What is "Sound Stage?"

[bblue]

I said it before and I'm saying it again; I was just listening to a recording two nights ago by Roger Waters - 'Amused To Death', and the drums are lower, the vocals higher, and the guitar(s) even higher, The bass in the middle, everywhere, and the talkin' on the r.a.d.i.o. at the extreme left and higher than the drums, or a kitchen table.

And so on so on so on ...

Several Patricia Barber recordings have also various heights in them, so some from Eva Cassidy.
... Kasey Chambers, Aimee Mann, Stacy Earle, Laurie Anderson, Lucinda Williams, Mary Gauthier, Katie Webster, Mary Chapin Carpenter, Rosanne Cash, Julie Miller, Sam Phillips, Jennifer Warnes, Loreena McKennitt, Joni Mitchell, Kate & Anna McGarrigle, Rickie Lee Jones, Janis Ian, Ani Difranco, Kathleen Edwards, Shawn Colvin, Tracy Chapman, Joan Osborne, Loretta Lynn, Alison Krauss,
Diana Krall, Nanci Griffith, Emmylou Harris, Allison Moorer, Jane Monheit, Eleanor McEvoy,
Cindy Blackman, Holly Cole, Natalie Cole, Norah Jones, Cassandra Wilson, Christy Baron, Sara K., Rebecca Pidgeon, Laverne Butler, Rosemary Clooney, Koko Taylor, Shemekia Copeland, Etta James, Rita Chiarelli, Sue Foley, Rory Block, Eliza Gilkyson, Virginia Rodrigues, Jewel, and so on ...

*** Talkin' 'bout the well recorded acoustic music recordings here, and in particular the live ones.
There is height to the vocals, and other instruments, plus depth as well ... And even forwardness and rearwardness from the audience standpoint and soundstage size respectively.
You can also size the height of the cabarets, the small venues, Jazz clubs, etc.

Talk 'bout holographic sound stage with real height, width, depth, & imaging! :b
And from just a single pair of loudspeakers ...tra la la ...3D & all ...Blues, Jazz, Classical, World, ...

Sigh.

You have simple frequency discrimination from your speakers when displaying a spacial sound stage. That's all. What you describe is attributable to the placement of woofers toward the bottom, midrange in the middle and highs toward the top of a cabinet, and the speakers positioned in the room such that there are significant reflections from the walls and ceiling.

I have high res recordings of many of the artists you list, and there is no height information in any of them. Some of the sound stages are remarkably detailed with depth and positional focus, but no height other than the 2.5 feet between my woofer and tweeter (midrange in between them). This is in an acoustically designed and treated room, not dependent on room reflections to enhance the sound stage. What it is, it is.

--Bill

 

[Soundproof]

There is an exception to the ability of two microphones to capture vertical information, that I am aware of. And this awareness came by accident.

I've been into ornithology since the 6th grade, and given my interest in recordings, it was a given that I would follow the "birdcall recording scene". These are serious ornithologists who travel around the world, often with parabolic discs and microphones, to capture birdcalls.

And a few of them do their travel with excellent microphones, and recording equipment. If analog, it's almost always a Nagra; and if digital, it's almost alway high-resolution.

When I heard this recording, through my set-up, I was wallowing in 3D with heigth-information. There are a few secrets to how this was done:

1. Two good stereo microphones, placed not that far apart, but sufficiently to capture a stereo soundfield.

2. Dense junge foliage, reflecting the jungle sounds in every which direction - reflective surfaces below, around you and above. And they are good reflectors, to boot, with the natural slope of the foliage giving a good gradient to the sound.

Point 2 is the issue here. The foliage is chaotic, it points "every which way" and creates a particular sound field, where the direct sound is redirected from an almost endless amount of surfaces, towards the listener/microphones. (Of course, it is also directed in every other direction, but the slope of the foliage ensures that quite a lot of indirect sound energy reaches a listener).

What happens?

You get an incredibly strong 3D Sound Stage.

Have a listen - we're in the jungle of Costa Rica. Play this through your sound system, and be amazed:

http://open.spotify.com/track/0tfmkXa0YDxVLZPj8Dpab5
http://open.spotify.com/track/07n0lhOFaCtyBlCybMfo2s

Here's the iTunes link to the whole album. Go to tracks 23 and 24:
http://itunes.apple.com/us/album/costa-rica/id72259625

Now - this is as far from most standard stereo recording conditions as you will get. I see that Frank posits we are getting reflection from the ceiling/floor, and that accounts for verticality. Problem is that most modern recordings are made with close-mike techniques, precisely to avoid these; and classical recordings (such as the Decca-tree) suspended the microphones in front of and above the orchestra/performer. How do you then account for the impression of height, when you are actually listening from above?

