There is a review of Martin Logan Montis in the latest Stereophile. The writer complains that the speaker does not do pin point imaging as well as other speakers. (The rest of the review is quite positive.)
Is pin point imaging about making design choices to make the speaker sound like the real thing? Who really thinks about imaging listening to music? Or is it an audiophile invented concept?
Where does the concept of pin point imaging originate? An artifact of reproducing music?
There is a review of Martin Logan Montis in the latest Stereophile. The writer complains that the speaker does not do pin point imaging as well as other speakers. (The rest of the review is quite positive.)
Is pin point imaging about making design choices to make the speaker sound like the real thing? Who really thinks about imaging listening to music? Or is it an audiophile invented concept?
Where does the concept of pin point imaging originate? An artifact of reproducing music?
I'm a big fan of pin point imaging. It is not natural. The band at the local club, or even the ensemble of acoustic musicians in my living room do not image as precisely as my monitors do, but I personally find pinpoint imaging to be a good replacement for the visual cues you get in a performance. Is the positioin of that trumpet a bit more cut out and clearly delinated in the horizontal space than it would ever be in most venues? Sure. But I can't look at the trumpet player to precisely locate him at home in front of the speakers.
Just a helpful illusion.
The reviewer complained about the imaging of the MLs? He should have expected it. I've never heard a pair of dipoles or bipolars that did really sharp pinpoint imaging. Nature of the beast. They can do that immersion thing really well, though.
I'm a big fan of pin point imaging. It is not natural. The band at the local club, or even the ensemble of acoustic musicians in my living room do not image as precisely as my monitors do, but I personally find pinpoint imaging to be a good replacement for the visual cues you get in a performance. Is the positioin of that trumpet a bit more cut out and clearly delinated in the horizontal space than it would ever be in most venues? Sure. But I can't look at the trumpet player to precisely locate him at home in front of the speakers.
I agree with Tim that pinpoint imaging is not natural and I think he is spot on regarding the illusion of imaging as a substitute for visual cues. Unlike Tim, for me, pinpoint imaging is pretty low on the audiophile checklist. Dynamics (both macro and micro) and tone saturation are more important for my taste. Perhaps these sort of differences help account for why people can have such widely divergent opinions about specific pieces of gear??
I agree with Tim that pinpoint imaging is not natural and I think he is spot on regarding the illusion of imaging as a substitute for visual cues. Unlike Tim, for me, pinpoint imaging is pretty low on the audiophile checklist. Dynamics (both macro and micro) and tone saturation are more important for my taste.
I definitely agree with that. If your interest is listening to music, you want it to sound engaging - so you want dynamics and good tone. Imaging has always been low on my checklist as well.
I definitely agree with that. If your interest is listening to music, you want it to sound engaging - so you want dynamics and good tone. Imaging has always been low on my checklist as well.
Imaging is one of those things you don't miss until it's not present.
If I can describe what I'm looking for without setting off ahuge debate. I want to localise an instrument or voice but I also want it to have proper dispersion. Look aty a dart board. Imagine the instrument is the center ring. Now imagine the outer rings are also coming at you. Giving you the full image of the instrument.
I enjoy speakers that image well however I agree with Tim it's not realistic. I have actually changed out waveguides to go with one that didn't image as shaply as the other for that reason. They image very well but not as precise as the previous pair. Too sharp and it's like a point in space I like it a bit less so it gives the illusion of being a little wider if that makes any sense.
There is a review of Martin Logan Montis in the latest Stereophile.The writer complains that the speaker does not do pin point imaging as well as other speakers. (The rest of the review is quite positive.)
Is pin point imaging about making design choices to make the speaker sound like the real thing? Who really thinks about imaging listening to music? Or is it an audiophile invented concept?
Where does the concept of pin point imaging originate? An artifact of reproducing music?
I've never heard a pair of dipoles or bipolars that did really sharp pinpoint imaging. Nature of the beast. They can do that immersion thing really well, though.
Tim
Tim,
You have to listen to Quad ESL63 - they can do pinpoint imaging. It is one of the very few dipoles that is used for professional monitoring in classical music.
Tim,
You have to listen to Quad ESL63 - they can do pinpoint imaging. It is one of the very few dipoles that is used for professional monitoring in classical music.
