Mastering engineer says the LP is the most accessible high-resolution music format

[bdiament]

...i think i should summarize here a bit: plain old stereo, ie two channels of audio is found no where in nature, its unnatural. ...

Hi tomelex,

I have a different perspective. Stereo is found all over nature. Start with you and I (and the other folks here). It is precisely via our stereo hearing -- nothing *other* than a product of nature -- that we can localize sounds. Try it with one ear covered -- just doesn't work anywhere near as reliably. Two channels of audio, decoded by the brain... all over nature in fact.

Best regards,
Barry
www.soundkeeperrecordings.com
www.soundkeeperrecordings.wordpress.com
www.barrydiamentaudio.com

 

[bdiament]

Hi tomelex,

we just look at it differently. as an example, you stand out in the woods, you dont move your head, you hear sounds from your left, across the front of you, then on to the right side, and behind. Go to your house, put two speakers out in front of you, and try to replicate what you heard out in the woods, stereo is not natural, thats all i mean by that, while, a true binaural recording for headphones, is more natural, because you will hear all the stuff you heard standing in the woods...therefore, binauaral is a more natural replication of the event than two channel plain old stereo, thats basically what i was saying, without this elaboration, a different perspective as you say. cheers!

I believe what you are referring to is the crosstalk in a typical stereo speaker setup, where the left ear hears the right speaker signal and right ear hears the left speaker signal.

I know of one acquaintance who has used an absorbent wall running from a point between the center of his speakers, toward the listening position, ending a foot or less from his nose. Perhaps a bit more extreme than most of us would find to be a relaxing listening environment. I believe Bob Carver has used electronic crosstalk cancellation (but to my ears, this creates artifacts of its own).

While I understand and would agree that *theoretically* a binaural signal delivered via headphones would be more natural, in practice, I've never found this to be the case. The most natural rendition of stereo localization (to my ears at least) has always been with a real stereo recording (of which *very* few exist), played back over well designed, properly placed loudspeakers, ideally in a properly treated room.

I've experimented for a long time with capturing stereo (i.e., accurately localizing sounds in recording and playback). Perhaps it has a way to go but I have been surprised at how close one can get. Good and enjoyable as headphones can be, I've never had an experience I would say is convincing in the overall way great speakers can be. Just my perspective of course.

Best regards,
Barry
www.soundkeeperrecordings.com
www.soundkeeperrecordings.wordpress.com
www.barrydiamentaudio.com

 

[bdiament]

Hi, actually, no, i am not referring to crosstalk at all. let me say it this way. in nature, there are not two distinct sound sources placed some feet across from each other, with a fixed radiation pattern toward you, as is with two speakers.
this is first and foremost the biggest flaw of stereo, despite the ability to "trick" your ears as far as left right imaging and only a small amount of depth and virtually no height information (all this on standard recordings, not "trick" recordings). It nerver sounds real, only does so when you imagine it so. And, on this forum, only one person owned up to claiming he heard a stereo system that sounded real.

so, what does true binaural do, it presents sound to each ear, thus more natural than some speakers talking at you. True binaural is using a dummy head, with mics where your ears are. its not perfect, for many technical reasons, but it is natural, as it captures sounds the way your ear do basically. That is it captures height, depth, width, and even from behind you. it is simply the more natural, and as far as replication, as far as not moving your head or not experiencing physical sound pressure waves on your body, the most accurate replicattion system.

stereo tries to bring the event to you, binaural brings you to the event.....a simple sentence, but you must understand that to understand what i am talking about.

cheers.

Hi tomelex,

We may be using different terms to describe the same thing. Or just looking at the same thing from different points of view.
Or we may just have different preferences in how we choose to listen.

Speakers don't exist in nature but neither do headphones.
What *does* exist in nature is that we hear two discrete signals which our brains then interpret by comparing the two. By determining what the two signals have in common and where they differ (in terms of amplitude, frequency and phase), we can figure out where a sound comes from.

Binaural recording with a dummy head attempts to integrate the effects of the pinnae. One big problem I have with it is, they aren't my pinnae (or yours). Then, upon playback, we add our own pinnae. So I don't see double pinnae as anything found in nature either.