Even the Binaural Neumann-head used by Minnesota to record was suspended in front of and above the orchestra ... listen to those recordings, and experience how your mind supplies height.

But chiefly, enjoy 3D in the jungle, in recording conditions that are rarely emulated for music, with a few exceptions that I have made certain to secure for my own great enjoyment.

What happens here, is that the recording geometry is being radically altered, and that the direct sound is being supplemented by a literally vast array of secondary, tertiary, etc. reflections - lending strong body tone, and also helping us localize sources through the three axes of the sound field to a greater extent than with the absolute majority of stereo recordings.

When I play this in my listening room, the walls (every single one, and the floor) disappear.

 

[Phelonious Ponk]

There is an exception to the ability of two microphones to capture vertical information, that I am aware of. And this awareness came by accident.

I've been into ornithology since the 6th grade, and given my interest in recordings, it was a given that I would follow the "birdcall recording scene". These are serious ornithologists who travel around the world, often with parabolic discs and microphones, to capture birdcalls.

And a few of them do their travel with excellent microphones, and recording equipment. If analog, it's almost always a Nagra; and if digital, it's almost alway high-resolution.

When I heard this recording, through my set-up, I was wallowing in 3D with heigth-information. There are a few secrets to how this was done:

1. Two good stereo microphones, placed not that far apart, but sufficiently to capture a stereo soundfield.

2. Dense junge foliage, reflecting the jungle sounds in every which direction - reflective surfaces below, around you and above. And they are good reflectors, to boot, with the natural slope of the foliage giving a good gradient to the sound.

Point 2 is the issue here. The foliage is chaotic, it points "every which way" and creates a particular sound field, where the direct sound is redirected from an almost endless amount of surfaces, towards the listener/microphones. (Of course, it is also directed in every other direction, but the slope of the foliage ensures that quite a lot of indirect sound energy reaches a listener).

What happens?

You get an incredibly strong 3D Sound Stage.

Have a listen - we're in the jungle of Costa Rica. Play this through your sound system, and be amazed:

http://open.spotify.com/track/0tfmkXa0YDxVLZPj8Dpab5
http://open.spotify.com/track/07n0lhOFaCtyBlCybMfo2s

Here's the iTunes link to the whole album. Go to tracks 23 and 24:
http://itunes.apple.com/us/album/costa-rica/id72259625

Now - this is as far from most standard stereo recording conditions as you will get. I see that Frank posits we are getting reflection from the ceiling/floor, and that accounts for verticality. Problem is that most modern recordings are made with close-mike techniques, precisely to avoid these; and classical recordings (such as the Decca-tree) suspended the microphones in front of and above the orchestra/performer. How do you then account for the impression of height, when you are actually listening from above?

Even the Binaural Neumann-head used by Minnesota to record was suspended in front of and above the orchestra ... listen to those recordings, and experience how your mind supplies height.

But chiefly, enjoy 3D in the jungle, in recording conditions that are rarely emulated for music, with a few exceptions that I have made certain to secure for my own great enjoyment.

What happens here, is that the recording geometry is being radically altered, and that the direct sound is being supplemented by a literally vast array of secondary, tertiary, etc. reflections - lending strong body tone, and also helping us localize sources through the three axes of the sound field to a greater extent than with the absolute majority of stereo recordings.

When I play this in my listening room, the walls (every single one, and the floor) disappear.

Even your jungle and Frank's reflections from the ceiling and floor will not give you height information. Think about this for a moment; what are all of those reflections doing? They are delaying, or altering the (distorting) the original sound. Can that create great depth and texture? Yes. Can it create "height?" How? How does the microphone know where, in the vertical plane, the altered sound comes from? And if it "knew" (how absurd this is becoming!) how would it encode that knowledge? What is the mechanism? Again, I don't doubt that people are hearing something they interpret as "height." But some folks in this thread are claiming a discrete vertical image -- drums down here, guitars there, voices up here. That is impossible. And if they hear it, it is either a) Fertile imagination or b) The inability of the individual drivers in their speakers to cohere before the sound gets to their listening position. Just for the record, B is not a good thing. Push your chair back.

