what's depth, transparency, imaging?

[kevinkuang]

I have heard lots of people using depth transparency imaging ... to describ their speakers? but what's the definition of these terms? are they just adj? or there is some technology meaning of each word? thanks for input!

[Ron E]

It is very difficult to talk about subjective experiences - all of these terms are just attempts to convey what something sounds like. It is hard enough for people listening to the exact same speakers in the exact same room to come up with the exact same terms. Trying to interpret what someone says and relate that to how the speakers may sound in your room is not very likely to be correct.

All three of the terms you asked about have a lot to do with room acoustics.

Depth and height are parts of "imaging" Stereo can not really make sounds with depth and height, but changes in volume and the amount of reverb can often simulate depth in a recording. Height is usually a room reflection or HRTF related thing that can fool you into thinking sounds are coming from places they are not Interestingly enough, sometimes tweeters run with the wrong polarity (causing a crossover notch) can make a speaker have really good depth..

Left-right imaging is best when speakers match each other in frequency response very tightly. The sense of "being there" is really dependent on the room and how the speakers energize it - but I don;t think there is a general quantitative way of explaining this...

Transparency I would equate with lack of distortion or compression and lack of early reflections which can cause a false sense of spaciousness..

[R.G.]

The devil makes me say...

Those are words that are used to sell speakers. They sound the same as ordinary words, but have quite different meanings.

In speaker-speak they mean " I don't think you can figure this stuff out, but it sounds really neat and abstract, so ....PLEASE... give me your money for my speakers...."

[leadbelly]

Originally posted by R.G.
The devil makes me say...

Those are words that are used to sell speakers. They sound the same as ordinary words, but have quite different meanings.

In speaker-speak they mean " I don't think you can figure this stuff out, but it sounds really neat and abstract, so ....PLEASE... give me your money for my speakers...."

And what alternative words would you recommend to use?

[audiobomber]

Originally posted by kevinkuang
I have heard lots of people using depth transparency imaging ... to describ their speakers? but what's the definition of these terms?

From "Sounds Like? An Audio Glossary" by J. Gordon Holt, July, 1993

depth: The illusion of acoustical distance receding behind the loudspeaker plane, giving the impression of listening through the loudspeakers into the original performing space, rather than to them.

imaging The measure of a system's ability to float stable and specific phantom images, reproducing the original sizes and locations of the instruments across the soundstage. See "stereo imaging."

transparency, transparent 1) A quality of sound reproduction that gives the impression of listening through the system to the original sounds, rather than to a pair of loudspeakers. 2) Freedom from veiling, texturing, or any other quality which tends to obscure the signal. A quality of crystalline clarity.

http://stereophile.com/reference/50/

Dan

[ShinOBIWAN]

Originally posted by leadbelly


And what alternative words would you recommend to use?

Do you mean what alternative words can the salesmen use? Is that what your asking?

I think there's enough BS in the showrooms without adding to it. Best just to kick back and listen rather than worry about little things such as how can I describe the sound using words, since its a complete contradiction in terms and is doomed to failure.

Words can be conveyed by sound but sound cannot be conveyed by words - simple as.

[Mr Evil]

Originally posted by ShinOBIWAN
...Words can be conveyed by sound but sound cannot be conveyed by words - simple as.

But that doesn't mean that describing sounds with words is pointless. For example, it is impossible to describe what "red" is with words; without having seen a red thing before there is no way to comprehend what it means. However if you say to someone that something is red, they know what you mean.

[leadbelly]

Originally posted by ShinOBIWAN
Do you mean what alternative words can the salesmen use? Is that what your asking?

If that was I was asking I probably would have written exactly that, Mr. Coward.

Maybe a system of grunts (more grunts = better sound) would fit the attitude in this thread?

[ShinOBIWAN]

Originally posted by Mr Evil

But that doesn't mean that describing sounds with words is pointless. For example, it is impossible to describe what "red" is with words; without having seen a red thing before there is no way to comprehend what it means. However if you say to someone that something is red, they know what you mean.

Yes but what we are talking about here is different shades of red. No one persons system has the same shade of red as the other. Its a massive gross generalisation.

Same as depth etc. etc. mean different things to different people. Its a flawed convention from the beginning and arguing over better ways to describe it will only lead to more confusion.

So I fully stand by my 'Words can be conveyed by sound but sound cannot be conveyed by words' bit.

[ShinOBIWAN]

Originally posted by leadbelly
If that was I was asking I probably would have written exactly that, Mr. Coward.

I think you missed the point.

But that doesn't surprise me.

Originally posted by leadbelly
Maybe a system of grunts (more grunts = better sound) would fit the attitude in this thread?

Ah, straight from the horses mouth