Not sound, it's part of the perception. You still can't name audible sound that can't be measured despite your claim of "Lots".
Perhaps it's time to admit your misstatement and fold.
So much for the examples of measurement.
I knew you were not following. You were expecting people to admit misstatement and fold
The illusion of sound stage is easily manipulated by playing with speaker position, where you sit (in relation to the speakers) the room acoustics etc. I would have though by now getting the signal to the speakers (the electronics) is trivial, what you do from the speaker to the sitting position and the surrounding environment is an important part of creating the illusion of 3D sound or sound stage, it is an illusion though...
There are a number of them.
However, how about a reliable subjective description that tells us how well a stereo system creates a 3D soundstage/image.
To qualify, the subjective description should be just as repeatable, reliable, and generally meaningful as a measurement.
Please remember the beginning of the discussion around this subtopic; i already cited the relevant passage from Kunchur´s FAQ.pdf which elucidates what he meant with resolving.
Yes, that was one of Kunchur´s conclusion based on the results of his experiments.
If, assume, might... Speculation is all you have.
Welcome to the world of empirical experiments.
Statistical analysis provide probabilities not certainty.
Please do yourself a favour and start with the introductory textbook i´ve listed earlier. It will not harm but afterwards you´ll much better understand what is at discussion.
Btw, you asked for a double blind test result earlier, an example was provided and all of a sudden you moved the goal post (claiming that it must be an ABX).
Dancing around, typical posting pattern of internet shills.Welcome to the world of empirical experiments.
Statistical analysis provide probabilities not certainty.
The question written was "tests", not "textbook".
Only if you can practice what you preach, you'll earn some credence.
True, but there is a lot more to it than that. It is also important to have all the tiny pieces of information preserved (mag & phase) -- if they exist in the software -- that provide the base information for the illusion.
dave
Dancing around, typical posting pattern of internet shills.
Only if you can practice what you preach, you'll earn some credence.
On the 1st you speak of yourself. Here we have Jakob, obvisously well versed in actual statistics (a well established branch of mathematics), speaking well-established fact and you trying to brush it aside as if you can just make it fantasy… those fantasies are yours -- you show no familiarity with the subject.
dave
Right. He used non-standard terminology and vague definitions to make it look like he proved something when in fact he only proved that he could dance.
Nope, since this is audio, all you need to preserve is the things that are actually heard.
That is more or less exactly what i said… far too many systems lose that vital information. If the ear/brain does not have the vital clues it cannot create the illusion of space that is essential to a good hifi.
dave
Thing is, we now know that the ear is quite accepting of audio gear with what is my modern standards fairly modest performance (the electronic parts).
Creating the illusion of sound playing in a space is actually pretty easy to create.
The tricky part is recreating the illusion of sound playing in a specific space so accurately that nobody can hear the difference, and thus far that is mission impossible.
Audiophiles sometimes auto-suggest themselves into believing that they have accomplished this, but this is only because the ear/brain looses it ability to reliably discern small differences when there is even just a very short delay in the comparison, and audiophiles usually have minutes, hours or even days of dead time in their comparisons.
Cable swapping, anybody? Comparing your audio system's sound to a live performance you never actually were at?
You are not being precise. Whose ears, whose standard, whose gear, what gear.
(Not precise --> subjective).
Subjective again.
To be precise, there are many levels between perfect illusion (which cannot be achieved) and terrible soundstage. We are dealing with these intermediate levels, not the impossible part.
We don't know what the "correct" soundstage is (if it is your point), but it is not the point.