Tim

 

[RBFC]

IMO, height perception may be produced by various phase effects caused by relections of sound during the recording process. These phase effects are interpreted by our ear/brain as denoting height. The physics of the playback is elementary. We have a defined rectangular-shaped zone (the boundaries of which are described by the highest and lowest drivers in each speaker) from which the sound must appear. Anything outside of that zone is the result of phase information, either in the native recording or an artifact of system/room interaction.

I"m not hearing the same vehement arguments about sounds appearing to the outsides of the speakers, yet many of the same phenomena are at work.
Lee

 

[Soundproof]

Even your jungle and Frank's reflections from the ceiling and floor will not give you height information. Think about this for a moment; what are all of those reflections doing? They are delaying, or altering the (distorting) the original sound. Can that create great depth and texture? Yes. Can it create "height?" How? How does the microphone know where, in the vertical plane, the altered sound comes from? And if it "knew" (how absurd this is becoming!) how would it encode that knowledge? What is the mechanism? Again, I don't doubt that people are hearing something they interpret as "height." But some folks in this thread are claiming a discrete vertical image -- drums down here, guitars there, voices up here. That is impossible. And if they hear it, it is either a) Fertile imagination or b) The inability of the individual drivers in their speakers to cohere before the sound gets to their listening position. Just for the record, B is not a good thing. Push your chair back.

Tim

Then I was being unclear. In certain jungle settings, with certain microphone set-ups, we get an omnidirectional reflection of the direct sounds that creates a believable 3D soundscape, with oodles of additional information for the ear, compared to conventional stereo recordings. It's worth it to listen to the samples, as they're "like nothing else."

But they're an exception, in exceptional circumstances, with depth, width and height that are not comparable to stereo recordings of music - the soundscape creates a reverb field that opens up the sound stage tricking us into feeling the three axes we're discussing.

In the vertical plane, which is what you question, the countless reflecting surfaces are supplying a simulacra of a vertical recording condition - think of the two microphones as A and B, and of each reflected sound as 'C. Each of these will be at a different distance from A and B, and thus will be supplying discrete information that is time shifted and level shifted.

As bass is not reflected, and the content is limited to upper range mid and top, we get an imitation of the phase distortions that we can tweak - leaving us with an expansive soundfield of apparently 3D sources.

Very interesting.

 

[JackD201]

Who claims to have heard a discreet rather than elevated phantom image? If you mean Roger, he does have "height" speakers fed by a processor. Discreet? No. Actual sound sources yes.

To me it's simple. If you hear it, it's there. I know it is trickery. I've DONE the trickery. What's the big deal? This is all semantics now. Can you or can't you give not just a sense of vertical height but also movement? The answer is YES. No you can't do it with one speaker. I still don't know what that's got to do with anything.

 

[RBFC]

This multi-page thread, IMO, is about semantics. We're arguing that because there is no sound source outside of the rectangular "sound-production window" of standard stereo, then we cannot be hearing any sounds from outside that window. Anyone who's heard Bob Carver's Sonic Hologram Generator will know that this argument is unfounded. I had many folks absolutely point to locations outside the speaker window as the source of sound when playing recordings through the Generator. So, without any such information in the recording, we can positively identify sound loci in positions where they "cannot" be. Argument for argument's sake, if you ask me.....

Lee

 

[JackD201]

Agreed. If the dissenters didn't live half way around the world. I like to invite them over, blind fold them, have them point at the "apparent" sources of the sound and video tape them and put the tape on youtube.

 

[bblue]

When I heard this recording, through my set-up, I was wallowing in 3D with heigth-information. There are a few secrets to how this was done:

1. Two good stereo microphones, placed not that far apart, but sufficiently to capture a stereo soundfield.

2. Dense junge foliage, reflecting the jungle sounds in every which direction - reflective surfaces below, around you and above. And they are good reflectors, to boot, with the natural slope of the foliage giving a good gradient to the sound.

Point 2 is the issue here. The foliage is chaotic, it points "every which way" and creates a particular sound field, where the direct sound is redirected from an almost endless amount of surfaces, towards the listener/microphones. (Of course, it is also directed in every other direction, but the slope of the foliage ensures that quite a lot of indirect sound energy reaches a listener).

