In Search Of Accurate Sound Reproduction: The Final Word!

[AJ Soundfield]

4 hours ago, fas42 said:

multi-channel is not necessary to conjure

Indeed Frank, indeed.

But you can still show the folks here that don't know you, how you have recreated a realistic concert hall with 2ch of HTIB. The picture of your conjuring method will be clearer, so to speak.

[AJ Soundfield]

2 hours ago, semente said:

 

If I'm not mistaken, side-wall and ceiling reflections will create ghost images (reflections) of the reproduced sound

You are mistaken. 

Precedence effect holds (no "echo") when there is a spectral similarity between the direct and reflected sounds. It will only break down when there are gross dissimilarities...aka terrible speakers with poor off axis (entirely possible for audiophiles).

An excellent layman article is written here by Dr Toole http://www.audioholics.com/room-acoustics/room-reflections-human-adaptation/what-do-listeners-prefer with references to the many studies showing so.

 

cheers,

 

AJ

[firedog]

1 hour ago, semente said:

 

I don't agree with this sentence, unless you are including the room in the "playback lifted to a very high standard".

The room cannot disappear unless you treat it, it's got nothing to do with the quality of the playback, even if controlled narrow dispersion in the upper mids and highs deals better with the room "conflict".

But a lot of people enjoy that "interference" to the point of positioning their speakers close to the side wall with little or no toe-in.

It also looks from what I read in forums and webzines like many audiophiles and "pro" critics perceive flat response as "dull" or "lifeless", although most of them do not listen to unamplified acoustic music.

 

R 

I think you two are saying the same thing. The quality of playback includes the amount of room interaction. A high standard of playback would then mean playback with a low level of room interaction.

[AJ Soundfield]

5 hours ago, STC said:

I am beginning to think stereo sound is now considered as a standard of its own not necessarily reflective of real sound reproduction. 

Actually it's been that way since the 30s Bell Labs experiments.

An old Bell guy explains it here:

http://www.aes.org/e-lib/browse.cfm?elib=9136

Then demos a real audio science system (rather amusingly) to folks from the audiophile sphere here:

http://www.onhifi.com/features/20010615.htm

I'm not sure if it could hold a candle to Franks 2ch HTIB conjurer (graded A+ by Frank), but it seemed to have a profound impact on folks who presumably, may have heard some of the finest "audiophile" 2ch rigs in their time.

 

cheers,

 

AJ

[james45974]

49 minutes ago, AJ Soundfield said:

You are mistaken. 

Precedence effect holds (no "echo") when there is a spectral similarity between the direct and reflected sounds. It will only break down when there are gross dissimilarities...aka terrible speakers with poor off axis (entirely possible for audiophiles).

An excellent layman article is written here by Dr Toole http://www.audioholics.com/room-acoustics/room-reflections-human-adaptation/what-do-listeners-prefer with references to the many studies showing so.

 

cheers,

 

AJ

I always enjoy reading Dr. Toole's articles, thanks for the link.  I don't want to hijack the thread but his "humans are adaptable" and the example of the different sound characteristics of the same monitor speakers in different mixing rooms seems to blow the MQA theory about getting "what the artists intended" out of the water!   How do we know what the artist intended if it is an individual's hearing ability that is the key?  If Dr. Toole has stepped away from "critical listening" (his research) and is only listening for pleasure because of the degradation of his physical hearing ability, should we give Bob Stuart, who I assume is in the general age group as Dr. Toole (correct me as needed), a pass as potential consumers of MQA?  Does he (I'm sure there is a team though) have the hearing ability to decide for all consumers what is right and how MQA should present sound recordings?  I guess Dr. Toole has given me pause about having Bob Stuart and MQA decide what I should be hearing on my system, beyond what came out of the mixing board.  Bob, keep your grubby fingers off the product!

 

To me the takeaways are, again, that humans are adaptable and there is no perfect room!  So sit back and enjoy the music!

[STC]

2 hours ago, AJ Soundfield said:

Indeed Frank, indeed.

But you can still show the folks here that don't know you, how you have recreated a realistic concert hall with 2ch of HTIB. The picture of your conjuring method will be clearer, so to speak.

Ok. This is my third attempt since my last two posts have gone missing. 

 

Yes, please do show your unique setup. I am curios to know how you could that with 2 speakers. We all can learn something new. 

 

Audio samples would be great even made from cheap microphone as it could reveal room coloration easily. 

 

Thanx. 

[STC]

2 hours ago, firedog said:

A high standard of playback would then mean playback with a low level of room interaction.

 

What is low level of room interaction? Nearfield listening?

[semente]

21 minutes ago, STC said:

 

What is low level of room interaction? Nearfield listening?

 

That or some degree of side-wall and ceiling absorption.

[semente]

3 hours ago, AJ Soundfield said:

You are mistaken. 

Precedence effect holds (no "echo") when there is a spectral similarity between the direct and reflected sounds. It will only break down when there are gross dissimilarities...aka terrible speakers with poor off axis (entirely possible for audiophiles).

An excellent layman article is written here by Dr Toole http://www.audioholics.com/room-acoustics/room-reflections-human-adaptation/what-do-listeners-prefer with references to the many studies showing so.

 

cheers,

 

AJ

 

The keyword in that article is "preference".

[STC]

5 hours ago, semente said:

If I'm not mistaken, side-wall and ceiling reflections will create ghost images (reflections) of the reproduced sound, such as those you used to get in the TV days of antenna in the roof, and also help the speakers disappear,

 

I am sorry, I do not agree with you. My two speakers completely disappear even without the aid of rear half reflection. The ghosting image is more relevant when we reproduce the original single source with two speakers.

