All very good questions.
Thanks krivium, will take a look.
I am not trolling here, just asking questions too.
My stuff is in the storage, since i sold the house, so can't do any measurements at the moment, but within a month or two I should be able. I am moving to florida.
Had four systems, and obviously the main one had best imaging. Instruments were completely in the air, sound did not seems to emanate from speakers but was literally in the air.
As small baffle around tweeter as possible, and upper midrange, dipolar patter to eliminate spraying the walls, yes, uniform directivity, all very important.
Speakers far from walls, diffusors on walls etc.
But the only way to evaluate the system imaging is listening to it.
Thanks krivium, will take a look.
I am not trolling here, just asking questions too.
My stuff is in the storage, since i sold the house, so can't do any measurements at the moment, but within a month or two I should be able. I am moving to florida.
Had four systems, and obviously the main one had best imaging. Instruments were completely in the air, sound did not seems to emanate from speakers but was literally in the air.
As small baffle around tweeter as possible, and upper midrange, dipolar patter to eliminate spraying the walls, yes, uniform directivity, all very important.
Speakers far from walls, diffusors on walls etc.
But the only way to evaluate the system imaging is listening to it.
Krivium wouldn't applying reverb to a mono source not succeed in changing the apparent size and depth of the source?
i agree with Adason currently we only have subjective means of evaluation.
i agree with Adason currently we only have subjective means of evaluation.
Your description point to low diffraction design Adason. This could modify the way imaging is perceived too. And something to take into account about the initial question Jipolx asked imho.
there is difference related to how diffraction effect can be felt between a large box width loudspeaker and a smaller one as the freq range where baffle edge diffraction occurs is different. It's in no way a simple issue.
Turk stereo or mono reverb? The depth yes, the size of source is more a question of (relative) level ( wrt other instruments) imho.
What is your own experience in live situation about it? I often see stereo as really compromised with big scene and acoustical instrument playback at high SPL often feel unatural to me.
I disagree about having only subjective means of evaluation. It's just not practical to implement at home.
there is difference related to how diffraction effect can be felt between a large box width loudspeaker and a smaller one as the freq range where baffle edge diffraction occurs is different. It's in no way a simple issue.
Turk stereo or mono reverb? The depth yes, the size of source is more a question of (relative) level ( wrt other instruments) imho.
What is your own experience in live situation about it? I often see stereo as really compromised with big scene and acoustical instrument playback at high SPL often feel unatural to me.
I disagree about having only subjective means of evaluation. It's just not practical to implement at home.
Last edited:
well i thought that was self evident....
but i guess i'll have to dig out my Rev 7 and give it a go.
what's volume got to do with the perception of apparent size?
Sarah Mclachlan's "I will remember you" the song intro clearly has her vocal louder than the accompanying piano which seems "bigger" even on a low rez speaker like your phone.
but i guess i'll have to dig out my Rev 7 and give it a go.
what's volume got to do with the perception of apparent size?
Sarah Mclachlan's "I will remember you" the song intro clearly has her vocal louder than the accompanying piano which seems "bigger" even on a low rez speaker like your phone.
Last edited:
With acoustic source when replayed louder ( by themself, without other instruments) than they are able to do naturaly ( let's say a piano) there is a shift in size in how i perceive them. It might be my own but i met musicians which felt the same.
When relative to other instruments (in a mix) make the drum subgroup louder and the drums seems 'bigger'. At least this is how i perceive it, some may say 'more in your face' or whatever... we don't all perceive things the same ime.
Ymmv of course.
When relative to other instruments (in a mix) make the drum subgroup louder and the drums seems 'bigger'. At least this is how i perceive it, some may say 'more in your face' or whatever... we don't all perceive things the same ime.
Ymmv of course.
I listened to it ( studio version from 'best of').
I perceive the piano/strings combo on intro as being wider because it is stereo and the voice is mono and panned hard center. I don't feel it's bigger than voice, in fact quite the opposite, his voice seems unaturaly loud given she is almost whispering and it's riding over the piano attack ( which i doubt it to be a real one but some sampled keyboard).
We could spend time forensic the mix and point to other things but i fear we will lost many other members. And ime it just tell what we focus on as individual.
