Soundstage, stereo vs mono vs surround

[STC]

Sound radiates 360 degrees from these devices too. The drivers have something called dispersion, which varies according to the basic design of the driver (horn, cone, panel etc.). There's a fairly substantial back-wave (cone, panel). There's a phase shifted wave from a backward firing port that is of the same fundamental frequency of the driver, but with greater intensity at the resonant frequency of the port. There's a time late wave from a front firing port (same characteristics as the backward fixing port). The cabinets resonate in all directions.



Correct.



That's a broad statement. Matters for what? Lots of things matter in hearing, frequency, phase, intensity, Doppler...



This totally depends on the difference in distance that sound travels via direct path and reflection. Influences on this include angle from the reflecting surface, distance from the reflecting surface, distance between the driver and the listener, orientation of the ears relative to source and reflections....



It can also create smearing, combing, and huffing, and a whole bunch of other audible effects.



I'd be interested in reading that paper. Please keep in mind that a music hall is a space designed for the propagation of sound and to manage its reflections. The sense of spaciousness is a function of carefully oriented reflecting points. It is also designed to preserve the sound stage for listeners because it would be distracting to have the band in one location and the sound coming from another. This is a balancing act... too many reflections will disturb the sound stage. Too few, and the sound will be lifeless.

But all of this is a gross simplification of sound, because human hearing relies on other things too in order determine direction and distance.



You started out talking about natural sounds. Then you moved to reproduced sound. Now the discussion is restricted to music... but not multichannel music, which is a feature of BluRay and DVD-A.

The truth of the matter is that sound does surround us. This is why it has been devilishly difficult for loudspeaker manufacturers (who actually have increased the performance of their products since the 1950s, 60s, and 70s) to deliver life-like sound.

I have no doubt that drivers (and perhaps even drivers supplied by a single channel of music) can trick the auditory system to a degree. But this requires a carefully controlled space that imparts effects that approximate those produced by real instruments. These effects include resonance, direction, reflection, phase, etc. But move a driver, hang a curtain, or change perspectives, and this illusion can be shattered.

Why? Because human hearing uses a lot of cues to determine what is real, what is close, what is far, what is approaching, what is movin, etc.

I clearly mentioned the role of multi channel for music. I know how multi channel works. I run with over 22 speakers with over 78 channels just to reproduce a standard 2.0 stereo with realistic concert hall realism.

I am well versed with human hearing and psychoacoustics to know what I am doing. It will be easier to discuss if you could refer and point out the errors in the papers in my earlier link. Most of the confusion is due to miscommunication and overlooking pyscoacoustics in human hearing to understand how and what really matters for realism in reproduction. It helps if we can confine the discussion to channel based over object based reproduction.

Thank you.

 

[GrimSurfer]

I clearly mentioned the role of multi channel for music. I know how multi channel works. I run with over 22 speakers with over 78 channels just to reproduce a standard 2.0 stereo with realistic concert hall realism.

I am well versed with human hearing and psychoacoustics to know what I am doing. It will be easier to discuss if you could refer and point out the errors in the papers in my earlier link. Most of the confusion is due to miscommunication and overlooking pyscoacoustics in human hearing to understand how and what really matters for realism in reproduction. It helps if we can confine the discussion to channel based over object based reproduction.

Thank you.

Oh, that is where we diverge. I don't believe most of what has been written about psychoacoustics. At least half of it is bad science.

 

[lovinthehd]

Thanks, @lovinthehd. I believe we will get there at some point. Perhaps through a variation on a flat panel speaker, but on a larger scale that operates as a wall panel. Certainly using some heavy duty processing to dynamically adjust levels to match the room and where people are (and moving to) in it. (Which is why I admire the AVR enthusiasts' acceptance of this kind of tech, which hasn't yet caught on for mainstream two channel listeners)

The key to all of this will be perfecting the fundamentals of frequency, frequency response, and distortion-free sound (which is why I admire two channel enthusiasts obsession with sound quality), as this will reduce the immense processing power that would otherwise be required.

We're far from this at the moment because of divisions between the two-channel and multi-channel market, which the corporations themselves created. These divisions make it easy to sell gear ranging from dirt cheap (90% of the market with tight margins) to excessively expensive (10% of the market with huge margins)... but they don't do anything to change the fact that we're still some distance away from being able to reproduce sound in our spaces that is indistinguishable from the real thing.

Seems the 2ch crowd is too busy dealing with idiocy in audiophilia....think they've somewhat killed the hifi market in some respects by the ridiculous expectations of vinyl, amps and wires rather than more meaningful things for good audio. I really don't try to recreate in my space the concerts I've attended, just not going to happen in a home environment, seems it would always be scaled down and somewhat unrealistic compared to the real thing (not to say you couldn't have a great experience, just that it doesn't have the potential of the real thing in most cases).

 

[GrimSurfer]

Seems the 2ch crowd is too busy dealing with idiocy in audiophilia....think they've somewhat killed the hifi market in some respects by the ridiculous expectations of vinyl, amps and wires rather than more meaningful things for good audio. I really don't try to recreate in my space the concerts I've attended, just not going to happen in a home environment, seems it would always be scaled down and somewhat unrealistic compared to the real thing (not to say you couldn't have a great experience, just that it doesn't have the potential of the real thing in most cases).

The two channel crowd would say that the multichannel world places quantity ahead of quality.

I straddle both camps. I don't listen to vinyl... stopped listening as soon as something demonstrably better came along. My speaker wires are just that... wires. Home Depot, about a buck a foot.