This is what happens with stereo trying to reproduce a single source - distortion.

 

This is how the waves in a reflection free room travel before reaching us.

 

 

 

 

 

Now when you reproduce the sound with stereo speakers, the waves are distorted compared to the real sound.

 

 

 

 

The animation charts were taken from ISVR website.

[semente]

1 hour ago, STC said:

 

I am sorry, I do not agree with you. My two speakers completely disappear even without the aid of rear half reflection. The ghosting image is more relevant when we reproduce the original single source with two speakers.

This is what happens with stereo trying to reproduce a single source - distortion.

 

This is how the waves in a reflection free room travel before reaching us.

 

 

 

 

 

Now when you reproduce the sound with stereo speakers, the waves are distorted compared to the real sound.

 

 

 

 

The animation charts were taken from ISVR website.

 

What you say/show is correct, bit I wasn't discussing live source VS. reproduction but sound of speakers in a room VS. sound of speakers in free space (anechoic). 

[Ralf11]

re:  side-wall and ceiling reflections will create ghost images (reflections) of the reproduced sound

 

do you mean the use of a 'ghost' source beyond the reflective barrier to better model room acoustics?

 

or that a ghost source will be perceived by a listener at certain levels of time lag?

[esldude]

5 hours ago, AJ Soundfield said:

Actually it's been that way since the 30s Bell Labs experiments.

An old Bell guy explains it here:

http://www.aes.org/e-lib/browse.cfm?elib=9136

Then demos a real audio science system (rather amusingly) to folks from the audiophile sphere here:

http://www.onhifi.com/features/20010615.htm

I'm not sure if it could hold a candle to Franks 2ch HTIB conjurer (graded A+ by Frank), but it seemed to have a profound impact on folks who presumably, may have heard some of the finest "audiophile" 2ch rigs in their time.

 

cheers,

 

AJ

Read about this before. Yet nobody licensed it.  More than two channels I suppose isn't commercially attractive. Instead we get mqa. A chance to sell all the two channel inventory again.

[semente]

41 minutes ago, Ralf11 said:

re:  side-wall and ceiling reflections will create ghost images (reflections) of the reproduced sound

 

do you mean the use of a 'ghost' source beyond the reflective barrier to better model room acoustics?

 

or that a ghost source will be perceived by a listener at certain levels of time lag?

 

The wall acts as a mirror and the resulting reflections, which are not part of the recorded signal, give the image a bit of "relief".

It may sound pleasant to the large majority but it is still a form of distortion.

I think that the image I posted previously is not a bad illustration of what I am trying to express.

 

R

[firedog]

5 hours ago, STC said:

 

What is low level of room interaction? Nearfield listening?

Or that, or a large room with enough space to minimize room reactions between the speakers and listener, or a room treated with acoustic panels.

[semente]

5 minutes ago, firedog said:

Or that, or a large room with enough space to minimize room reactions between the speakers and listener, or a room treated with acoustic panels.

 

Interestingly I have a hunch that most audiophiles would not like either... 

[AJ Soundfield]

5 hours ago, semente said:

 

The keyword in that article is "preference".

Correct and "blind". It falsifies the image you posted.

Turns out, ears only, most folks, including believers/studiophiles/etc.  prefer reflections with good polar pattern speakers. Exceptions are terrible speakers and of course sighted belief preferences for the latest iso-ward fashions.

Reflections are critical for stereophonic phantom center spatial rendering. For ears i.e.

[semente]

3 minutes ago, AJ Soundfield said:

Correct and "blind". It falsifies the image you posted.

Turns out, ears only, most folks, including believers/studiophiles/etc.  prefer reflections with good polar pattern speakers. Exceptions are terrible speakers and of course sighted belief preferences for the latest iso-ward fashions.

Reflections are critical for stereophonic phantom center spatial rendering. For ears i.e.

 

So you are saying that stereo imaging doesn't work outdoors.

That is not my experience.

[AJ Soundfield]

2 hours ago, semente said:

It may sound pleasant to the large majority but it is still a form of distortion.

Of what? There is no reference acoustic transduction. So "distortion" of what?

Once again 2ch sampling of any soundfield is itself a "distortion". See link above.

[semente]

Just now, AJ Soundfield said:

Of what? There is no reference acoustic transduction. So "distortion" of what?

Once again 2ch sampling of any soundfield is itself a "distortion". See link above.

 

Of the signal.

[AJ Soundfield]

6 minutes ago, semente said:

 

So you are saying that stereo imaging doesn't work outdoors.

Nope, I'm quoting you saying that 

 

Lateral reflections spatially average/smoothen the stereo phantom central imaging combing. Lack of reflections worsens the audible combing.

The (ears) research is clear.

[AJ Soundfield]

4 minutes ago, semente said:

 

Of the signal.

You can't hear signal without transduction

[mansr]

3 minutes ago, AJ Soundfield said:

You can't hear signal without transduction

Unless you have Bluetooth enabled cochlear implants.

[AJ Soundfield]

2 hours ago, esldude said:

Read about this before. Yet nobody licensed it.  More than two channels I suppose isn't commercially attractive. Instead we get mqa. A chance to sell all the two channel inventory again.

Don't make me quote the JGH article again explaining everything you just said 

 

Audiophiles want a shrine of 2ch audio jewelry in the iso-ward to kneel before, fondling the cable lifters, while rock music plays in background.

PSR??? meh  

[AJ Soundfield]

8 minutes ago, mansr said:

Unless you have Bluetooth enabled cochlear implants.