In my experience, properly recorded stereo (a key prerequisite before one can evaluate playback is a good recording) can indeed supply height cues. Not the same as the frequency-determined cues our pinnae supply but via reflections that occur in the recording space being captured coherently with the main signal. Further, a properly made recording is, to my ears, most definitely a "you are there" experience, not a "they are here" experience.

So we have compromises no matter which way we go. The natural part, as far as I'm concerned is two discrete signals processed by a brain. Nothing at all unnatural there, in my opinion. The departures from nature include crosstalk with speakers, double-pinnae with headphones. If I think about it, I can come up with more limitations of both. Then it comes down to how one prefers to listen: in the open air or via headphones. And ultimately, the recording itself is, in my view, where the greatest departures from nature tend to occur. It doesn't have to be that way (and I've spent some years working to show this, as well as seeking to create "you are there" recordings) but with most typical recordings--and even with many so-called "audiophile" recordings, that is indeed how it is.

Best regards,
Barry
www.soundkeeperrecordings.com
www.soundkeeperrecordings.wordpress.com
www.barrydiamentaudio.com

 

[esldude]

Barry, i respect your recording methodologies and agree with them. We just will have to disagree on which technology delivers the more convincing illusion, and agree that, as we both have stipulated, both technolgies have their issues, for true binaural, the issue is there aint a whole lot to choose from. If i were you, i would record binaural while doing your conventional recordings, and present them on your website as well, and here is why, although one of your big boy competitors claimed to have binaural, they call it binaural+, and that plus means the fiddled with it to sound better on speakers, thus defeated the whole idea behind true binaural!

I think you are just the sort of guy to again push ahead of the pack!

I have a little sony pcm-m10, and its mics sort of act binuarally, and let me tell you, when i play back stuff recorded on that thing with headphones, it is closer to a dummy head binaural than i ever imagined it would be.

Cheers

Just my experience, as binaural seems like a great idea. But I have been underwhelmed by binaural recordings. They don't sound really exceptional over speakers. They sound pretty good over headphones. But Barry's recordings to me sound good over speaker and headphones. Better than binaural either way. I haven't figured out what to attribute to that too. Other than theory and actual practice don't match up yet. And of course Barry knows what he is doing to get those results.

 

[Bruce B]

I thought binaural was strictly for headphones. I have a few dozen binaural recordings and they sound less than stellar over speakers.

 

[audioarcher]

I thought binaural was strictly for headphones. I have a few dozen binaural recordings and they sound less than stellar over speakers.

I think for speakers you have to put a barrier down the middle of the room. Most people won't want to do that.

 

[mep]

I think for speakers you have to put a barrier down the middle of the room. Most people won't want to do that.

And why would you? So you can hear some birds tweeting in the woods or some other exciting binaural chart busters?

 

[audioarcher]

And why would you? So you can hear some birds tweeting in the woods or some other exciting binaural chart busters?

I wouldn't. Even if there was a ton of good binaural material it would be a huge hassle. Probably why it did not catch on.

 

[MylesBAstor]

http://www.ambiophonics.org

 

[Atmasphere]

I wouldn't. Even if there was a ton of good binaural material it would be a huge hassle. Probably why it did not catch on.

Yes. I knew someone that did that with Sound Labs no less. You had to sit with this big divider panel inches from your nose. It did work, but IMO/IME it didn't do a whole lot that regular stereo (with the speakers moved further apart of course) didn't also do. Having the speakers further apart helps too because you can move around and other people can hear it at the same time. If you are really serious about this sort of approach get headphones.

 

[MylesBAstor]

Yes. I knew someone that did that with Sound Labs no less. You had to sit with this big divider panel inches from your nose. It did work, but IMO/IME it didn't do a whole lot that regular stereo (with the speakers moved further apart of course) didn't also do. Having the speakers further apart helps too because you can move around and other people can hear it at the same time. If you are really serious about this sort of approach get headphones.

Ralph Glasgal, the link provided above.