What is "Sound Stage?"

Frank, now you are quoting and highlighting your own erroneous assumption and asking whether Tim has "any problem with that."
Okay, let's try to nail it. Would you say therefore when sound engineers are using microphones like the Soundfield and Eigenmike that they are not capturing information which can be relayed to the ears in some fashion, any fashion, to convey the illusion of height?

So - on this page alone a quote about how humans hear, and a reference to an erroneous and unsupported conclusion. And absolutely nothing about how microphones used in hifi-recording hear height in addition to width.
So is there, or isn't there, research to "prove" that height can't be conveyed by stereo replay, or is it purely an assumption? I could throw in something here about bumblebees and flying, but I won't ...

Frank
 
On page 6, I mentioned the fact that John Culshaw was adamant that stereo can not reveal height information.

Let's review a bit. There is general agreement in audiophilia that Decca is the recording company of note when it comes to what another thread here calls "The Golden Era of Records". Decca's releases from the 50/60s are highly sought after, and command arresting prices when available in good condition.

It might therefore be wise to lend a little credence to the opinions of the person who was in charge of Decca's classical music division during the era we are discussing. A person who began recording classical music with great artists in 1948 and who received an OBE for his significant contribution to the development of the art of recording and distribution of classical music.

Yes, the same John Culshaw. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/John_Culshaw

There is general consensus that stereo recordings from this era, and Decca's in particular, are stand-out examples of the best that can be achieved. Well, Culshaw was actually the person who initiated and drove Decca's stereophonic effort. As manager of Decca's classical recording division, Culshaw had enormous influence over the development of the art of recording in stereo. As mentioned in Gramophone's obituary: "he transformed the whole concept of recording."

People can look up Culshaw's discography on their own. But the man supervised and funded the development of mixing consoles, microphone techniques, transfer to LPs as well as improved playback technology for the serious audiophiles of the time.

In 1999, Gramophone polled its readers to find the ten greatest recordings ever made, and Culshaw's Wagner Ring topped the list.

During the production of the Wagner Solti Decca (Culshaw) Ring Cycle, Decca's engineers, driven by Culshaw, worked incessantly to create sound stages for what Culshaw called "a theatre of the mind" opera productions.

They worked for years and years on the cycle, spending time devising how to recreate the sound stages required, how to achieve the sound effects called for by Wagner (and how to record them).

Culshaw would have loved to be able to technically manipulate the perception of height in his recordings. From decades trying to achieve the impossible, he instead had to devise other ways of indicating verticality, because laterally recorded stereophonic sound can't recreate height through laterally placed speakers. (Unless your speakers are placed one above the other, you have a lateral stereophonic system in front of you at home, with identical speakers on the same plane (the floor) placed at a distance from each other, in front of you.)

Culshaw wrote a memoir in 1967, upon completion of the Ring Cycle, which had taken nine years to record and release to the public. In "The Ring Resounding" he goes through the work in chronological order, describing the various challenges that had to be met. We can safely assume that writing in 1967, he applies the perspective of someone who has gone through the entire effort (plus all the other work carried out by Decca's classical division). What follows is his opinion on the topic of height in stereo, from his book and as quoted on page 6 here. I have highlighted the important part - Culshaw had to cheat in order to get his listeners to think they were hearing vertical information, and what a cheat it was:


BTW - for what it's worth: John Culshaw, of Decca fame, was adamant, to the point of being livid, that stereo - can not, will not, is incapable of - depicting vertical information. One could claim that this is due to the speakers he was relating to at the time, but some serious set-ups were created by Decca for demos, so I doubt that's the reason.
Culshaw makes a particular point of this in his book "The Ring Resounding". At the conclusion of Das Rheingold, the Rhine Maidens are heard singing from under the surface of the river, and Culshaw knew that there was no way of capturing that in a stereo field. So he cheated - he described how Decca had gone to great lengths to achieve this depth of projection (solved in Bayreuth by the singers going into the orchestra pit, and by Culshaw through trickery).

p.98 of Ring Resounding, Viking edition:

Stereo will do anything you want on the lateral sense, but it cannot give you a vertical perspective. But sometimes, there are ways of compensating: there are ways, quite frankly, of cheating the ear into informing the brain that it has received an impression which it has not in fact received. We worked very hard to get a special acoustic on the girls' voices and then, in an article published just before Rheingold was released, I drew attention to the way in which the voices appeared to come from below. In fact they do nothing of the sort, but the suggestion worked. One critic after another commented on the remarkable illusion, and letters poured into the office asking how it had been done.


