Problems with believability in audio

[microstrip]

It’s very unfortunate that we’re stuck with just two channels. That’s mainly due to the limitations of vinyl, which was the dominant medium back then by a large margin.

R2R tape advanced quickly from one track to three, which, in my opinion, is ideal for realism. A three-channel setup—with a center and two sides, all using the same speakers and amps—would be fantastic.

Not would, It is fantastic. We can easily listen to it in SACD - see https://forums.stevehoffman.tv/threads/3-track-stereo-recordings-on-sacd-and-dvd-a.167180/ But we need a SACD player with discrete channel outputs.

To me, quadraphonic, 5.1, or 7.1 formats are misguided, unserious attempts to recreate a musical event. A properly executed three-track system, with equal quality across all channels, offers the ultimate stereo experience.

By the way, I’m excluding quadraphonic records because they don’t provide equal quality across all channels. It’s just a gimmick, and I don’t see any real potential there.

Now we disagree. IMO proper 5.1 can creates a more realistic stereo experience. But is is a subjective personal opinion.

 

[Kal Rubinson]

OK. Music, per se, aside. I do not place "multi-channel virtues" ahead of the rest of parameters, e.g., low distortion, lack of dynamic compression, etc. It is yet another but less recognized than the others.

 

[tima]

OK. Music, per se, aside. I do not place "multi-channel virtues" ahead of the rest of parameters, e.g., low distortion, lack of dynamic compression, etc. It is yet another but less recognized than the others.

Thanks for that.

 

[Rexp]

Not would, It is fantastic. We can easily listen to it in SACD - see https://forums.stevehoffman.tv/threads/3-track-stereo-recordings-on-sacd-and-dvd-a.167180/ But we need a SACD player with discrete channel outputs.



Now we disagree. IMO proper 5.1 can creates a more realistic stereo experience. But is is a subjective personal opinion.

What is more realistic about proper 5.1? Is there an example recording you can describe?

 

[ssfas]

It makes both sense and nonsense of it. It allows us to enjoy the sounds and also unable to be objective about them.

Read any of Daniel Levitin? Even his relatively brief section on neuroanatomy gives considerable insight about how we perceive sound.


Just because our brains cannot make objective and repeatable measurements, it does not mean our auditory system is incapable of highly accurate subjective assessments. Some people with perfect pitch can discern tone as accurately as is necessary for the purpose of listening to or playing music, even if not to three decimal places.

The important point is that our brain anticipates sensory inputs from memory, our brains learn patterns, it goes to the core of musical perception, so what our brain tells us does not only reflect the immediate sensory input. To some extent it is a correcting mechanism.

 

[Holmz]

Two channels were all that were needed to place and separate voices on a cinema screen. Although developed by Alan Blumlein at EMI in the UK in 1931, it was not considered worthwhile or necessary for audio recordings. A stereo recording of Mozart was made at Abbey Road (EMI's main studio) in 1934, but it didn't catch on.
…

They should have used Ludwig Von.

 

[Kal Rubinson]

Read any of Daniel Levitin? Even his relatively brief section on neuroanatomy gives considerable insight about how we perceive sound.

Yes. FWIW, I am Professor Emeritus of Neuroscience and Physiology.

 

[bonzo75]

Yes. FWIW, I am Professor Emeritus of Neuroscience and Physiology.

Wow you must have studied audio since long to get there. Microstrip also became a professor of electrical engineering after studying audio

 

[Kal Rubinson]

Wow you must have studied audio since long to get there. Microstrip also became a professor of electrical engineering after studying audio

I started in audio when I was in high school and it has been a distraction from my career ever since.

 

[Holmz]

I started in audio when I was in high school and it has been a distraction from my career ever since.

Maybe it was an implied question as to whether you do any pro bono work?

 

[Argonaut]

Yes. FWIW, I am Professor Emeritus of Neuroscience and Physiology.

Excellent … Touché Professor

 

[andromedaaudio]

Audio forums incl WBF are probably one of the most sought after PHD exam studies for psychologie students

 

[andromedaaudio]

But to stay on topic .

Where it goes wrong in audio is in the amplification.

The source certainly the analogue source contains the information.
There are enough high rez speakers to let you hear it on the market .

But none of the amp designers seems to really achieve it no matter how many machined boxes they put on the market .

The only brand that lets you look into the artists soul is FM acoustics.

Is it in the transistors they use , the component matching , i have no idea.
It doesnt seem to lay in parts cost either , but most amplifier designers are doing something wrong thats why FMA can charge what they do

 

[Kal Rubinson]

Maybe it was an implied question as to whether you do any pro bono work?

These days, that's all I do.

 

[Kingrex]

Audio forums incl WBF are probably one of the most sought after PHD exam studies for psychologie students

Really??? Studying the placebo effect? And how to measure it? I'm sure we would all tilt the scale.

 

[andromedaaudio]

Really??? Studying the placebo effect? And how to measure it? I'm sure we would all tilt the scale.

Cable / placebo effect studies are the most highly regarded.

Cable cooker effect studies on audiophiles come in second

 

[ssfas]

Yes. FWIW, I am Professor Emeritus of Neuroscience and Physiology.

Gosh. Well impressed. On reading Levitin I did start to wonder whether audiophilia and neuroscience are fundamentally incompatible. I even started to wonder whether the time it takes the brain to put together all the components of audio perception is much longer than people claim as being perceptible timing differences in digital audio.

I've been rather lax in attending a concert series that mixes recitals by top notch artists with scientific lectures on a wide range of subjects. It's held in Oxford (no shortage of professors), run by the son of a friend of mine (a well known violinist). My favourite talk was by Russell Foster and Ron Douglas about the effect of light on our biorhythms and perception of music. It was followed by a performance in complete total 100% pitch darkness (by a jazz trio called Phronesis - piano, percussion and bass - a remarkable achievement in itself). One of them, I forget which, discovered the receptors at the back of our eyes that tell our body when to change from day mode to night mode and back again.

2016 Programme — Oxford May Music

www.oxfordmaymusic.co.uk

 

[Kal Rubinson]

Gosh. Well impressed. On reading Levitin I did start to wonder whether audiophilia and neuroscience are fundamentally incompatible.

Audiophilia encompasses a myriad of factions.

 

[PeterA]

The only brand that lets you look into the artists soul is FM acoustics.

That is quite a claim. Do any other brands come close?

 

[andromedaaudio]

That is quite a claim. Do any other brands come close?

Thats for you to decide.

Afaic not really one is music the other is ......whatever.
One makes me wanna listen for hours for the others 2 - 3 songs is mostly enough