What is "Sound Stage?"

[Gregadd]

OK. Let's look clearly at what a microphone does. It's a transducer - it converts one form of energy to another. It turns sound waves into an electrical signal.

At any one point in time, the amount of sound energy received will bend the diaphragm so that it creates motion across the wound coil that converts mechanical energy to electrical energy.

The energy impact received by the diaphragm causes it to move accordingly. It doesn't matter to the diaphragm where the energy that makes it move comes from, it just moves - and when it moves, its motion is converted into an electrical signal with the use of a wound coil and a magnet. That's it. The microphone doesn't think or evaluate or discern between the origins of the energy that makes it act as a transducer of sound waves into an electrical signal. It just responds to the motions of the diaphragm by creating a signal.

Then, depending upon how we use the microphones, we can use two or more to register an energy differential relative to the sources of sound. Two microphones, placed a little apart, will respond differently to the sound waves generated by a source. The closer it is, the stronger the electrical signal, the farther away, the weaker (when the sound created is at the same level).

When we record the electrical signal generated by the two microphones, in a manner that ensures that their output is synchronized, we are taking an electronic snapshot of the sound stage the microphones "heard".

When we play back the two electrical signals, sending their energy to the driver of a loudspeaker, we are creating an imitation of the sound energy that was released into the recording room by the sources.

As the two microphones perceived the amount of energy emitted by the sources differently, due to their distance from the source, we get a recreation of varying strength, and that variation lets us place the sources along the lateral plane, because the speakers we listen to are next to one another.

Sorry I could not resist. The microphone is not a decoder, it is a copier. As for it striking a memebrane, is not that a exactly what happesn in the ear? In fact sound travles down a hole in your head and strikes a menbrane.

 

[bblue]

No, the height information possibly, from the point of view of our ears, is effectively encoded at the microphone by those different paths, replayed hopefully correctly into our listening enviroments, and then the ears decode that waveform as representing height. In the same way as 2 vertically displaced speakers should be able to do so, fed with the right inputs

In other words, two different ways to achieve the same end goal, perception of height. The loudspeaker way is simply a way of exaggerating the effect, spotlighting it as intensely as need be, to get the message across ...

Frank

Frank, you make a point... of a perfect example of refusing to apply common sense to a situation, and instead propose a condition that doesn't exist. This is what I referred to as ignorance, of the basic physics of recording with a microphone.

Soundproof described it well (as has Tim and others (me)). A microphone has no sense of direction with regards to where a sound comes from. It simply sums everything it hears into one electrical signal. There is no encoding, nothing from which any direction can be discerned by listening to one mic.

Now, as long as you and others refuse to accept this basic fact, and instead provide some rhetoric about a single microphone being able to preserve direction, you're doing yourself and everyone else here a great disservice.

And to whomever referenced "know-it-all's" as the folks here who KNOW what they're talking about in this subject, another disservice.

You people need to read up on some known facts and techniques and try to *understand* them and quit wasting everyone's time with your b*llsh*t.

Sorry about being direct, but the ignorance here is really getting annoying.

--Bill

 

[Soundproof]

Sorry I could not resist. The microphone is not a decoder, it is a copier. As for it striking a memebrane, is not that a exactly what happesn in the ear? In fact sound travles down a hole in your head and strikes a menbrane.

Nowhere does it say that the microphone decodes anything, that's something you have pulled out of your imagination. Nor does the microphone "copy" anything - that would be the recording medium.
What the microphone does, quite simply, is to transduce between two energy states - sound waves to electrical signal.

And yes, the designers of the microphone realized that by using a membrane (there are various designs now, but this is a useful metaphor), they could connect this to the transducing component (coil and magnet, in many instances) and harvest sound waves as an electrical signal. The world was never the same after that.

 

[Gregadd]

Sorry about being direct, but the ignorance here is really getting annoying.

Yes it is.

 

[Soundproof]

Yes it is.

There is also the kind of willful obtusiveness that makes for amusing study, Gregadd.

