What is "Sound Stage?"

MylesBAstor · Feb 9, 2012

Robert said:
Myles, You are correct in that performers occupy a position and your seating distance has a large effect on the sound. My point was that many systems serve to exaggerate the positioning element, and I've heard systems which presents the performer as too discrete, and also as too large. I am seeking a sound that is natural. Once you have a natural sound, you stop actively listening for this descriptor. The brain knows.

OK I see what you're getting at and I agree. One thing to remember too is that soloists are often spot lit. Take Oistrakh on the Bruch's Scottish Fantasies on Decca or Rubinstein on RCA. Rubinstein had a bit of an ego and because of his name, dictated to the recording engineers how "he" wanted his piano miked. And his attitude was that listeners were buying that LP to hear him, not the other musicians

Ergo his piano just sounds overblown.

A system has to be able to render a quartet as well as an orchestra properly. After all, one doesn't usually opt to listen to a quartet in the back of the hall

FrantzM · Feb 9, 2012

MylesBAstor said:
OK I see what you're getting at and I agree. One thing to remember too is that soloists are often spot lit. Take Oistrakh on the Bruch's Scottish Fantasies on Decca or Rubinstein on RCA. Rubinstein had a bit of an ego and because of his name, dictated to the recording engineers how "he" wanted his piano miked. And his attitude was that listeners were buying his record were buying that LP to hear him, not the other musicians Ergo his piano just sounds overblown.

A system has to be able to render a quartet as well as an orchestra properly. After all, one doesn't usually opt to listen to a quartet in the back of the hall

I agree with you too on this point

Robert · Feb 9, 2012

FrantzM said:
I agree with you too on this point

On 2/9/12 at 9:42, three people on WBF actually agreed with one another. Can we close this thread now?

MylesBAstor · Feb 9, 2012

Robert said:
On 2/9/12 at 9:42, three people on WBF actually agreed with one another. Can we close this thread now?

Time to play the NY Powerball! 250 million!

FrantzM · Feb 9, 2012

Robert said:
On 2/9/12 at 9:42, three people on WBF actually agreed with one another. Can we close this thread now?

Could be a First on ANY Audio Forum .. Thread Closed !!!

microstrip · Feb 9, 2012

rockitman said:
Really ? I never have attended a surround sound concert. I have never heard music coming from behind me at a concert save for the reverberation off the back wall sitting in a crappy seat. I don't find 2 channel lacking in the least for live recordings and I have 100's of them from my bootleg taping days with DAT.

We should not mix enveloping sound with an enveloping orchestra.

A properly recorded and reproduced multichannel experience is something that can better most of our 2 channel sessions. But unhappily it is similar to most of us R2R situation - you can count by your fingers the number of recordings of real interest to you.

The whitepapers at the Harman site about these matters can be very useful for this thread. We can find them at
http://www.harman.com/EN-US/OurCompany/Technologyleadership/Pages/WhitePapers.aspx

FrantzM · Feb 9, 2012

microstrip said:
We should not mix enveloping sound with an enveloping orchestra. A properly recorded and reproduced multichannel experience is something that can better most of our 2 channel sessions. But unhappily it is similar to most of us R2R situation - you can count by your fingers the number of recordings of real interest to you.

The whitepapers at the Harman site about these matters can be very useful for this thread. We can find them at
http://www.harman.com/EN-US/OurCompany/Technologyleadership/Pages/WhitePapers.aspx

Okay what's going on here?

.. I was in agreement with Myles earlier and now entirely, fully, completely, utterly agree with Microstrip ... What a day!

microstrip · Feb 9, 2012

FrantzM said:
rockitman

I am a 2-ch person. let me repeat it .. Whenever you go to a concert you are surrounded by sound. I would say more than 60% from the front ... ANY Live performance .. You hear quite a bit from the back... How do you reproduce these things that are comig from the side and back with ony 2-ch in the front? Do you have to rely on the reflections (false) on your own room boundaries to simulate but not truly reproduce these.. These can only be reproduced , not simulated by surround channels.. No way out of this... You and I have been quite satisfied with 2-ch and for now i don't see myself moving away from the thousands of software i have in2-ch but admitting it lacking is not the same as saying it is not satisfying ...