I perceive the piano/strings combo on intro as being wider because it is stereo and the voice is mono and panned hard center. I don't feel it's bigger than voice, in fact quite the opposite, his voice seems unaturaly loud given she is almost whispering and it's riding over the piano attack ( which i doubt it to be a real one but some sampled keyboard).
We could spend time forensic the mix and point to other things but i fear we will lost many other members. And ime it just tell what we focus on as individual.
I don't think thats how that works lol. You are talking about "sounds good to me" and I am talking about interpreting the word "imaging" into something objective. First we must talk about the original image. In a stereo 2 channel system, the original image is 2 point sources. Phase/Amplitude can convey left to right and proximity. Reverberation can convey space. These are all characteristics that are designed into the original signal. Thus this is the original "image"... Any deviation from thus is a distortion of sorts. The circle of confusion says that we need to be in the room with the designer to hear what he heard.
Image is the result of everything that the IR represents... You can either aim for an Accurate image, or a Desirable/pleasurable one. Its no different with voicing (FR) cause its all related.
No, No one can measure how good yopu think it sounds... The Accuracy of the image, since its the same thing, is measured in the IR.
Yeah its well known already... They use IR to capture the signature of these devices and replicate them....
You know thats incorrect, I hear stereo in my headphones just fine. In an anechoic chamber all you need is two sources to experience stereo. This is not disagreed with by professionals here on the board.
You are saying that imaging is real but unmeasurable... Thats gotta be wrong lol
I don't think you know what the image is, in the first place, which is why you are confused. Its the IR bro... A 3d IR would be an even better representation.
Last edited:
Camplo, you don't hear stereo 'just fine' with headphones. There is a lot of issue about stereo with headphones... except if we talk about a Dummy Head ( binaural) but there there is issue regarding playback on loudspeakers as you lost vertical mouvement related info. 😉
There is no joke: if you don't have interaural bleed the rendering change. As it destroy the message in loudspeaker playback of binaural ( still usable though).
Stereo width can be tweaked through addition and subtraction of channel info: introduce crosstalk.
see (in Dutch) & do translate yourself) : https://verstraten-elektronica.blogspot.com/p/basisbreedte-regeling.html
Also see Uli Brueggemann 's work https://www.audiovero.de/ - he even can manage ' to set the parameters to permit some small frequency dependent crosstalk' with his DSP.
- Measure??? never heard the part. . .
OK, well good thing thats not needed to achieve stereo....
If you don't have interaural bleed the impulse changes....gotcha.
Camplo, i'm talking non faked stereo, captured by a pair of mic.
Of course it's needed: try a Jenklin couple and any other one type of couple without obstacle to simulate the head shadowing effect and compare naturalness of rendering ( same apply to dummyhead).
Of course it's needed: try a Jenklin couple and any other one type of couple without obstacle to simulate the head shadowing effect and compare naturalness of rendering ( same apply to dummyhead).
"Stereo is achieved by having distinct left and right channels.
Interaural bleed adds to the realism of that stereo image, not its fundamental creation"
So I get what you are saying but the debate was about how to measure the image... Its obviously measured through impulse response. You can take that deeper with Impulse over time, and within 3 dimension.
Interaural bleed adds to the realism of that stereo image, not its fundamental creation"
So I get what you are saying but the debate was about how to measure the image... Its obviously measured through impulse response. You can take that deeper with Impulse over time, and within 3 dimension.
Could you give source of your quote please Camplo, cause you could quote yourself! That would loose objectivity to the statement. 🙂 Lol.
Not that i disagree with your quote, the basics are delta phase/delta amplitude of course but the way we hear stereo imply shadowing and interaural bleeding ( crosstalk) as well as HRTF. Without understanding those principle you can't go way enough into what mater for playback and limitations imho.
I'm not debating with you about how to measure but as i stated about real stereo capturing technique in general ( but it's always a pleasure to debate with you nevertheless).
Not that i disagree with your quote, the basics are delta phase/delta amplitude of course but the way we hear stereo imply shadowing and interaural bleeding ( crosstalk) as well as HRTF. Without understanding those principle you can't go way enough into what mater for playback and limitations imho.
I'm not debating with you about how to measure but as i stated about real stereo capturing technique in general ( but it's always a pleasure to debate with you nevertheless).
Last edited: