square_wave
Well-Known Member
That is little weird. Are harbeth's known to not do that ?The layered depth I am seeking is still elusive in my room.
That is little weird. Are harbeth's known to not do that ?The layered depth I am seeking is still elusive in my room.
Sorry, I don’t understand. Are you saying stereo is different from mono?
I fully agree with this.
I personally have not experienced depth and height in sound stage in stereo set ups in a obvious way. Again that maybe because I have not yet listened to a two channel system that can do this convincingly.
Since most performances and studio recordings have the musicians on the same floor (level) the height aspect doesn’t bother me. But being able to identify who is in front, at the back etc would be fantastic!
In cinema and multichannel home theatre systems I guess clearly identifiable sounds from all directions would be important (achieved by placement of speakers all around)
IMO it is impossible to get the height with stereo and where recording has been done with just 2 microphones. Whatever semblance of height anyone gets is probably some hallucination. Accurate rendition of height will be possible only if the recording is done in two planes. One horizontal (the way it is done for stereo) and one vertical plane with top and bottom microphones. And of course playback done with 4 speakers - Left + right speakers and top ceiling + below the floor speakers?8. There is no spatial 3d information in the signal. It is stereo, a left to right difference in loudness and running time. It‘s all in the signal. Two times mono. Height, depth etc. is a conceit. That is what stereo was invented for. It‘s not your fault or weakness. For height a second pair of speakers is necessary. With different signals, recorded from different microphone (higher) positions.
Are you able to experience this with headphones? Forget about height, but do you get the feeling of layered depth with headphones?I was wondering about this too. But I really haven’t heard any 2 channel system that convincingly showed layered depth or height.
That is not to say it’s not possible. Just that I have not experienced this.
When we talk about height in the stereo image, it is not exactly height info/sound that you get using height channels in a multi channel setup. It is the height of the soundstage in front of you. With the right speakers, acoustics and placement, you can get height that is taller than the location of the tweeters. The sound will be airy and differences in height of various images in the soundstage is clear. Sitting in your listening chair, if you look at the tweeters, it will look as if it is not making any sound at all. The sounds will be in the soundstage around and above it. It is quite uncanny.IMO it is impossible to get the height with stereo and where recording has been done with just 2 microphones. Whatever semblance of height anyone gets is probably some hallucination. Accurate rendition of height will be possible only if the recording is done in two planes. One horizontal (the way it is done for stereo) and one vertical plane with top and bottom microphones. And of course playback done with 4 speakers - Left + right speakers and top ceiling + below the floor speakers?
In short what you need is a basic version of Atmos adapted for stereo
Somehow I never get this, even with headphones. Whatever semblance of height I get is because of 2-way, 3-way speakers where instruments sound to be coming from top and lower frequency and vocals coming from the height of the midrange drivers. When I listen with headphones, it becomes worse.When we talk about height in the stereo image, it is not exactly height info/sound that you get using height channels in a multi channel setup. It is the height of the soundstage in front of you. With the right speakers, acoustics and placement, you can get height that is taller than the location of the tweeters. The sound will be airy and differences in height of various images in the soundstage is clear.
True. This is very much palpable even in my modest setup.When we talk about height in the stereo image, it is not exactly height info/sound that you get using height channels in a multi channel setup. It is the height of the soundstage in front of you. With the right speakers, acoustics and placement, you can get height that is taller than the location of the tweeters. The sound will be airy and differences in height of various images in the soundstage is clear.
Yeh kuch hajam nahi huvi.So here they are:
“Hard facts:
16/44 Is sufficient.
There is no spatial 3d information in the signal. It is stereo, a left to right difference in loudness and running time. It‘s all in the signal. Two times mono. Height, depth etc. is a conceit. That is what stereo was invented for. It‘s not your fault or weakness. For height a second pair of speakers is necessary. With different signals, recorded from different microphone (higher) positions.
Yes, nicely with some recordings, and specially with open back HPs.Are you able to experience this with headphones? Forget about height, but do you get the feeling of layered depth with headphones?
It’s definitely a provocative list with some “facts/opinions” that challenge our long held beliefs.Yeh kuch hajam nahi huvi.
(Can't digest these)
Try repositioning the speakers. It took me lot of experimentation with positioning to get depth. It was only when I pulled the speaker quite a lot further into the room did I get depth. I think it is reflections. Also I have an odd L shaped room.Yes, nicely with some recordings, and specially with open back HPs.
With closed back HPs the layering is apparent but within the confines of the head.
Totally agree, especially with the thing about height. When you don't have top to bottom information recorded (like the left to right recording), how is height possible? I'm looking for answers. My long held belief is that without height channels, this is impossible or illusion at best. See this discussion on reditt, where others too are saying that you require minimum of 4 speakers to get height. Height has lot to do with psychoacoustic. See the video after the reddit comments.It’s definitely a provocative list with some “facts/opinions” that challenge our long held beliefs.
If the room permits and family is understanding, you could try positioning your speakers one-fifth into the room from front wall (the wall behind the speakers) and side walls. Use measuring tape. Start listening with the speakers firing straight into the room. Gradually toe in the speakers towards the listening position. At one particular angle you'll find that the stereo phantom centre particularly good/locked with the tonal balance between the bass, mids and highs is well balanced. You should be able to get decent, if not good, layering with some sounds playing well behind the front plane of the speakers. The ability to present layers is also a function of how three chain resolves tiny nuances in the music. Details buried deeper in the mix will sound as if it's further back because it's less louder. The above exercise will also bring into focus the image. Specific instruments and voices will have their specific placements in the semi circular sound stage that envelopes the speakers.Chasing the chimera… You are right; my research and interest indicates the topics and areas I am fascinated about.
