I was wondering how I could somehow easily experiment with this, but I only have a stereo set up and no DSP. You seem to have answered it for me.
Same here, but I can see it might help to steady the centre over a wider area, multichannel is mainly for movies, so this makes sense
It sounds from what I've read so far that reflections have a large role to play here. I am able to change my fullranges from VTL (Jordan) to OB and I notice an all round improvement in imaging and especially in the quality of the centre when I am using them OB.
Yes, I can't see how it can easily be created without some pretty extensive digital jiggery-pokery!
We could well be among the select few. Is there anything more personal or subjective than this topic?
I'll admit what I did was pretty extreme... getting rid of all early reflection points in a living room. I had a reason for that. I wanted to see if it could give me more of a "you are there" experience. And it worked out very well.
I do not expect every DIY audio-nut willing to go as far as I did. For me it was a learning experience to see how far I could take this concept, in a living room!
No regrets, it worked better than expected. And I'm not done yet. This is too much fun to quit now.
A centre channel might sound attractive, though I haven't heard of many successful implementations for stereo. All of the commercial 5.1 systems (or higher) that feature up-mix algorithms for Stereo seem to have their own draw backs, at least that's what I've found reading up on that.
Stereo can indeed paint a beautiful and engaging picture. I personally love what I was able to achieve with it out in my room. I would not call it a flawed concept at all. I'm glad I spend a lot of time learning what works and what doesn't as a personal quest. There is so much conflicting information out there that made me decide to try and find out my personal view on all of this. Not disregarding previous published data, but checking it out for myself. Music has always been about emotion to me and that's exactly what I get out of it. No regrets on the time spend. Planning to spend even more time into it.
I do not expect every DIY audio-nut willing to go as far as I did. For me it was a learning experience to see how far I could take this concept, in a living room!
No regrets, it worked better than expected. And I'm not done yet. This is too much fun to quit now.
A centre channel might sound attractive, though I haven't heard of many successful implementations for stereo. All of the commercial 5.1 systems (or higher) that feature up-mix algorithms for Stereo seem to have their own draw backs, at least that's what I've found reading up on that.
Stereo can indeed paint a beautiful and engaging picture. I personally love what I was able to achieve with it out in my room. I would not call it a flawed concept at all. I'm glad I spend a lot of time learning what works and what doesn't as a personal quest. There is so much conflicting information out there that made me decide to try and find out my personal view on all of this. Not disregarding previous published data, but checking it out for myself. Music has always been about emotion to me and that's exactly what I get out of it. No regrets on the time spend. Planning to spend even more time into it.
Speaking of early reflections, one other thing I've done with my system is to set it up along the long dimension of the room, which places the side walls further away. Added to the more common practice of placing the L-C-R speakers out from the front wall, I believe this goes a long way toward taking the room out of the equation. I realize this arrangement isn't realistic for everyone; one of the few advantages of living alone is that I get to set my stereo up any way I damn well please. 
Regarding early reflections and dipoles, the answer is yes and no.
If I understand correctly, early reflections are the "first bounces" that occur from surfaces like floors, ceilings, and side walls. The direct sound from the drivers (hopefully) reaches your ears first, and the early reflections are the next things you hear. Because they have taken a slightly longer path, they arrive at your ears a bit later than the direct sound.
As these early reflections mix with the direct sound at your eardrums, they cause lots of additions & cancellations that conspire to color and degrade the direct sound in various ways. Reducing the ratio of these reflections to the direct sound is usually desirable. Which brings us back to your dipoles.
The sound pressure emanating from the rear of your dipole speakers is reversed in polarity from the front sound. This causes a cancellation to occur in the area between the front and rear of the baffle, resulting in greatly reduced output from the sides & top. This figure-8 pattern is very effective at reducing early reflections from the side wall & ceiling. Of course a dipole also creates reflections from its back side that do not occur with a conventional loudspeaker, but there are many (including yourself, I presume!) who enjoy the effect these rear reflections produce.
I hope the above is somewhat accurate; I'm no expert on dipoles. Perhaps others will correct mistakes and fill in gaps as needed.
If I understand correctly, early reflections are the "first bounces" that occur from surfaces like floors, ceilings, and side walls. The direct sound from the drivers (hopefully) reaches your ears first, and the early reflections are the next things you hear. Because they have taken a slightly longer path, they arrive at your ears a bit later than the direct sound.
As these early reflections mix with the direct sound at your eardrums, they cause lots of additions & cancellations that conspire to color and degrade the direct sound in various ways. Reducing the ratio of these reflections to the direct sound is usually desirable. Which brings us back to your dipoles.
The sound pressure emanating from the rear of your dipole speakers is reversed in polarity from the front sound. This causes a cancellation to occur in the area between the front and rear of the baffle, resulting in greatly reduced output from the sides & top. This figure-8 pattern is very effective at reducing early reflections from the side wall & ceiling. Of course a dipole also creates reflections from its back side that do not occur with a conventional loudspeaker, but there are many (including yourself, I presume!) who enjoy the effect these rear reflections produce.
