Do you require spatial cues for emotional engagement? Or are they for analytical listening?

caesar

Well-Known Member
May 30, 2010
4,290
767
1,698
I'm not talking about interplay of musicians....

If the system makes me focus on how "big the stage is", or if I think about imaging, I snap out of the state of flow. And my MBL system is excellent at the spatial elements of stereo sound...

Yet for me it's all about tone, dynamics, and PRAT to communicate emotion.

And for you?
 

NorthStar

Member
Feb 8, 2011
24,305
1,323
435
Vancouver Island, B.C. Canada
Presence of the human voice, the cello talking to my inner chords, the piano, the opera singer, ...the music itself without any artifice. The system completely vanished, invisible...only the music envelops my soul and grabs it firmly with tears of deep emotional trance...soothing ultimate satisfaction, total bliss, nothing in the world matters anymore...but the music playing in the moment, that magic moment.

Being in that mood of that tune playing, absolutely spontaneous, non-analytic, à l'improviste.

For me.

* Nice seeing you Caesar.
 
Last edited:

RogerD

VIP/Donor
May 23, 2010
3,734
318
565
BiggestLittleCity
For me it is the ability for my system to soar or project the music into the listening area. It can be a single vocalist,piano,pipe organ or full orchestra. Bringing excitement into the illusion,I just get hooked every time. I listen mostly with my eyes closed so the soundstage is a part of it too. Sometimes on a new recording I find myself opening my eyes on very dynamic parts..lol, exciting.
 

the sound of Tao

Well-Known Member
Jul 18, 2014
3,620
4,840
940
I have known some guys who when dialling in their systems first use managing the presentation of stage width and depth as a key indicator in how well their system is set up.

I only noticed this because I realised that I use coherence as my primary analytical tool along with balance and tonality and have never aimed for maxing out stage width or depth especially.

In terms of emotional experiences from music stage portrayal however I am very much into systems that scale up physically when dynamic swells come into the music. This can be exhilarating much as it is in real musical experience.

Particularly when the musicians are fantastic technically precise bands like some great symphonic orchestras and chamber orchestras where real dramatic power and potency is born out of that playing precision.
 

JackD201

WBF Founding Member
Apr 20, 2010
12,308
1,425
1,820
Manila, Philippines
For me space is the last frontier. It is winning the jackpot and finding there is a bonus round.

Exceptional portrayal of space is probably the most recording dependent quality I can think of and that's why I think it is more bonus than regular play. Recordings like these, even in classical minimally mic'ed recordings, make up such a small percentage of my collection that they are the music analog of the special occasion dinner for the guy that normally eats and lives well already. :)
 

ddk

Well-Known Member
May 18, 2013
6,261
4,040
995
Utah
Like Bob said, music without artifice. There’s a difference between system created space which is always a constant in size, contrast and presence on every piece of music and in competition with it vs a more natural one changing from recording to recording. The system should disappear and not impress and distract from the music with hifi paraphernalia. Beyond the stage and imaging is the ambience, the noise, the envelope the atmosphere or whatever you want to call it is the real presence unique to the venue, that’s my final frontier and goes a long way towards what I feel as natural. There are too many wires and widgets designed to rob you of the experience with filteration calling it noise control by masking and replacing the natural with their homogenized artifact. Unacceptable!

david
 

Barry2013

VIP/Donor
Oct 12, 2013
2,305
487
418
Essex UK
I agree caesar.
For me too it is all about "tone,dynamics, PRAT and the ability to communicate emotion"
I have recently had the pleasure of listening to two very different horn based systems, those of blu58 and zerostar general. The former streaming and the latter a no compromise analogue system. Both very good and with impressive transparency and articulation.
But horns don't do it for me, or at least those I have had the opportunity to listen to other than at shows.
The combination of the Vitus sia 025,DCS Scarlatti three box, Magnum Dynalab 109, Townshend Rock V and YG Kipod Signature passive speakers gives me what I can best describe as a more organic sound that communicates the music to me in a way that always gives me pleasure.
 

microstrip

VIP/Donor
May 30, 2010
20,806
4,700
2,790
Portugal
I'm not talking about interplay of musicians....