I definitely agree with that. If your interest is listening to music, you want it to sound engaging - so you want dynamics and good tone. Imaging has always been low on my checklist as well.
Same for me. i tend to listen off-axis anyway while i am working. Plus, there is an interesting interview with the Head of Transparent Audio where she seems to focus likewise...with soundstaging/imaging something that she considers low on the chart and an artifact of reproduction anyway.
I agree with Tim that pinpoint imaging is not natural and I think he is spot on regarding the illusion of imaging as a substitute for visual cues. Unlike Tim, for me, pinpoint imaging is pretty low on the audiophile checklist. Dynamics (both macro and micro) and tone saturation are more important for my taste. Perhaps these sort of differences help account for why people can have such widely divergent opinions about specific pieces of gear??
don't forget, a recording is not a live performance. It is picked up by microphones - not your ears. Pin point imaging is just an example of a system showing you precisely what is captured on the recording.
don't forget, a recording is not a live performance. It is picked up by microphones - not your ears. Pin point imaging is just an example of a system showing you precisely what is captured on the recording.
And largely traceable to the miking technique, the mike pickup pattern and type of music. And if your system can't reveal the differences between recordings, then there's something wrong. Not all recordings are going to have pinpoint imaging. Oh and how are you going to get pinpoint imaging with a solo cello? Hard to when the musician moves while playing, esp. since you're caught between two masters when miking a cello or double bass.
if you accept imaging as a function of miking technique and the mikes pickup patterns (omni, cardioid, hyper and super, etc) then you must also consider the polar patern of the speaker as the final link between the 'system' and the listener. i find speakers with polar patterns that radiate like an omni ( speakers with 1st order crossovers for instance) need way more room treatment than those that radiate like a cardiod (im thinking proac tablette, harbeth p3, spendor s3/5 etc.). it can mean the difference between sharp or diffuse images.
Pinpoint imaging isn't natural, it is an artifact of microphone placement, but without imaging, you can't construct a stereo/solid soundstage. Dipoles may not pinpoint image as well as some dynamic speakers, but the solidity and depth of their soundstage is much better. Speakers like the Magneplanars, Martin-Logans and Infinity/Genesis dipoles are champions of the solid soundstage.
What Phelonious said about the position of players in a club band creating a soundstage is true because they typically have their amplifiers miked and then fed through the club's PA system which is what the audience listens to, so there really isn't a live soundstage. However, I don't agree with the part about acoustic instruments playing in someone's living room, because I have been to many recitals (mostly string quartets and piano quintets) in large living rooms and you can tell exactly where the the musicians are situated. YMMV. Also, the farther you are from the musicians or the narrower the angle between the speakers, the less pinpoint imaging you are going to have.
A real soundstage requires acoustic instruments being recorded preferably by as few microphones as possible to pick up all the instruments in real physical space. Any other soundstage is created in the recording control board.
Regarding Myles statement about imaging of s solo cello, I have to say on my system soloists always image much bigger than life, which clearly isn't a reproduction of reality. Other ensembles or orchestras are represented extremely well.
Thank you, and I am quite familiar with Robert Deutsch as the audio reviewer and the musician,
both in Canada and the USA. :b ...And for many many years.
What Phelonious said about the position of players in a club band creating a soundstage is true because they typically have their amplifiers miked and then fed through the club's PA system which is what the audience listens to, so there really isn't a live soundstage. However, I don't agree with the part about acoustic instruments playing in someone's living room, because I have been to many recitals (mostly string quartets and piano quintets) in large living rooms and you can tell exactly where the the musicians are situated. YMMV. Also, the farther you are from the musicians or the narrower the angle between the speakers, the less pinpoint imaging you are going to have.
A real soundstage requires acoustic instruments being recorded preferably by as few microphones as possible to pick up all the instruments in real physical space. Any other soundstage is created in the recording control board.
Regarding Myles statement about imaging of solo cello, I have to say on my system soloists always image much bigger than life, which clearly isn't a reproduction of reality. Other ensembles or orchestras are represented extremely well.
Regarding Myles statement about imaging of s solo cello, I have to say on my system soloists always image much bigger than life, which clearly isn't a reproduction of reality. Other ensembles or orchestras are represented extremely well.
Do you think that's in part a function of the IRSs? The IRS is wonderful on large scale but sometimes "oveblows" small scale music. I always preferred the RS1bs to the IRS in this aspect.