I hope the above is somewhat accurate; I'm no expert on dipoles. Perhaps others will correct mistakes and fill in gaps as needed.
Thanks. Yes, I think that's accurate, thanks for answering, I thought, after I posted the question it was probably the sort of thing I should either, know all about already, or do my own research, I have done both, but as you probably know yourself there are some conflicting views and interpretations and since this thread is about personal experiences I'm asking with that in mind.
Regards the early reflections, I presume ones that arrive at the ear at the same time don't add or cancel but wonder what effect they do have. From my understanding of the rear reflection from the dipole, so long as the delay is greater than 6mS it is not perceived as an early reflection that muddies the sound in some way. Therefore I'm assuming that early reflections are somewhere between 0 and 6mS and later ones may be beneficial to imagining and even (particularly with the dipole?) help with the phantom centre.
Can you describe your set up please?
Regards the early reflections, I presume ones that arrive at the ear at the same time don't add or cancel but wonder what effect they do have. From my understanding of the rear reflection from the dipole, so long as the delay is greater than 6mS it is not perceived as an early reflection that muddies the sound in some way. Therefore I'm assuming that early reflections are somewhere between 0 and 6mS and later ones may be beneficial to imagining and even (particularly with the dipole?) help with the phantom centre.
Can you describe your set up please?
Want to know what you have? Check out the APL_TDA demo I showed earlier.
Measure at the listening spot and "see" what you have.
None of this will matter when an entire musical experience is streamed directly to the neurons in your brain
My primary skool teacher asked us to draw a picture of how we imagined the future. I drew a man with a TV aerial sticking out of his head. She asked me to explain, jeez, I was only 8 (45years ago). Teachers were as thick then as they are now
Last edited:
While my processing chain has got a little more complicated than the picture in this link, it does show the mid/side EQ. At the time it was only applied to the mid part (L+R signal). I later added (a little) EQ to the side (L-R signal) as well. More current chain setup pictures are in my thread. Those include the ambient part etc.
So basically it's EQ-ing all the same info in left and right channel (L+R) a little different from the info that differs in left and right channel (L-R). Voxengo's MSED plugin was used to encode and decode the "mid" from the "side" info. JRiver seems to have included mid/side encoder/decoder functionality in the new V22 version (I still run Jriver 21).
Last edited:
Hypothetical question : given the emphasis on incident wave and minimal reflections, would you get the best result (for you) in an open field?Indeed, it is fun... get the timing right in that bottom end, right there where you listen and it can get pretty scary! But there's way more to it. Feeling music on your eye lids, in your belly...
It's just a more complete sensation with the feel part in it. I tried to have a more PA like setup, cutting off below 40 Hz. I could get louder if I wanted but started to miss atmosphere. The sheer energy of it all.
I try to use as much as I can and know about our hearing mechanism to fool "us" with this Stereo concept. That bottom end is mandatory to get there. I'll probably get ridiculed about it, I don't care, but I believe timing to be essential too.
As measured at the listening spot from a stereo pair, top to bottom of the frequency spectrum within milliseconds. It also shows the absence of obvious reflections... the room and stereo system working together. In a pretty normal living room I might add.
Don't just adjust phase "somewhere" and expect it to be good enough. Measure it where it counts, and when it counts. Check that first wave front hitting your ears. Want to try? Download a demo version of APL_TDA. That's what was used for this graph.
Its not a trick question, but it indicates a preference.
Interesting question and there was a time where I would have expected to answer with Yes. However, my answer is No. Due to the following:
The plot above shows my left and right speaker, and not my ambience output, which falls between 15 and ~22 ms. Part of it is used to fill in the tonal blanks of stereo cross talk (L+R signal).
The other part of it consists of a Haas Kicker, a band passed, attenuated and diffused (L-R) and (R-L) signal with a touch of (late) reverb added to it.
I prefer listening to my stereo with this ambient addition. It kind of simulates/imitates a room, a bigger and better room than mine. Just a hint of it is enough to add a feeling of envelopment. I quite like that.
That Haas Kicker part also enhances the front stage, though one never actually hears the ambient speakers consciously. It enhances the 3D presentation.
I've been curious about the Haas Kicker before I started my speaker project. Eventually I tried it and it has become one of the most successful additions/experiments for my listening pleasure.
If I had to guess I'd say most people would probably like "some" room in their music, though on here I've met people that would choose the open field. I've made my "room" adjustable to taste. My taste. The reverb is software and changes behaviour on each song (Random hall). I've also tried real measured IR based room reverb and liked it at first until I grew tired of hearing the same "room addition" or "signature" in every song.
The plot above shows my left and right speaker, and not my ambience output, which falls between 15 and ~22 ms. Part of it is used to fill in the tonal blanks of stereo cross talk (L+R signal).
The other part of it consists of a Haas Kicker, a band passed, attenuated and diffused (L-R) and (R-L) signal with a touch of (late) reverb added to it.
I prefer listening to my stereo with this ambient addition. It kind of simulates/imitates a room, a bigger and better room than mine. Just a hint of it is enough to add a feeling of envelopment. I quite like that.