If the system makes me focus on how "big the stage is", or if I think about imaging, I snap out of the state of flow. And my MBL system is excellent at the spatial elements of stereo sound...

Yet for me it's all about tone, dynamics, and PRAT to communicate emotion.

And for you?

An interesting question, but what are "spatial cues"? Stereo is a very limited media in terms of direct spatial information, the 2D spatial illusion is created by the listener using all kinds of information, including the extra one added by the recording engineers during recording and mastering.

The spatial illusion is based on our experience of reality - and most of the time we can not separate spatial cues from the cues that make us feel the recording has good timbre, dynamics and sounds real and emotional.
 

Tango

VIP/Donor
Mar 12, 2017
4,938
6,268
950
Bangkok
Like Bob said, music without artifice. There’s a difference between system created space which is always a constant in size, contrast and presence on every piece of music and in competition with it vs a more natural one changing from recording to recording. The system should disappear and not impress and distract from the music with hifi paraphernalia. Beyond the stage and imaging is the ambience, the noise, the envelope the atmosphere or whatever you want to call it is the real presence unique to the venue, that’s my final frontier and goes a long way towards what I feel as natural. There are too many wires and widgets designed to rob you of the experience with filteration calling it noise control by masking and replacing the natural with their homogenized artifact. Unacceptable!

I think the type of sound you described can be illustrated by using just a hand held recorder recording a musical performance in a venue and listen to it. The sound that comes out always sound simple “uncoated” with great contrast and differentiation. It might not sound pretty or spectacular but it sounds real and portrays what was there. If a system sounds too much more than that, yes it sounds captivating but it is more like a home theatre exciting great sound.

Tang
 

PeterA

Well-Known Member
Dec 6, 2011
12,533
10,700
3,515
USA
"Do you require spatial cues for emotional engagement? Or are they for analytical listening?"

No, and no. I want my system to reproduce what is on the recording. I hope that it also sounds convincing to me. If the choir is recorded in a stone cathedral, and the recording has that information, and my system can reproduce it, that information makes the performance seem more present and real. It gives the musicians context. If the choir is in a recording studio, the sound is very different. Both can be emotionally engaging, but I associate hearing a choir with my times in a church. I've never been to a recording studio, so the listening experience is different somehow. I suppose I listen to the information presented. If I hear no spatial cues, I presume the performance is in a studio somewhere, so that is information. If I like the music, and am not otherwise distracted, I lose myself in the sound of the music and there is no analysis taking place. If I am listening critically to say a new piece of gear under audition, I can still listen analytically, even if there are no spatial cues. I just listen to different things.
 

Ron Resnick

Site Co-Owner, Administrator
Jan 24, 2015
16,033
13,359
2,665
Beverly Hills, CA
"Do you require spatial cues for emotional engagement? Or are they for analytical listening?"

No, and no. I want my system to reproduce what is on the recording. I hope that it also sounds convincing to me. If the choir is recorded in a stone cathedral, and the recording has that information, and my system can reproduce it, that information makes the performance seem more present and real. It gives the musicians context. If the choir is in a recording studio, the sound is very different. Both can be emotionally engaging, but I associate hearing a choir with my times in a church. I've never been to a recording studio, so the listening experience is different somehow. I suppose I listen to the information presented. If I hear no spatial cues, I presume the performance is in a studio somewhere, so that is information. If I like the music, and am not otherwise distracted, I lose myself in the sound of the music and there is no analysis taking place. If I am listening critically to say a new piece of gear under audition, I can still listen analytically, even if there are no spatial cues. I just listen to different things.

+1 as to each discrete point
 

Mike Lavigne

Member Sponsor & WBF Founding Member
Apr 25, 2010
12,474
11,371
4,410
Do you require spatial cues for emotional engagement? Or are they for analytical listening?

no doubt that portraying space and how the music lays out in the soundstage is recording dependent. OTOH energizing every molecule in the room with musical presence is more than an artifact. it's the sum greater than the parts. it's the ultimate synergy. it sweeps you away. and the unrestricted ability to do space, scale, and the 3D rendering is a worthy goal. my room does these things so effortlessly that I suppose I just don't even think about it. I just know that i'm going to get 100% of what the recording and format can deliver in these areas.

until you experience it in a music reproduction system don't assume it's beside the point.

but it's not everything. and music can be relatively less than 3D and still connect emotionally and touch me. musical goodness exists in all sorts of types of presentations.