I am a 2-ch person

FrantZ,
You (why not we?) are a 2-ch person who wants all the certitudes and assurances of a multichannel person.

Phelonious Ponk · Feb 9, 2012

Huh !! Robert has a point in most live performance there is no sense of instruments really at least when it comes to a symphonic performance ... I would however say that in small ensembles, Chamber music, Jazz and the likes there is such ... There is separation between instruments and they have a physical presence and dimension...

Robert does have a point, a very good one, I'm just not sure it's relevant to this discussion (more on that in a minute). Even small ensembles don't present the kind of imaging good hifi does, unless the performance is completely acoustic, the acoustics of the room are extremely controlled and you have the best seat in the house. If you get to experience all of the above more than a few times in your life, congratulations.

I see the soundstage as the virtual volume of space from which the sound comes from. This voume has dimensions that usualy vary with recordings and it seems that some components suggest more of that volume than others given the same speakers and room.

This is why Robert's point is not particularly relevant to this discussion: Imaging, and sound stage are false constructs of recording and stereo reproduction. They do not exist in the wild. Not sure about some components suggesting more than others, without that suggestion being a further distortion of a false construct, but I'm open to how that can happen.

The more I listen to Live performance and I have these past past few weeks, the more Irealize how much 2-ch stereo is lacking ... I am really hoping that Surround sound gets the recognition it needs to bring music reproduction to a different level.

That would be nice. Surround has the ability to seriously reduce the negative influences of the room by providing direct sound from all around, and creating a truly enveloping listening experience much more like what one might hear from the best seats at a great club, cabaret or concert hall. But before it can get any recognition in that area, it has to work that area. Are you aware of any surround recordings that use the extra channels in an attempt to create a more natural enveloping ambience? Most of what I've heard, except for film soundtracks, just used the extra channels for cheap tricks -- "Duuuuuude!!! The congas are like behind me man!!!!"

When Robert speaks of maximizing the enveloping experience in 2 channel, and getting something that is more natural, more like what you would hear in a performance space, I think of dipoles and bipoles and the compromise - if this is important to you - is imaging, the placement and separation of instruments and voices. It ain't natural, but it's cool.

Next to "Enveloping, natural stereo sound" in the dictionary, by the way, it should say "See Sigfreid Linkwitz."

Tim

PS: One more point to an already long post -- while pinpoint imaging is not "natural," it does provide a nice illusion, a substitute for the visual cues we have in concert that we do not have listening at home. I will admit, I'm pretty addicted to imaging.

microstrip · Feb 9, 2012

Robert said:
(...) Once you have a natural sound, you stop actively listening for this descriptor.

Tim , are you going to create a thread entitled What is a "Natural Sound"?

BTW, F. Toole had an interesting opinion about it.

Phelonious Ponk · Feb 9, 2012

microstrip said:
Tim , are you going to create a thread entitled What is a "Natural Sound"?

BTW, F. Toole had an interesting opinion about it.

Nah. I think this one is broad and difficult enough. I thought that next, I'd create one called "What Is Transparency," then sit back and watch everybody's heads explode.

Tim

microstrip · Feb 9, 2012

FrantzM said:
(...) The more I listen to Live performance and I have these past past few weeks, the more Irealize how much 2-ch stereo is lacking ... (...)

True and not true.

Going to real performances, that outperform any sound reproduction, will show you the limitations of your system. But as in such a lacking system as 2ch, the sound experience relies a lot on the user capability of rebuilding the real experience, after I go to a real performance I generally find the sound of my system better and more complete than I expected. May be because I just learned where to search ...

