Linkwitz Orions beaten by Behringer.... what!!?

John K,
I wouldn't say that you can pin point identify where the individual instruments are per say, but with left right panning in most recording the images should have some position and some of that should be between a pair of speakers if center panned. Now as for the up and down that people say they hear I don't see the mechanism for that besides a speaker that is tilting the image because of a time alignment problem or phase shifting, but I guess some people could like that effect. I don't think that we can every create a realistic size proportion of an instrument just because they can radiate over such a large area on a real instrument such as a piano or even a viola or any wind instrument. But we sure do try and want to believe we can recreate that in two channel stereo!

ps. we have to remember that the majority of recorded music is just panned mono left to right, unlike the real event.
 
See, this is where I loose the imaging argument. I've never been to a live concert of any kind where I could close my eyes and pin point the placement of any single instrument. When audiophiles start talking about such pin point imaging I immediately find that totally artificial. It truly is an illusion, but a false one, IMO.

John - I completely agree. In a live concert I can't either. But you completely miss the point. Classical music in a concert hall is not the only type of recording that there is! :rolleyes:
 
Just another Moderator
Joined 2003
Paid Member
Having personally experienced height, depth and images way wider than the speakers, I am in the camp that believes that stereo encoding CAN do all of this.

Two specific cases (both Television through my stereo only sound system) had no visual clues that could prompt this.

One I was watching a movie and thought that's odd there is a helicopter outside above the house. I actually got up and went to the window but couldn't see anything, then the helicopter appeared in the scene.

The other was an advertisment. There were people sitting on a couch which was in the middle of a room (as was mine) I heard a voice behind me (which made me turn around and look) when I looked back the tv camera panned around to show the person standing behind the people on the couch.

I also often (but not allways) find that thunder in movies sounds like it is coming from outside of the room.

The helicopter and thunder I guess could be explained by the brain expecting these sounds to come from a particular location so if they are realistically enough rendered your brain hears them where it expects them.

The one behind me I have no explanation for. Rear wall reflection is out as the wall was another 3-4M behind.

annecdote I know, but enough for me to be convinced.

If you want to hear sounds out into the room and beyond the width of the speakers have a listen to Roger Warters "Amused to Death" Roger Waters Amused To Death Full cd - YouTube using Q-Sound. If you don't hear it with that, you won't hear it with anything ;)

Tony.
 
If you want to hear sounds out into the room and beyond the width of the speakers have a listen to Roger Warters "Amused to Death" Roger Waters Amused To Death Full cd - YouTube using Q-Sound. If you don't hear it with that, you won't hear it with anything

Yes but that is an exception and without the Q-Sound you have to wonder what it would sound like. That said one of my set-up disks.

Rob;)
 
I've never been to a live concert of any kind where I could close my eyes and pin point the placement of any single instrument.
If this "closed eyes" experience would be the preferable kind of listening, why don't we see concert halls full of people listening with sleeping masks? :rolleyes:
Did it never appear to you that a recorded concert needs increased spatial accuracy to compensate for the lack of ventriloquism, when listening blindfolded? :confused:

Rudolf
 
Thanks for posting that. I'll try to catch up with the thread and read the paper.
It seems like a breath of fresh air to me - because for years people have told me that it's the high frequencies and the tweeters that aid location clues. I just don't hear it that way. Tweeters add texture and tone for me, not space or location. I hear space and location clues down low, mostly in the octave around 400Hz.

Since that's where I hear the location clues I have long been puzzled why tweeters don't do much for me, except change tone. The study looks worthwhile to pursue.


Yes Pano you are one of the few left who still trust his own perception.

Many people around here have been brainwashed with the marketing agenda by some parties.

At the end which is more important, what you hear by yourself or what someone is telling you how you should hear.


- Elias
 
Many people around here have been brainwashed with the marketing agenda by some parties.

At the end which is more important, what you hear by yourself or what someone is telling you how you should hear.
Elias,
you certainly don't dare to call those "brainwashed" people by their names on this forum. So why are you using this accusation in the first place? :mad:

Rudolf
 
increased in comparison to a live event? :confused:

You mean that a recording must be "more accurate than reality"? :scratch:

What Do You mean by "accuracy" then??? :confused:

That is not as unreasonable as you make it sound.
If you compare going to a live sporting event with seeing it on television for example.
On television you get a lot more detail and live you get more ambiance. Both have their strong and week points.
It can be the same for live music vs recorded music that is just a question of taste.
 
Let's make a difference between "hearing" and "listening". "Hearing" would be the physical and low level neurological process, that is somewhat coded in our genes. "Listening" is learned as a baby by comparing sounds at the ear with the visual changes around us. Like the mother moving her lips or the rattle bouncing across the buggy. This link between ear and eye is never broken. As a subjective perception we hear less accurate (and in many cases less emotionally involved) when we can't see the origin of sounds.

If this is all wrong, why do people want to see the piano player in front of the stage at a piano concert? The piano would not sound different if the conductor would conceal the soloist. :rolleyes:

Good recording engineers know about that and give the soloist a more pronounced acoustical representation in the recording than he/she had in the original (live) concert.

Rudolf
 
Last edited:
See, this is where I loose the imaging argument. I've never been to a live concert of any kind where I could close my eyes and pin point the placement of any single instrument. When audiophiles start talking about such pin point imaging I immediately find that totally artificial. It truly is an illusion, but a false one, IMO.

it depends the hall really. the late XIX century most famous, and best halls were made accordingly to the music played, which was.. late romantic symphonic works. they do act as blenders, they litteraly transform the tones of intruments, the probably most radical approach being the one Wagner choose for Bayreuth and the covered pit, but that works as support for the music, not against it. I have never been to the Gebouw, or Musikverein, but it seems very clear that you cannot pin point intruments there.. A more "baroque" venue, smaller, with less volume per seat, the Garnier type, would make it possible as long as you don't seat too much at the back.
I believe the Zurich Tonhalle share similar features with the first group, would be nice to know what Markus who is a regular attendant has to say. :)
 
Last edited: