Does anyone else hate the term "soundstage" ?

[Absconditus]

To quote me, post 83;

Words are the currency of thought; without a common currency, there can be no exchange of thought. If you have your own private currency, it is of no use to anyone, including yourself.

Abs

 

[Pano]

...then it's a useless buzzword.

So you don't like the word, then?

Abs - you don't like it because you can't find a definition?

 

[Absconditus]

Abs - you don't like it because you can't find a definition?

It seems there isn't one, so while you may want to use it while talking only to yourself, it is useless for the rest of humanity. (Caveat; this is not a criticism of, or a statement about, your mental condition, only an observation about the purpose of words for inter-human communication. 🙂 )

Abs

 

[TonyTecson]

yes, somehow terminologies needs to be invented to convey same meaning and have common understanding, but unfortunately the same terms means differently to different folks thus rendering them useless....you just can't put a finger on and say, "this is it..."


how easy it was when laws were invented, one of which was Ohm's law, interrelationships between current and voltage was simple then....

 

[SY]

So you don't like the word, then?

It tells me nothing. If you say, "imaging specificity" or "localization," that has a meaning. If you say, "apparent height," that has a meaning. If you want to be poetic and say, "Speaker A creates an illusion of the acoustic space of the recording being transported into my room, whereas Speaker B gave an illusion of the me being transported into the acoustic space of the recording," that has a meaning. Assuming, of course, that the recording was actually done in an acoustic space as opposed to a studio wonder.

If you say, "Speaker C has better soundstaging than Speaker D," I have no idea what you're talking about and neither does anyone else.

 

[wintermute]

Are you guys a bunch of pedants or what! 😀 If Pano say's to me that a set of speakers produced a fantastic soundstage then I've got a pretty good idea what he is talking about, as do I'm sure many others who gave very similar explanations in the thread.

Tony.

 

[SY]

Are you guys a bunch of pedants or what! 😀 If Pano say's to me that a set of speakers produced a fantastic soundstage then I've got a pretty good idea what he is talking about, as do I'm sure many others who gave very similar explanations in the thread.

Only if Pano also explains what he means with the word, in which case, why use it? I've seen at least three different definitions used since I asked what it means. Rorschach terms are fine if you want to be a gasbag or a marketer, but convey no meaning.

 

[wintermute]

Soundstage is the ability of the system to present a believable 3D space , as has been already mentioned. Width, depth and height. The best of system can give a feeling of 3 dimensions even to individual instruments and voices.

He did 🙂 and that was exactly what I thought it meant before he posted the definition. Why use it? Because it is a lot shorter than the above 😀

Tony.

 

[5th element]

I like the term soundstage. Although this is a usual subjective thing and different for everyone, I think it's a rather good description of what's supposed to be happening with a good stereo recording on a good play back system.

Soundstage - the stage the performers are supposed to be perfoming on, as recreated by the sound produced from your system as is interpreted by our brain.

There's nothing wrong with the term, what's wrong is all the extra subjective garbage that goes along with it as people try and describe what that sounds like to them.

 

[tinitus]

I think someone got it backwards
funny word ... soundstage
isn't it supposed to be stage sound ?
ahh, now I got ... it's been reversed because stereo is playback 😀

 

[DF96]

I'm sure I read somewhere that the illusion of 3D space in stereo recordings comes simply from the LF cutoff point. This is because in real life we can (blindfold) judge the size of a space from the LF noise in it. If so, 'soundstage' = 'LF response'.

Otherwise, perhaps soundstage ought to be roughly equated to Wavebourn's 'niceness'? That is, it is a vague expression of personal preference and pleasure and tells us precisely nothing about fidelity.

 

[tinitus]

btw, isn't it often said that omnis 'throws' a huge soundstage ... hmm, could be it is less 'plastic', or 'organic'

 

[Phenoholic Anonymus]

DF96,

If i had anything to say about the use of words, soundstage would indeed be about LF used to "sense" a roomsize. Interestingly enough that could be tested A & B. And to end on an very subjective note. If the human brain is all about location of sounds. (the twig breaks, fight or flight) Would cutting to low mean stress?

This rooms size effect is the only reason i am interested in subwoofers. Knowing just how big a church is even before the first note of the music starts is really addictive stuff 🙂 Problem would be this only works with music that's recorded in a room to speak of. It's not at all interesting for popmusic / house/ electronic.

 

[tinitus]

somehow I find the German word Klangbild 'besonders wunderschoen' ... and remarkably free from all 'pretentions', but honestly saying its about a picture of sounds 😀

but you can continue and describe it by attaching all the other know subjective words like, airy, focused, tight, diffuse ... etc etc

soundstage appear to be a much fixed one way street 😱

 

[M Gregg]

Ok so you don't like soundstage,

So this means you don't like stereo sound..
Your all stuck in the mono era<<😛
I know you are going to say your mono system has two speakers😕

Well it doesn't count..😀Soundstage<<<<poke with a long stick..
The poor dog hangs its head in shame..😀

Regards
M. Gregg

 

[tinitus]

Ok so you don't like soundstage,

that is total rubbish 😉 its about the word soundstage, and the way it is being used, and not about whether you actually like soundstage or not 😀

I do know what good soundstage means
and I also know that if I would like a speaker in mono, I know it would also have very good soundstage in stereo 🙂

 

[M Gregg]

that is total rubbish 😉 its about the word soundstage, and the way it is being used, and not about whether you actually like soundstage or not 😀

Well OK,
You don't like the word "soundstage"<<<poke with a stick again..😀

So what shall we call it then😕..cinematic reproduction of sound.
Or the sound that is staged..😱...perhaps the visual representation of audio phenomena..😀
UFS<<unidentified flying sound..

Regards
M. Gregg

 

[planet10]

I'm sure I read somewhere that the illusion of 3D space in stereo recordings comes simply from the LF cutoff point. This is because in real life we can (blindfold) judge the size of a space from the LF noise in it. If so, 'soundstage' = 'LF response'.

Counter example. My uFonkenSET have (with appropriate source material) a very good 3D soundstage. The run out of steam below about 85 Hz.

dave

 

[tinitus]

ok ... just admit it is audiophile snobbery
nah, just joking 😀

I have spent a lot of time sitting and listening to a good soundstage ... and all the annoying errors

I just don't have the time for that anymore
I limit it to enjoy a nice tune, good songs and melodies, voices and basslines, etc etc

and I still need very good equipment to do that 😉

soundstage ? well, yeah, its important, sure, absolutely, I just don't use it much

 

[tinitus]

Counter example. My uFonkenSET have (with appropriate source material) a very good 3D soundstage. The run out of steam below about 85 Hz.

dave

because it is much more about smooth baffle step loss compensation with low level of phase errors 😉

but it does not work if the used BSC 'approach' cause too much phase errors

I believe that is a very important key