What happens?

You get an incredibly strong 3D Sound Stage.

Correction. You get a lot of depth in the sound stage, as you say by the random reflections from the foliage. However, there isn't one ounce of height, higher than my tweeter.

...
Have a listen - we're in the jungle of Costa Rica. Play this through your sound system, and be amazed:
...
Now - this is as far from most standard stereo recording conditions as you will get. I see that Frank posits we are getting reflection from the ceiling/floor, and that accounts for verticality. Problem is that most modern recordings are made with close-mike techniques, precisely to avoid these; and classical recordings (such as the Decca-tree) suspended the microphones in front of and above the orchestra/performer. How do you then account for the impression of height, when you are actually listening from above?

That and your conclusion of height (above) have nothing to do with each other. Wherever the suspended microphones are (head or otherwise) -- those two points become your lateral sound stage from your speakers. It doesn't matter where they are, all they do is pick up the sound points for L and R at that position, which are then played back on your speakers. Just because the mics are high doesn't mean you will hear height, only that your point of sound stage reference is from a different point of view. Height of the recording mics is often used to allow the microphones to 'see' the entire orchestra front to back without obstructions. That translates to more detail and articulation of the various instruments when you play them back on a lateral sound stage from your speakers.

Even the Binaural Neumann-head used by Minnesota to record was suspended in front of and above the orchestra ... listen to those recordings, and experience how your mind supplies height.

Only if you expect it to be so because you were told the mic was high overhead.

But chiefly, enjoy 3D in the jungle, in recording conditions that are rarely emulated for music, with a few exceptions that I have made certain to secure for my own great enjoyment.

What happens here, is that the recording geometry is being radically altered, and that the direct sound is being supplemented by a literally vast array of secondary, tertiary, etc. reflections - lending strong body tone, and also helping us localize sources through the three axes of the sound field to a greater extent than with the absolute majority of stereo recordings.

When I play this in my listening room, the walls (every single one, and the floor) disappear.

But the ceiling doesn't.

Obviously these are well made recordings and are particularly articulate due to a rising high frequency response. But again, there is no height portrayed other than the height of the speaker and room reverberations. My room has no reverberations so is quite detailed as to depth and dimension of the recordings without external influences.

I have a couple of reverberation plug-ins on my DAW that include a forest simulation, inside, close and further away, an open field, and various other outside recording effects. It is just very short delays and many of them, frequency selective. But no height, because it doesn't exist in 2 channel stereo.

--Bill

 

[JackD201]

Bill, can or can't you move a phantom image vertically with the tools at your disposal?

 

[bblue]

This multi-page thread, IMO, is about semantics. We're arguing that because there is no sound source outside of the rectangular "sound-production window" of standard stereo, then we cannot be hearing any sounds from outside that window. Anyone who's heard Bob Carver's Sonic Hologram Generator will know that this argument is unfounded. I had many folks absolutely point to locations outside the speaker window as the source of sound when playing recordings through the Generator. So, without any such information in the recording, we can positively identify sound loci in positions where they "cannot" be. Argument for argument's sake, if you ask me.....

I don't think so. It's about folks making claims about systems and speakers regarding stereo reproduction that simply are not true, either based on misunderstanding the principles involved, misunderstanding proper speaker setup, or misinterpreting what they're hearing. This IS WBF, no?

I've heard (and had) Carver's Sonic Hologram hardware. It has nothing to do with reality, and does nothing whatsoever to improve the audio. It just makes things appear in different locations depending on phase coherency of the stereo signal.

Two channel stereo IS a sound-production box. There's nothing magic about it except the effect that various distortions and acoustic anomalies create. But within that box and with very good and well tuned playback equipment it can be quite enjoyable. Just not magical.

--Bill

 

[JackD201]

Magic is ascribed to what is either not understood or is not describable. That doesn't nullify the observation.

Hmmm. If that isn't a dose of semantics, I don't don't know what is.

 

[bblue]

Bill, can or can't you move a phantom image vertically with the tools at your disposal?

Not higher than the tweeter when limited to 2 channel. You can wrap it around you by manipulating phase, or position it beyond L and R, but no height.