NorthStar · Feb 9, 2012

Sound Stage is where the action is, usually in front of your eyes.

But it also covers in a wider spread, and even to the sides, and even behind!

* What was a definition 50 years ago of Sound Stage, is now much larger, I believe. :b
It evolves with time and adapts to our new surroundings to be more in touch with the true life images ...

RogerD · Feb 9, 2012

Ronm1 said:
Tim

My 2cents

Sound stage The width of the wall of sound created by your setup, between and to either side of your speakers and possibly even some height and depth depending on room etc...
Imaging within that wall, the ability to pick out and differentiate individual components, instruments, voices, etc..

I like it.....when the preamp kicks in does the sound stage increase in scale? I have a pretty wild recording "Frank Martin Requiem" recorded in a cathedral in Zurich the landscape and scale of this expands to almost a life size rendering(illusion),top to bottom,side to side,front to back. It is a perfect example of a soundstage.

fas42 · Feb 9, 2012

Phelonious Ponk said:
How could, for example, someone change DACs -- and let's say both, for the sake of discussion, are very good quality with very similar channel separation performance -- and experience a dramatic (or even audible) expansion of sound stage, without changing anything else? How can any electronic component change the height/width of the soundstage (depth could be a function of S/N, dynamic range, resolution of detail)?

Tim

Because for soundstaging to be experienced by the listener the low level acoustic cues, clues, have to be audible; these are the echoes off the surfaces in the recording space, which the microphones are plenty sensitive enough to pick up. Your ear/brain has had a lifetime of experience dealing with sound in spaces, and knows how to decode this cues, so then automatically recreates the illusion, the sense of that space in your head.

Now, one area where one DAC can be "better" than another is in its ability to properly decode, convert this low level information to an analogue signal. So the DAC, and system, that presents this low level information more clearly, more correctly, will be the winner in the quality stakes ...

Frank

RogerD · Feb 9, 2012

If you switch one relatively transparent (another "what is" if there ever was one) DAC for another and hear a dramatic expansion of the sound stage, enjoy that, but it's expectation bias.

How about if you roll the output tubes,change the digital cable,and swap coupling caps? expectation bias? Isn't that a common expression for I don't believe it matters? my experience is different,but that's what makes it interesting. Oh and don't forget the power cables...lol.

fas42 · Feb 9, 2012

RogerD said:
How about if you roll the output tubes,change the digital cable,and swap coupling caps? expectation bias? Isn't that a common expression for I don't believe it matters? my experience is different,but that's what makes it interesting. Oh and don't forget the power cables...lol.

That's altering the blend of the various non-linear distortions in your system, to get the right, soothing balance, Roger ...

Frank

RogerD · Feb 9, 2012

fas42 said:
That's altering the blend of the various non-linear distortions in your system, to get the right, soothing balance, Roger ...

Frank

Frank I have dedicated speakers solely to reproduce "ambience" so everything I do is judged on the level of ambient info, it is a very good benchmark.

Tim there you go.....What is ambience?

NorthStar · Feb 9, 2012

Ambiance, isn't also part of the soundstage? :b

fas42 · Feb 9, 2012

RogerD said:
Frank I have dedicated speakers solely to reproduce "ambience" so everything I do is judged on the level of ambient info, it is a very good benchmark.

Agree. Once you get good levels of that, the next trick is to be able to recover that cleanly, comfortably with "difficult" recordings, at high, realistic volumes. The Springsteen track I mentioned earlier is a good one to play with for such things, if one is so inclined ...

Frank

What is "Sound Stage?"

Well-Known Member

Member Sponsor & WBF Founding Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Member Sponsor & WBF Founding Member

VIP/Donor

Member Sponsor & WBF Founding Member

VIP/Donor

New Member

VIP/Donor

New Member

VIP/Donor

Member

VIP/Donor

Addicted To Best

VIP/Donor

Addicted To Best

VIP/Donor

Member

Addicted To Best

Similar threads