As long as microphones are placed on a lateral plane, they can not register a vertical differential, while registering a horizontal ditto.
 
Earlier today I was listening to David Johanson and the Harry Smiths, from Chesky record label.

First the CD from the analog connections, and then the SACD (Stereo) from the digital HDMI connection (DSD direct bitstream, not downconverted).

I listened attentively and I found real good depth in the soundstaging, like if I was there at the time of the recording.
David's main vocals were firmly anchored in the center, between my two 'flankers',
and his voice was higher than the instruments, but not by much; perhaps a few feet or so (2 or 3).

That recording started very nicely, but near the middle there were few tunes I wasn't fond of (too piercing from David's vocals), and then it settled down at the end.

If you want to do some critical listening you have to relax, and no listening sessions longer than few hours per day. This is how you'll be in top performing condition (ears & brains) for some critical music listening.

Tomorrow I'll do some more, and the day after, and so on ...
And I will share in all honesty my main impressions from my listening sessions with you guys from anything I remark (hear) in that soundstage (width, depth, and height included); for that holographic 3D spatial imaging sense).

I already talked a lot; now I'm in the listening mode 'next gear'.
Talk talk, walk walk, listen & results!

Meanwhile you can also do your own experimenting; and it's good for the ears and also for the soul, and from your own favorite music selections.
I'm on the ACTIVE audiophile mode when I'm doing this, and I feel good;
I feel better than James Brown. :b
How do you feel?

Bob, I would be interested in your thoughts listening to a large chior, or if anybody has a singers unlimited disc. One of the wonderful qualities that I can notice is the natural bloom and energy level captured in these recordings. As the intensity increases,the height level and total volume of space rendered also increases. It is not uncommon to feel the energy fill the room or a wall of sound to be heard and in some cases felt. It is a space and time element that is reproduced well in a 2 channel system and in the best form there is no sweet spot per se.
 
Bob, I would be interested in your thoughts listening to a large chior, or if anybody has a singers unlimited disc. One of the wonderful qualities that I can notice is the natural bloom and energy level captured in these recordings. As the intensity increases,the height level and total volume of space rendered also increases. It is not uncommon to feel the energy fill the room or a wall of sound to be heard and in some cases felt. It is a space and time element that is reproduced well in a 2 channel system and in the best form there is no sweet spot per se.

That is an excellent suggestion Roger, and I'll be looking at some of the perfect recordings; perhaps one from Reference Recordings for example, like John Rutter - Requiem five anthems, or Pomp & Pipes by Frederic Fennel with the Dallas Wind Symphony & Paul Riedo on organ. And I got several Choral music selections from mass choirs; I will look for some of my favorites Roger, and will keep in touch. ...I'm also big on Operas.

Thanks for the great suggestion, and meanwhile you can also share your listening experiences from such performances because you are a true music lover of mass chorales and Classical music from large venues. Your sound system is oriented that way and your musical taste crossed mine. :b

* And Steve too is set up perfectly for these kind of musical performances, and so are many more members here on this excellent site with some fantastic members of high intelligence caliber, and higher degree of music experience.

___________________
___________________

Mercury Living Presence is also a great Record label, and from the 50s and early 60s (I got some of these two). ...And a whole lot more (enough for constant playing, 24/7 till I die). :b
 
Last edited:
I would love to get some of these choral pieces, but I have refrained from purchasing any as I feel I could not properly experience them in my small 10x11 audio room.
 
Promise ...

I would like to mention this too (in regard to soundstage perspective in the 3D lateral planes).

Your Room is of prime importance (the near walls, the ceiling height, and the floor reflectivity).
And very important too: what is between your two front loudspeakers (preferably nothing).

You don't want near side walls, near front wall, low ceiling, to spoil your realistic soundstage when listening to quality music recordings.
Your loudspeakers need the proper positioning in respect to the size (space dimensions) of your listening room.

If you want to hear what's on the recording, we need to do that first; get the right room,
with the right loudspeakers that fit in it.
The closer we are to that, the easier we can read what's on the grooves, or pits. :b

[My ceiling is 11 feet high at the highest point, and my two front 'flankers' are five feet or more from any walls; but my room's arrangement is certainly not my ideal, as I simply cannot afford it. ...I lost big time in the past, and all my dreams shattered into millions of broken pieces. And I kid you not.]