I listen in various mental states. if i'm multitasking then the tone, PRAT and dynamics are more what i'm taking in. then maybe I sit back, close my eyes, and the venue gets painted in my mind and i'm there. in my most involved state of listening I would really miss the full picture. obviously I've made a huge 'life' commitment to this viewpoint.

honestly it's been months and months since I did any analytical listening. I just am at a place where i'm not judging, i'm just flowing along. and the space, scale and 3D are certainly a part of it. they make it more real to me (even though some of that rendering is mixing artifact......I don't think about that).
 

RogerD

VIP/Donor
May 23, 2010
3,734
318
565
BiggestLittleCity
no doubt that portraying space and how the music lays out in the soundstage is recording dependent. OTOH energizing every molecule in the room with musical presence is more than an artifact. it's the sum greater than the parts. it's the ultimate synergy. it sweeps you away. and the unrestricted ability to do space, scale, and the 3D rendering is a worthy goal. my room does these things so effortlessly that I suppose I just don't even think about it. I just know that i'm going to get 100% of what the recording and format can deliver in these areas.

until you experience it in a music reproduction system don't assume it's beside the point.


but it's not everything. and music can be relatively less than 3D and still connect emotionally and touch me. musical goodness exists in all sorts of types of presentations.

I listen in various mental states. if i'm multitasking then the tone, PRAT and dynamics are more what i'm taking in. then maybe I sit back, close my eyes, and the venue gets painted in my mind and i'm there. in my most involved state of listening I would really miss the full picture. obviously I've made a huge 'life' commitment to this viewpoint.

honestly it's been months and months since I did any analytical listening. I just am at a place where i'm not judging, i'm just flowing along. and the space, scale and 3D are certainly a part of it. they make it more real to me (even though some of that rendering is mixing artifact......I don't think about that).

+10
 

Empirical Audio

Industry Expert
Oct 12, 2017
1,169
207
150
Great Pacific Northwest
www.empiricalaudio.com
My room limits the width of the soundstage to the speakers plus about 2 feet on each side. The depth is only limited by my acoustic treatments, which counteract the reflection off the big screen between and behind them. I hear about 10-15 feet of depth. I get a very focused image, which I believe is more important than the width and depth. This gives a solidity to the instruments and vocals that makes them live in the room. If the centered vocalist is 2 feet wide, this is not live sounding. The vocalist should be more like 3-4 inches wide.

This focus and solidity is mostly due to really low jitter in the digital signal and a lot of acoustic treatment and speaker placement tweaking. 20psec of jitter will not get you there I have found. It takes sub-10psec to get you there.

Steve N.
Empirical Audio
 

DaveC

Industry Expert
Nov 16, 2014
3,899
2,141
495
It is important if it's on the recording. A recording that has captured spatial cues well can make for more of a "you are there" experience.

The problem with a system that can't convey space is not just that... it will also be less than fully capable of resolving other fine details in the music.

IME the sense of space is an indicator of a system performing properly. Even if you're not intending to make improvements in that area, improvements made will generally improve the resolution of spatial cues. In that way it's also an indicator if a change made to a system is a genuine improvement or just a difference.

I also think the ability to do an excellent, convincing job portraying the music in the space it's recorded is one of the main differences between a good system and a great system. Resolution is very important to fidelity!
 