Hope we are all talking about the same thing
I do get a nice wide sound stage with clear separation. The decay of some notes is fabulous. There is nice heft and substance to the sound overall.
I just don’t get any perception of height
I also don’t get a clear sense of individual musicians positions front to back.
Hopefully I will figure it out.
I think you are absolutely right. In fact ever since the Croft arrived, I have been moving the speakers a lot. Sometimes three or four times a day trying to understand what each position does to the sound and my room acoustics.
I currently have them pulled out about 5’ away from the wall in front of me, 2.5 metres apart and @2.5 metres from my ears at the listening spot. (Even got a laser measure for this )
In essence I am trying near field to eliminate room effects as far as possible.
Astonishing to notice the change that even a 2-3” move sideways creates.
The layered depth I am seeking is still elusive in my room.
1. That's a very common circular logic fallacy amongst audiophiles. As others have pointed out, due to individual headphone colouration, individual HRTF and individual perception, the human brain can sometimes mis-interpret the relationship between frequency, phase and levels of the sounds/instruments which are actually in a particular mix and create an illusion of height information. The circular logic comes into play because if a group of audiophiles decide that they like this unintentional height illusion then: Any equipment which seems to enhance this perception is better than equipment which doesn't, any mixes which seem to exhibit this phenomena are better than those which don't and therefore, anyone who doesn't perceive this illusion either has poor equipment, poor hearing or both. The reason this is all a fallacy is because there is no height information in stereo, the equipment isn't "good" because it's revealing "hidden clues" because there are no hidden clues to reveal, just a fluke of the interaction of the elements in a mix with the headphones, HRTF and perception of each individual. We could just as easily say/decide that as there is no height info in a stereo mix, any equipment which creates an illusion of height is poor/bad rather than good, anyone who perceives it has flawed perception or any mix which exhibits it has a fault/problem.[1] As time as gone on I've got better equipment and found some good recordings that seem to have more 'hidden' clues with regards to positions.
[2] Would it be correct to say that people who 'perceive' height with IEMs are over interpreting?
Almost any stereo recording carries height info. This is the reason why speakers are mounted at exactly the same height and spirit levels are used to check for front-back level and left-right level of the speakers. Many footers and stands have individually adjustable footers for this very purpose. Properly adjusting the heights and levelness of both speakers results in additional "lock" of the stereo image. This adjustment is cheap (buy a spirit level costing a couple of hundred rupees) and does not take much time and is easy to perform. No hallucination involved.IMO it is impossible to get the height with stereo and where recording has been done with just 2 microphones. Whatever semblance of height anyone gets is probably some hallucination.
Yes. And just like you can't record stereo with just one microphone, you can't have height without 4 microphones as a minimum. Even if there is any height information encoded artificially in stereo recording, it cannot be rendered with 2 speakers. You require minimum of 4 speakers with the MLP suspended mid air between the top and the bottom speaker.@jls001
Not sure if height info is implicitly encoded in stereo. It may be a mixing artifact, when the engineer plays around with levels.
As for the illusion of depth and height the speakers+room and the harmonic profile of pre/pwr/IA matters.
I call it illusion cause, change in position or change in one or more components makes a difference in presentation.
In my home, depth is very easily perceivable, height is a bit elusive. Maybe because I move the speakers to listening position every time.
I'll replace the word "beliefs" with the word "experiences". Belief need not have basis but experience does.It’s definitely a provocative list with some “facts/opinions” that challenge our long held beliefs.
Uneasiness, discontent, indigestion, or waiting for a epiphany…all part of the journey and discovery?
Do explain why (if you wish to, of course) I am sure it will enrich the discussion.
Call me old school; I doggedly held on to my CDP and my CD collection. Having done many experimentations with sources like CDP, Laptop etc. using connectivity options like RCA, Coaxial, Optical & USB, many times, in the presence of FMs like @linuxguru @srinisundar @murali_n @mohamednaseer @Rajiv & @Thad E Ginathom while at Chennai and came to a conclusion that CDP with RCA & Coaxial sounded the best, in the given setup. I along with FM @gvenu once visited Shiva of Acoustic Portrait fame and auditioned the same tracks on his reference set-up; from redbook CDs on his CDP & high resolution files from a laptop, both routed through his DAC to their flagship amps & speakers. The differences were not night and day though perceptible. Streaming was unheard of those days, at least I didn't.16/44 Is sufficient
In my personal experience, I have listened to countless CDs/ Vinyls where, the soundstage is huge withth width going well beyond the speaker boundaries with well perceptible depth and many CDs with very small height and soundstage, mimicking a concert hall. That's why I'm skeptical of these statements.There is no spatial 3d information in the signal.
Yes, @raghupb , the height info is not explicitly hard coded in the stereo mix (afterall we have only left and right channel), but one can hear better phantom centre when both speakers are height and level matched. Most of us tend to concentrate on distance of speakers from listener and toe-in angle. I'm suggesting from experiences in setting up speakers that we should additionally level and height match the speakers for a more refined sound.
<snip>
Whatever illusion of height one gets is because of reflections and the distance between the tweeter and the lower frequency drivers in a speaker box. The height illusion is illusion at best, not real and totally depends on the speaker construction. One of the pair of floorstander I have is the Cadence Arista speaker with siltech electrostatic panel and Thiel low frequency driver below the electrostatic panel. But the low frequency driver is tilted upwards (almost by 15 degrees). This causes some of the sound appear to be coming from the floor. Also with this speaker, while listening to Ken Mo, it appeared Ken Mo to be singing sitting on some raised stage high above the ground.
<snip>