I got a lot of work ahead of me to hear what's on my humble but cherished music collection.
Because this place where I live right now is quite new (only 9 months), and I simply don't have enough time left in my lifetime to even do a fraction of what I'd like to do.

All I can truly do, and I will, is only my very Best. And this, is a 'promesse' to my ownself,
and to nobody else.

I'll be listening for height information with auditive perception in my own room's setup.
And of course for width and depth imaging as well. And overall spaciousness, clarity, and holographic reconstruction of the real acoustic performances as recorded by the sound engineers.
All about Sound Stage; in this thread originally started by Tim (ten days ago).

One day at a time ... In the most silent way.
 
Last edited:
I would love to get some of these choral pieces, but I have refrained from purchasing any as I feel I could not properly experience them in my small 10x11 audio room.

Can you not rip a wall or two John?

But then, even if you could, you would have to start quasi all over; perhaps larger loudspeakers,
and all that Jazz ... Or maybe not.
 
Can you not rip a wall or two John?

But then, even if you could, you would have to start quasi all over; perhaps larger loudspeakers,
and all that Jazz ... Or maybe not.

I live in a 2-bedroom concrete jungle that I rent....so no tearing down walls for me.
 
Yeah, I knew that already, sorry.

But in your own space you are listening to the music you love, and that's all what truly counts.
You adapt to your own style of music.
And if you want the big Orchestras with Symphonias and full Chorals with Operatic works,
perhaps there are concert halls in the city where you live ...

Yeah I know, it ain't the same as in the comfort zone of your own space at home.
Then simply learn to love even more your own room.
Everything is there, and we are from the human race, which means we are very adaptable.

And don't dream bigger than your own reality. Music sounds nice anywhere and everywhere, small or big.
Me, I also luv small ensembles, Jazz quartets, Classical solo piano (big time), Blues bands from smaller venues.
And all of these have their own soundstage size and spaciousness.

And John, like me, don't dream of what others have, but of what you have yourself.
And that is our own soundstages. Tailor-made especially for each one of us. :b
And we're both from the same generation, with the same age ...

Sound, Stability, Age ... SoundStage. :b
 
I've actually been giving some serious thought to attending a live classical concert again, as I've been playing some of my Deutsche Grammaphon/Phillips/Mercury pressings, and I'm really enjoying the rediscovery of them. As I've said here and elsewhere many times, media is what drives me in this hobby, and my system delivers the results with great personal joy.

And, if I may, I do think that the choices I've made in gear selection are very compatible with eachother and I have been able to squeeze out the best from all of them. Does it sound as good as Steve's system? Mike Lavigne's system? Jack's system? Myles' system? No, but I can say without hesitation that I enjoy the music as much.
 
Maybe even more John :)

I'm currently playing with a tiny pair of 10wpc solid state single ended, ZNFB, class A monoblocks with 2 way monitors and while it can't blow off the roof, I'm really enjoying myself :)
 
My original post was :

Do you have a problem with that bit?

If you don't, then the next question is what to do with the 2 or more channels, tracks, of that sound information: keep them all separate and send them back individually to speakers -- one mic, one speaker, or mix them in some fashion, create an audio soup of information on a lesser number of tracks. And however you decide to do that, how do you spit the information back to the listener, where do you put the speakers, etc. In other words, there are a million ways to skin the cat, which is what all the research is fiddling around with.

And I still haven't heard of anything of experiments testing whether people can detect vertical information in stereo sound. Or, perhaps the wise old men have something in their pants that tells them everything they need to know ...


Frank

Of course I have a problem with it. It is your own interpretation of something you've read, and misinterpretations of what mics, recording and playback equipment, and even what is being heard are all over this thread, IMO. That's why I asked for a link. So far, I haven't even received a quote.

Tim
 
Bob, I would be interested in your thoughts listening to a large chior, or if anybody has a singers unlimited disc. One of the wonderful qualities that I can notice is the natural bloom and energy level captured in these recordings. As the intensity increases,the height level and total volume of space rendered also increases. It is not uncommon to feel the energy fill the room or a wall of sound to be heard and in some cases felt. It is a space and time element that is reproduced well in a 2 channel system and in the best form there is no sweet spot per se.

Two condition will be required to make it seem as if there is no sweet spot in your listening room: mono, and perfectly even frequency response from your speakers, from any position in the room. Do you have those conditions, roger?