RogerD

VIP/Donor
May 23, 2010
3,734
318
565
BiggestLittleCity
A good example of a change in spatial ques is a major difference in the presentation of the stereo image. You notice a lot less of a Left Right separation effect and a much more realistic presentation which is more homogeneous. There were early stereo recordings which featured a ping pong effect that was purposely engineered that way.
London Phase 4 is a good example, as the system perfects the stereo image becomes as one wall of sound as opposed to a L and R and main body of sound. Everything moves forward which increases clarity,dynamics, spatial ques and integrity of the recording. Everything is revealed information wise and realism goes up exponentially which means more enjoyment.
 

tima

Industry Expert
Mar 3, 2014
5,779
6,821
1,400
the Upper Midwest
Like Bob said, music without artifice. There’s a difference between system created space which is always a constant in size, contrast and presence on every piece of music and in competition with it vs a more natural one changing from recording to recording. The system should disappear and not impress and distract from the music with hifi paraphernalia. Beyond the stage and imaging is the ambience, the noise, the envelope the atmosphere or whatever you want to call it is the real presence unique to the venue, that’s my final frontier and goes a long way towards what I feel as natural. There are too many wires and widgets designed to rob you of the experience with filteration calling it noise control by masking and replacing the natural with their homogenized artifact. Unacceptable!

david

Yes, excellent comments - thanks for that. There is no black background at a live performance. Perhaps a bit in a highly damped recording studio, but not with a piano on a stage. Think Horowitz in Moscow or at Carnegie when the crowd is hushed.

The envelope of atmosphere, the sense of an orchestra in a hall, back and side wall reflections, the cloud of harmonics, the undergirding strength of the rhthym section - in the world of musicians making music as you say the real presence unique to the venue not the system soundstage construct.
 

tima

Industry Expert
Mar 3, 2014
5,779
6,821
1,400
the Upper Midwest
"Do you require spatial cues for emotional engagement? Or are they for analytical listening?"

No, and no. I want my system to reproduce what is on the recording. I hope that it also sounds convincing to me. If the choir is recorded in a stone cathedral, and the recording has that information, and my system can reproduce it, that information makes the performance seem more present and real. It gives the musicians context. If the choir is in a recording studio, the sound is very different. Both can be emotionally engaging, but I associate hearing a choir with my times in a church. I've never been to a recording studio, so the listening experience is different somehow. I suppose I listen to the information presented. If I hear no spatial cues, I presume the performance is in a studio somewhere, so that is information. If I like the music, and am not otherwise distracted, I lose myself in the sound of the music and there is no analysis taking place. If I am listening critically to say a new piece of gear under audition, I can still listen analytically, even if there are no spatial cues. I just listen to different things.

When I read that I thought of the English Concert and Choir in London’s ancient Temple Church performing Heinrich Biber’s "Missa Christi Resurgentis". A 36-foot vault, many faceted stone surfaces, musicians and choristers in a square of four raised organ galleries.
 

spiritofmusic

Well-Known Member
Jun 13, 2013
14,609
5,416
1,278
E. England
I've just returned from Barry/Blue58 visit.

An amazing sense of space from his system (Aqua Formula XHD dac, SGM server, Java pre, 45 tube amps, AG Duos horns).

A total treat to hear digital finally hold it's head up w the best analog re spatial cues and flow.

There's no doubt for me it absolutely enhances the listening experience to hear space around vocal lines, reverb on instruments, studio cues, effortless depth.

Especially on digital to now start to match the best analog has to offer.
Only brings positives, not negatives.

Other aspects of the presentation from systems like hyper resolution of detail, one can argue for and against.

But for this listener at least, I've never been more entranced by digital, and the greater space I hear at Blue's is key to this.
 

About us

  • What’s Best Forum is THE forum for high end audio, product reviews, advice and sharing experiences on the best of everything else. This is THE place where audiophiles and audio companies discuss vintage, contemporary and new audio products, music servers, music streamers, computer audio, digital-to-analog converters, turntables, phono stages, cartridges, reel-to-reel tape machines, speakers, headphones and tube and solid-state amplification. Founded in 2010 What’s Best Forum invites intelligent and courteous people of all interests and backgrounds to describe and discuss the best of everything. From beginners to life-long hobbyists to industry professionals, we enjoy learning about new things and meeting new people, and participating in spirited debates.

Quick Navigation

User Menu

Steve Williams
Site Founder | Site Owner | Administrator
Ron Resnick
Site Co-Owner | Administrator
Julian (The Fixer)
Website Build | Marketing Managersing