are taken from the impulse response of real spaces.
I certainly hear hight on some of these, not the horns themselves, but in the space. Listen for what you think. Two mp3 files in each zip.
A respected member on a dutch forum had the same experience in his study years. One of his study friends had a poor wooden student home. That wooden room had one of the best acoustics for music reproduction he experienced.
That brings to me the idea that the absorption bandwidth of wood and the reflection bandwidth are the key for pleasant music reproduction.
In the states there are a lot wooden houses when I look at the TV when I see the houses blown a way by a hurricane. So many must have great acoustics as long they are not hit by a storm.
Just listened to "Roger Waters" and the coach rides from left to right a bit in front of the speakers. Then when it disappears it bents a bit to the right side of me.
This is a effect i think of my room and placement of the speakers. I also have it with a cd of Jimi Hendrix(polydor "The ultimate experience") when I am concentrated listening to the music also appears to come to the right or left side of me.
(The light window in the sealing is very poor for music reproduction it reflects a lot when your standing there talking for example.)
Last edited:
Very true. We build poorly here in the US. Gypsum board over a light wood frame - not great for acoustics. Concrete block is another popular building material and it's awful, acoustically. Terracotta tile is pretty good but isn't used much now because of the cost.
In general I hear much better acoustics in Europe. The right combo of wood, stone and plaster seems to do the trick.
In general I hear much better acoustics in Europe. The right combo of wood, stone and plaster seems to do the trick.
Well funnily enough, I've just come across a song where some of the guitar appears to original nearly at the ceiling
It's "Wish you were here" from the remastered version of Pink Floyd's Wish you were here album. Here's an iTunes link that has a nice 1:30 preview:
http://itunes.apple.com/gb/album/wish-you-were-here/id464264998?i=464265017
(If it doesn't work because its the UK store, just search for "Wish you were here (remastered)")
On my system, the plucking of the main guitar in the centre phantom channel which begins at about 13 seconds in the preview appears to originate several feet above the speakers, perhaps as little as about 1-2 feet below the ceiling, near the ceiling/front wall junction behind the speakers. Even the notes of the guitar (as opposed to the plucking) are coming from about half way between the top of the speakers and the ceiling. The singing that starts a bit later comes from a couple of feet above the speakers at least as well.
In fact the singing and guitar together form an overall soundstage that seems to spread from the top of the speakers to near the ceiling, and to the width of the speakers - like a big window above the speakers.
Most curious, because I own a couple of versions of this song and I had never noticed this before. I have a lossless rip of the song both from the original "non remastered" CD release of the album (released 10-15 years ago ?) and the Echoes: The best of pink floyd collection released about 5 years ago.
So I pulled up both of those and played them as a direct comparison and sure enough, the exaggerated stretched to the ceiling height perception is not there. Both sound identical to each other and have an image for both guitar and singer that is very sharply focused at most about 1 foot above and half way between the speakers - where most phantom mono material usually images on my speakers.
Both guitar and singer sound "dense" in that they image from a small tightly constrained spot.
Meanwhile back on the remastered version on iTunes the image is not just higher up but stretched vertically, with high frequency components seeming higher than lower frequency components, thus giving a more "expansive" image, but one that is more diffuse and not quite believable.
I looked, but it seems that iTunes no longer has available a non-remastered version of this song available, nor the Echoes collection, so I can't offer a link to the non-remastered version for people to compare, however I would be interested if you play the preview of the version linked above to see whether you perceive well above speaker imaging of the guitar in particular.
Clearly some tampering has been done in the "remastering" (sigh...) and I can notice a difference in tonal balance between the two - the remastered version has noticeably more high treble, which is consistent with a perception of elevation, although its possible that deliberate processing (other than just high end treble lift) was applied to attempt to stretch the image into more of a soundscape.
Last edited:
- Status
- This old topic is closed. If you want to reopen this topic, contact a moderator using the "Report Post" button.