Tim
 
Maybe even more John :)

I'm currently playing with a tiny pair of 10wpc solid state single ended, ZNFB, class A monoblocks with 2 way monitors and while it can't blow off the roof, I'm really enjoying myself :)

That to me is what should be strived for in all circumstances. It's obvious you are there and I know I am as well. It saddens me (perhaps confusion is a better word) when I hear audiophiles discussing their system's limitations with stronger fervor than their enjoyment of it. I don't get it!:confused::(
 
As long as microphones are placed on a lateral plane, they can not register a vertical differential, while registering a horizontal ditto.
I appreciate your extended response, Soundproof, and the thoughts therein. However, at the end of the day, it is only John Culshaw whose opinion you're quoting: no matter who experienced, that is the viewpoint of a single person acquired through personal experience with the equipment of the day, and, perhaps most importantly, possibly how he assessed the ability of the playback equipment available in those days to reveal low level reverberation information. He may have done extensive experiments to test what was possible by capturing echo and other acoustic information, but you've haven't mentioned anything along those lines.

So we still not aware of any experiment done, testing whether echoing from the floor and ceiling which is captured along with the direct signal is sufficient information for the human hearing mechanism to discern height: there should be at least a master's degree for someone willing to do experiments along these lines ...

Frank
 
(...) And as to the "Cocktail Party Problem" I do trust that microstrip is aware it's the ears they are discussing, and not microphones? And I gather you are all aware of the role of the pinnae in localization? As well as the head-related transfer function - both of which one has tried to simulate with binaural heads, btw. But it turns out our pinnae are individual, and that each of us adapts to their shape when learning to localize, through early trial and error when we're young. (It's also best when they are symmetrical, which is not always the case).

So - on this page alone a quote about how humans hear, and a reference to an erroneous and unsupported conclusion. And absolutely nothing about how microphones used in hifi-recording hear height in addition to width.

Soundproof,

Please read my post before taking from it conclusions that I have NOT presented in it .
Surely the comment is about the ears - I have often referred that our ears are not microphones, but the end of track.

For me the interesting part seemed : Spectral differences provided by the head-related transfer function (HRTF) are the main cues used for vertical localization.

If the way the ear perceives the height is partially based on alterations of the spectral content, not in directional issues, than may be microphones can convey this information if they are accurate enough. (my humble interpretation)

If you think that this is impossible (may be it is :)) please educate us.

BTW, the Cocktail Party Problem has nothing to do with the height issue - it was only the title of the paper, and I had to reference it . Next time I will call it CPP to avoid misinterpretations.
 
I am extremely relaxed right now and I'm listening again to:
Dead Can Dance - Into The Labyrinth from the CD (4AD record label: CAD 3013 CD).

* Now for all who have the CD or LP versions, please do this:

- Listen to track #1 and from 2:45, give special attention. ...Listen if you can hear the height.
- Check track #9. ...It is even more obvious.
- And listen to tracks #10 & #11 as well.
{And of course check the width & depth of that huge soundstage.}

-> And when you're done, please return here and share your findings.
[From your own room => most important.]
0 height above my tweeters.

It is a remarkably well engineered set of tracks, very deep, wide (well beyond the speakers) and spacious, with a lot of 'little sounds' in various places and at moderately high frequencies that could give some listeners an illusion of height above their speakers if the room was reflecting certain frequencies in the near field, or if the tweeters in that speaker array were not linearly handling all frequencies (not all that unusual). But there's not a hint of 'organized' height, even though there is a fair amount of movement within the height projected by the speakers themselves. That apparent vertical movement is due to sounds that transcend more than one driver in the speakers, not from the recording.

They are using what sounds like one or more large stereo plate reverbs with very long reverb times and pre-reverb delays carefully eq'd to match the source, which helps create and maintain the spacious sound stage. It's a fascinating recording, to be sure. Though the music seems to be an acquired taste.

--Bill
 
0 height above my tweeters.

That apparent vertical movement is due to sounds that transcend more than one driver in the speakers, not from the recording.
--Bill
Excuse my ignorance, but does it really matter where the "height" one perceives to be there comes from?
 
Excuse my ignorance, but does it really matter where the "height" one perceives to be there comes from?
Only because most of those claiming to hear it believe that it is based on information in the original stereo recording. Not a synthetic based on the height of transducers in the speakers or variables in the listening room. I personally prefer an accurate rendition of the recording within the capabilities of two channel stereo.

--Bill
 

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 Owner | Administrator
Julian (The Fixer)
Website Build | Marketing Managersing