I believe in good quality amplification and am not willing to sacrifice it so I can buy a poorly performing multichannel amp designed to reproduce movie effects as a priority. I'm open, and indeed, very eager to purchase a good quality multichannel system provided I have access to good quality source material.

I believe in sound/room correction but feel that the best it can come at this time is close... very close to the ideal. Irreplaceable for the amateur and of great assistance to the professional. But I'm not ready to throw out my spl meter or test tones because these have proven useful in fine tuning.

I don't try to recreate my concert experiences either. I left them in the 70s and 80s.

So I think that there are people who don't conform to the binary markets that the industry likes to perpetuate.

As for the demise of audio, I believe that responsibility lies more at the equipment manufacturer and recording industry level than listener level. But that's another discussion for another time.

 

[STC]

Oh, that is where we diverge. I don't believe most of what has been written about psychoacoustics. At least half of it is bad science.

Description
Psychoacoustics is the scientific study of sound perception and audiology – how humans perceive various sounds. More specifically, it is the branch of science studying the psychological and physiological responses associated with sound. It can be further categorized as a branch of psychophysics. Wikipedia

It is not a club.

A simple way to understand this is taking a a mono recording and split it to left and right channel. Invert one channel and you get null output when you mix them. However, when you play this over loudspeakers or headphone you would still hear the sound although it will now be out of phase. This is the difference with hearing and dealing with phases in recording and DSP.

 

[GrimSurfer]

Description
Psychoacoustics is the scientific study of sound perception and audiology – how humans perceive various sounds. More specifically, it is the branch of science studying the psychological and physiological responses associated with sound. It can be further categorized as a branch of psychophysics. Wikipedia

It is not a club.

A simple way to understand this is taking a a mono recording and split it to left and right channel. Invert one channel and you get null output. However, when you play this over loudspeakers or headphone you would still hear the sound although it will now be out of phase. This is the difference with hearing and dealing with phases in recording and DSP.

I should have said cult. It becomes such when people hold resolutely to opinions for which there is no scientific truth.

 

[lovinthehd]

The two channel crowd would say that the multichannel world places quantity ahead of quality.

I straddle both camps. I don't listen to vinyl... stopped listening as soon as something demonstrably better came along. My speaker wires are just that... wires. Home Depot, about a buck a foot.

I believe in good quality amplification and am not willing to sacrifice it so I can buy a poorly performing multichannel amp designed to reproduce movie effects as a priority. I'm open, and indeed, very eager to purchase a good quality multichannel system provided I have access to good quality source material.

I believe in sound/room correction but feel that the best it can come at this time is close... very close to the ideal. Irreplaceable for the amateur and of great assistance to the professional. But I'm not ready to throw out my spl meter or test tones because these have proven useful in fine tuning.

I don't try to recreate my concert experiences either. I left them in the 70s and 80s.

So I think that there are people who don't conform to the binary markets that the industry likes to perpetuate.

As for the demise of audio, I believe that responsibility lies more at the equipment manufacturer and recording industry level than listener level. But that's another discussion for another time.

Don't forget the idiocy of the audio mags/reviewers in the demise....contributed to by of course the manufacturers and other industry members complicit in the bs.

I like multich for both movies and music, but the availability of well prepared multich music is on the light side. I prefer a system that can do whatever I ask of it rather than specialize 2ch vs multich. I do still listen to vinyl, kept all my records and my tt all these years, just don't use it much except for a some particular recordings and sometimes just for a nostalgia trip. Many of the "audiophile" groups/fora are showing far too many follow the marketing rather than reality unfortunately.

 

[STC]

I should have said cult. It becomes such when people hold resolutely to opinions for which there is no scientific truth.

And this is based om your limited exposures? Now science is a cult to you. And we wonder why audio never progressed.

 

[GrimSurfer]

Don't forget the idiocy of the audio mags/reviewers in the demise....contributed to by of course the manufacturers and other industry members complicit in the bs.

I like multich for both movies and music, but the availability of well prepared multich music is on the light side. I prefer a system that can do whatever I ask of it rather than specialize 2ch vs multich. I do still listen to vinyl, kept all my records and my tt all these years, just don't use it much except for a some particular recordings and sometimes just for a nostalgia trip. Many of the "audiophile" groups/fora are showing far too many follow the marketing rather than reality unfortunately.

The media is just the unwitting or abetting mouthpiece of industry. It's unwitting when it considers a Press Release content. It is abetting when it gives favor to advertisers or reimburses complimentary gifts with positive coverage. It has the potential to be fair when it avoids either of these extremes.

In the absence of fair evaluation, people who don't know any better believe that they are fed.

Dude in blue shirt at Best Buy says purchase the amp or AVR that has 200 wpc at 10% distortion, one channel driven? Guess what happens?

Poncey artsy dude wearing a black turtleneck and tam says $50k tube amp capable of delivering 5 wpc to a stone @ 1 ohm? Guess what happens?

Critical thinking is becoming the domain of the ruling class... not for use unless it achieves a profitable end state and certainly something which should be curtailed if it does not. The majority of society have become their agents because they buy into what they're being fed without so much as an independent or broadly informed thought.

Advertising, Wikipedia, Twitter et al have dulled the senses.

 

[GrimSurfer]

And this is based om your limited exposures? Now science is a cult to you. And we wonder why audio never progressed.

I think you need to work on your reading comprehension. Stop reading Wikipedia, pick up a journal or two, and start thinking a bit more critically.

 

[KallyCoda]

And who ever said audio never progressed? Been listening for 40 years and have heard incredible developments over that time. It's inevitable. Forget the concept that Audio = Science. That's nonsense. Does everyone need a PHD to appreciate good sound. Let's get practical for a moment.