You can go further than L or R by almost 45 degrees by manipulating phase shift of one channel to the other of a given instrument. That's because the speakers L & R radiate the sound stage laterally and you DO have control over that. That's what gives random ambience a very wide (wider than the speakers) soundstage. Some recordings use carefully tuned reverb units to make a vocal seem huge or at least very wide compared to other tracks, without 'swimming' in reverb. As you get beyond 45 degrees, some people and rooms will 'hear' it right above their head, and others hear it behind them depending on phase coherency of the speakers and the room.

--Bill

 

[Phelonious Ponk]

Who claims to have heard a discreet rather than elevated phantom image? If you mean Roger, he does have "height" speakers fed by a processor. Discreet? No. Actual sound sources yes.

IMO, anyone who claims to be hearing different instruments at different heights in a complex (music, not a single moving tone) recording -- drums down here, guitar here, vocals up here. And there are several participants in this thread claiming to hear this. I don't doubt they are hearing some phase effects and some separation of frequencies along the vertical plane that creates a sense of height. But a vertical image, complete with separation of sound sources? Recordings are not made that way; that's not what they're hearing and it is not a semantic argument, IMO.

To me it's simple. If you hear it, it's there. I know it is trickery. I've DONE the trickery. What's the big deal? This is all semantics now. Can you or can't you give not just a sense of vertical height but also movement? The answer is YES. No you can't do it with one speaker. I still don't know what that's got to do with anything

.

You can give a "sense." And evidently with enough "trickery" you can create a moving audio object in a special recording. But can you put on your stereo records and create a differentiated vertical sound field? Not because your speakers are good enough. Only because your imagination is good enough. And yes, there are several people in this conversation who are claiming just that.

Tim

 

[Steve williams]

I am sure many or most of you have Dead Can Dance album, Into The Labyrinth

In track 2 where Brendan Perry sings The Ubiquitous Mr Lovegrove, i have always been amazed that I can hear the sound well above my left speaker all the way up to my ceiling (12 feet high) and along my left wall. I don't know if this is a phase issue to create the effect or what but I have played that song over hundreds of times to people who also hear what I heard

 

[JackD201]

That would mean the head would be under the tweeters horizontal plane then?

 

[JackD201]

IMO, anyone who claims to be hearing different instruments at different heights in a complex (music, not a single moving tone) recording -- drums down here, guitar here, vocals up here. And there are several participants in this thread claiming to hear this. I don't doubt they are hearing some phase effects and some separation of frequencies along the vertical plane that creates a sense of height. But a vertical image, complete with separation of sound sources? Recordings are not made that way; that's not what they're hearing and it is not a semantic argument, IMO.

.

You can give a "sense." And evidently with enough "trickery" you can create a moving audio object in a special recording. But can you put on your stereo records and create a differentiated vertical sound field? Not because your speakers are good enough. Only because your imagination is good enough. And yes, there are several people in this conversation who are claiming just that.

Tim

That trickery is in the SIGNAL. If your speakers can't reproduce the signal to a good enough degree you aren't going to get tricked.

 

[microstrip]

IMO, height perception may be produced by various phase effects caused by relections of sound during the recording process. These phase effects are interpreted by our ear/brain as denoting height. The physics of the playback is elementary. We have a defined rectangular-shaped zone (the boundaries of which are described by the highest and lowest drivers in each speaker) from which the sound must appear. Anything outside of that zone is the result of phase information, either in the native recording or an artifact of system/room interaction.

I"m not hearing the same vehement arguments about sounds appearing to the outsides of the speakers, yet many of the same phenomena are at work.
Lee

Lee,

Wise guess. It was studied before, and it is intrinsic to to sound and the ear. I still do not understand why some people are still discussing polar response of the microphone.

But people have to understand that is effect is as "individual" as stereo, and even less reliable.

 

[microstrip]

That trickery is in the SIGNAL. If your speakers can't reproduce the signal to a good enough degree you aren't going to get tricked.

Or if you do not want to be tricked ... Reverse expectation bias, since you believe it is not possible, it does not exist.

 

[JackD201]

Micro,

Because you can simulate those notch patterns partially with mic placement for static positioning. As far as movement as pointed out by soundproof, bblue and myself, panning, phase manipulation is used. Panning can be done manually with a microphone not just on the board. Think of a stereo pair of microphones as a camera. Move to the array to the left and the subject moves to the right. To get vertical I typically use EQ.

Vertical movement requires a blend of FR manipulation and Phase manipulation. Almost impossible to do without a lot of trial and error and without automation.