That Haas Kicker part also enhances the front stage, though one never actually hears the ambient speakers consciously. It enhances the 3D presentation.
I've been curious about the Haas Kicker before I started my speaker project. Eventually I tried it and it has become one of the most successful additions/experiments for my listening pleasure.
If I had to guess I'd say most people would probably like "some" room in their music, though on here I've met people that would choose the open field. I've made my "room" adjustable to taste. My taste
. The reverb is software and changes behaviour on each song (Random hall). I've also tried real measured IR based room reverb and liked it at first until I grew tired of hearing the same "room addition" or "signature" in every song.
And how have you dealt with the room modes which will occur at <200Hz ?Interesting question and there was a time where I would have expected to answer with Yes. However, my answer is No. Due to the following:
The plot above shows my left and right speaker, and not my ambience output, which falls between 15 and ~22 ms. Part of it is used to fill in the tonal blanks of stereo cross talk (L+R signal).
The other part of it consists of a Haas Kicker, a band passed, attenuated and diffused (L-R) and (R-L) signal with a touch of (late) reverb added to it.
I prefer listening to my stereo with this ambient addition. It kind of simulates/imitates a room, a bigger and better room than mine. Just a hint of it is enough to add a feeling of envelopment. I quite like that.
That Haas Kicker part also enhances the front stage, though one never actually hears the ambient speakers consciously. It enhances the 3D presentation.
I've been curious about the Haas Kicker before I started my speaker project. Eventually I tried it and it has become one of the most successful additions/experiments for my listening pleasure.
If I had to guess I'd say most people would probably like "some" room in their music, though on here I've met people that would choose the open field. I've made my "room" adjustable to taste. My taste
I'm assuming a typical timber + drywall construction walls.
Using line arrays I've had very little trouble there. No floor and ceiling bounce and the bass is more spread out like multiple subs can do. 2 additional big damping panels (absorption) did help. And dividing the bass output between both arrays. Where one is in a corner the other is more free standing. So each one helps the other where they fall short. Next step is trying to bring in a couple of subs to do that part and add headroom.
2 big damping panels hidden behind those curtains, one on the wall posing as a poster.
Brick house, build in 1927, wooden floors and outer walls insulated from the inside.
Last edited:
Omni
I've been experimenting with OmniDirectional speakers (my sandbox prototype model) in an attempt to increase reflections, in particular lateral ones. I thought I'd add a few observations because these issues have been mentioned w.r.t stereo image location, soundstage and spaciousness. These speaker have been measured and have a omnipolar constant response 360deg.
Observation 1: single Omni operating in mono. You can walk around most of the room and tell where it is blindfolded when your ears hear equal SPL (ie. you're pointed at it). I say most, because if you stand between the wall/alcove and the speaker the location appears to be between the two. The reflection off the wall tricks your ear, generating a phantom coming out of a wall.
Observation 2: two Omni operating in stereo. They fill the room and you still will hear loudness differences if you approach a single speaker but you still hear both speakers regardless of where you are. If you are 2m away from them, they are very hard to locate with any precision blindfolded. The first reflections are in the 7-20ms range depending of the path (5mx4mx3m). The reflections make the sound spacious and diffuse, sounding good nearly everywhere.
Observation 3: two Omni operating in stereo. The stereo image is best anywhere in a line between the speakers (equi-distant). However it can also be found if you are off that line as well. In walking right to left at 2m in front of the speakers you will still hear the soundstage and phantom image but it will of course shift as relative R/L levels change. The sound level changes as you move are very gradual and the tone stays even.
I've been experimenting with OmniDirectional speakers (my sandbox prototype model) in an attempt to increase reflections, in particular lateral ones. I thought I'd add a few observations because these issues have been mentioned w.r.t stereo image location, soundstage and spaciousness. These speaker have been measured and have a omnipolar constant response 360deg.
Observation 1: single Omni operating in mono. You can walk around most of the room and tell where it is blindfolded when your ears hear equal SPL (ie. you're pointed at it). I say most, because if you stand between the wall/alcove and the speaker the location appears to be between the two. The reflection off the wall tricks your ear, generating a phantom coming out of a wall.
Observation 2: two Omni operating in stereo. They fill the room and you still will hear loudness differences if you approach a single speaker but you still hear both speakers regardless of where you are. If you are 2m away from them, they are very hard to locate with any precision blindfolded. The first reflections are in the 7-20ms range depending of the path (5mx4mx3m). The reflections make the sound spacious and diffuse, sounding good nearly everywhere.
Observation 3: two Omni operating in stereo. The stereo image is best anywhere in a line between the speakers (equi-distant). However it can also be found if you are off that line as well. In walking right to left at 2m in front of the speakers you will still hear the soundstage and phantom image but it will of course shift as relative R/L levels change. The sound level changes as you move are very gradual and the tone stays even.
Attachments
Last edited:
- Status
- This old topic is closed. If you want to reopen this topic, contact a moderator using the "Report Post" button.