do you get any front to back soundstage?

I apologise for my previous posts, it would appear what I want from hifi is not what you people want from hifi.

 

You don't want to hear a band in front of you as you would in real life?

 

Only in a non environment and even then I'd be suprised it if worked. Don't forget the HRTF is the response of your outer ear. Forgetting the ear canal effects and ear drum response it is the last major filter before transduction. If your trying to do it through loudspeakers you are introducing a further filter stage AFTER the HRTF which alters the percieved sound.
Thats why binaural and transaural do work but they're never going to be perfect. Messy as it is a proper ambisonics setup is the best way to do it ime as it doesn't attempt to model the head response in anyway, it places speakers at height and lets the ears determine for themselves where the source is. Interestingly it is possible to adapt to another set of HRTF's over time, whether that would help the transaural I don't know

 

And what does the Ambisonics do? Does it place high frequencies higher up in the sound-stage or something? Otherwise it must need a recording similar to AC3 if it is going to actually place the instruments and sounds themselves in the 'correct' place.

 

Yes Gary, you obviously appreciate music So much more than the rest of us A few pages ago you were telling everyone it can't happen with stereo

 

AC3 as in the piece of crap dolby call 'surround sound'? Its nothing like AC3, for one thing its based on science and another it works.
Look up how stereo works, then think of that in multi dimensions. Basically you can have any number of speakers (even 1 but it won't work of course) and the array uses all speakers to reproduce the sound, where ever it is, even if its right on top of one of the speakers. This allows you to essentially place a sound anywhere within the array.
Its recorded using a sound field mic which is also worth looking up as they're great fun. I can't remember exactly what they do but iirc its 3 figure 8's, X, Y, Z and and omni which is W. You put the mic in the sound field and it captures everything. Encode the outputs correctly and play back thro the ambi setup and you get back the soundfield. The encoding process takes the feeds and calculates the correct levels to set each speaker too, obviously varying as to how many speakers there are in the rig

 

Anex I mearly pointed out that I don't sit in front dead centre of the speaker and listen out for sound stage.

In fact my sofa is not in front of the hifi at all, its off to the side. My interest in depth of sound or the sort of bull**** being spouted about walking amongst the soundsatge is not something I am interested in. because it does not exist.

If you go to a live event you don't get soundstage depth, your eyes give you that information not the sound. You know the guys voice is in front of speakers because you eyes tell you it is so.

Speakers are not able to make a guitar on the left stop making noise one metre into the room, anyone with even a slight sense wil understand this is not possible.

There fore I contened that those who are interested in recreating this effect are not interesting in music but are interested in technology and illusion.

By all means have fun.

 

Gary,

if I remember you have a small collection of Dub. If that's right, why on earth don't you want to hear the work as the artist intended?

 

You wouldn't have any soundstage when you sit sideways on to the hi-fi

Gary, do your ears let you know where a sound is located? If so then it is part of recreating the 'live' ideal.

Not all music is intended to be performed live, Enya for example. If she put the snare drum in her music slightly to the right, its because that is where she wanted it and you just be aware of the full message of the music.

 

It sounds like if you want to hear the ambisonics stuff, you need recordings made specially for it? How much software is there available in this format?

 

Dunno about software really, theres very little support for it, most of it is DIY, if you have matlab I can give you the script. There are a few hardware encoders though, if I was ever interested in home theatre or something I'd buy one of those and do a 6 speaker ambisonic array with the new Dobly sic formats. 6 is where things start to get good. Yes, its not just using 5 mono tracks like surround, this is proper stuff so the recordings are ambisonic specific

 

Whats wrong with multiple mono recordings? It seems a lot better than encoding the extra info into the phase differences like pro-logic does. Idon't have matlab, how is ambisonics encoded? Though I have to say, in our old much larger house the pro-logic system we had sounded great. Far better than a lot of AC3 systems do now but it cost a lot too.

 

I didn't say multiple mono recordings. Surround is effectively replayed the same way it is recorded, ambisonics is not.
Look up ambisonics on tinternet, theres a million and one papers on it, searching Ambisonics Gerzon is a good place to start, assuming I spelt his name right, Michael Gerzon, developed the equations. And one hell of alot of other stuff, the man is a proper genius.

 

Yes, if there's enough of a difference in acoustic signature then those kinds of clues can give you some impression of soundstage height but stereo can't reproduce the cues we use to determine height.

Also possible, but artificially pre-notching the signal with any accuracy is probably tricky and I'm sure that no one actually does it.

Michael.

 

You would but I'm not sure how it would present itself. Soundstage is the product of sounds being heard by the left and right ears with differing arrival times and intensities - primarily because of the physical position of the ears - with interpretation by the brain to localise the source in space. You can't turn this mechanism off. The result of several million years of evolution to kill things - now used to listen to hi-fi!

 

I think I know what you mean.

The fact remains that good stereo has the impression of depth and height, but if you read of somebody localising images in the compost heap at the bottom of the garden you can be pretty sure they're nutters.

Paul

 

I see loads of arguments back and forth .....do you selves a favour, those that don't believe have a listen to the previously mentioned cd. If you can be bother, don't bother posting ! It seems we have the same old naysayer's telling us something can't exist when patiently it does, is repeatable and easily proved.

Did anyone hear the BBC Radio 4 the Archers ...yes yes I know! but last nights episode had a sequence in a pub wher two actors talked as if sat close to the listener, where as the back ground hubub sounded fifteen to twenty feet pushed back and to the sides. The back ground sound had almost an out of phase quality to them ....I've no idea how the engineers achieved the effect... but aspect of the back ground where pin sharp, so phasing may not have been the total method.

Its inresting to actually hear some peoples listening habits......One or two of the contributers have now stated that the listen way off axis. This actually comes as no suprise, they have in the past expressed views that are the result of none standard listening !

Garyi......a lot of the difference that you don't hear, are a dirrect result of sitting off axis. I'm not going to tell you how where when you should listen, thats not my way. But do us a favour and listen on axis and then a great deal of the things that have been discussed in the past that you have not heard or opposed may become apparent.

I've had this discussion with people on other boards.....in the past, if where not listening in the same way, its not suprising we are hearing different things even if we use the same gear.

 

It would appear you not only imagine cable differences but people to argue with . Everyone here is pretty much agreeing that soundstage width and depth (like your Archers example) are quite possible.

The only thing that's debatable is soundstage height and there are very good reasons why in absolute terms this is not possible with stereo, in the same way as it's not possible to have soundstage width from mono recordings.

Michael.

 

Zanash the effect exists, my argument is that it does not improve My lisetening pleasure. I find it quite off putting listening out for engineer sound effects.

The background hubbub of the archers is little more than a sound effect probably playing in the background whilst the actors spoke foreground. This is not soundstage its just various volumes of sound

I have some dub, not a lot. It sounds fantastic. When I have this type of music on I am usually doing something. I can't be sitting still in the centre of a soundstage when there is a beat going on.

Does anyone get what I am saying? Whats the point of music if your only emotional involvelment is getting excited because a guitar appears off axis?

There is a lot to be said for mono..

 

Gary, I fully understand your point. I also understand the attaction of Mono and Naim systems, they connnect to the foundations of the music.

The point here is that soundstaging does exist, and for many it is an important part of the listening experience - in my case more so with dub than anything else. Recording engineers spend time creating soundfields using various techniques and some of us appreciate that. To dismiss it as imaginary is wrong. Unimportant? To some certainly. To others, essential.