 

[Steve williams]

wow , I have been down in the desert for the past 3 days where its 95 degreesand just catching up. The only thing generating more heat is this thread.This thread is mindboggling, on and off topic with IMHO absolutely no new or valid arguments. Aren't you guys tired of talking around each other and getting nowhere
Let me know if you want to continue

 

[Soundproof]

wow , I have been down in the desert for the past 3 days where its 95 degreesand just catching up. The only thing generating more heat is this thread.This thread is mindboggling, on and off topic with IMHO absolutely no new or valid arguments. Aren't you guys tired of talking around each other and getting nowhere
Let me know if you want to continue

The fact that people choose to completely ignore the actual facts of recording music does not give me a feeling of not getting anywhere, Steve. Far from it - it provides me with considerable amusement.

 

[RBFC]

I look at it like a microphone is a funnel. Sound comes in from all over and all of it gets sent down the wire at the tip of the funnel.

Lee

 

[Gregadd]

There is also the kind of willful obtusiveness that makes for amusing study, Gregadd.

Yeah that too!

 

[Robh3606]

I'm not going to present any arguments. I just think that it is sad that any audiophile would beleive that height perception is a myth. If you follw Tims arguments, that he is entileted to make, there would be no high -end. Maybe Tim thinks that's a good thing. I for one think it would be sad.

Hello Gregadd

Well the issue is there are many myths that get passed on word of mouth, get read or written on internet forums or are repeated so many times that they become "facts". We really should debunk these "facts". They do not serve any useful purpose and obscure the real facts. All they do is add confusion which this thread is a perfect example. If you want to blindly accept all the add copy used in the high end as facts go right ahead. If you think the use of psuedo science to explain things that fly in face of common knowledge and sense is OK what can I say.

The more we understand how things really work the more easilly we can see through too what the real deal is. The smarter we are as a group the better off we will all be.

Rob

 

[Gregadd]

Hello Gregadd

Well the issue is there are many myths that get passed on word of mouth, get read or written on internet forums or are repeated so many times that they become "facts". We really should debunk these "facts". They do not serve any useful purpose and obscure the real facts. All they do is add confusion which this thread is a perfect example. If you want to blindly accept all the add copy used in the high end as facts go right ahead. If you think the use of psuedo science to explain things that fly in face of common knowledge and sense is OK what can I say.

The more we understand how things really work the more easilly we can see through too what the real deal is. The smarter we are as a group the better off we will all be.

Rob

Blah.Blah, Blah. I've heard it all before. I think it was Shakespeare who said ,"Ah, there is the rub. " Deciding waht's fact or fiction. Science or pseudoscience.


My point is all the research I've done done and cited on this forum has changed very few if any minds. My goal is to make sure my side is heard. It is sure that if I followed the science I would be listening to two dimensinal, ear bleeding, lifeless music. How do I know it? Because I started this hobby forty years ago listening to the science. Then I decided to listen to the music and never looked back.

Are there corrupt, incompetent idividuals peddling (for lack of better word) snakeoil? Sure. But that's true of any business field in a capitalistic economy. Caveat Emptor!

It bears repeating. Don't let anyone talk you out of what stereo has to offer. A realistic image is one of those things. It would be a sad day if anyone allowed themselves to be talked out of that.

P.S. As my friend Raul says "Enjoy the music." The discussion groups are just for fun.

 

[Ron Party]

P.S. As my friend Raul says "Enjoy the music." The discussion groups are just for fun.

Hey Greg, where has Raul been? I really enjoyed reading his posts.

 

[Phelonious Ponk]

I'm not going to present any arguments. I just think that it is sad that any audiophile would beleive that height perception is a myth. If you follw Tims arguments, that he is entileted to make, there would be no high -end. Maybe Tim thinks that's a good thing. I for one think it would be sad.

I've never said that height perception is a myth, and I think there should be a high end. I do think that much of what is considered "high end" (mostly based on price and mythology) could disappear tomorrow and a) Audio reproduction would be no worse off for it b) It would only be a slightly premature exit.

Those are my arguments, and as is often the case, you've not heard them. Too busy hearing vertical stereo imaging in panel speakers, I suppose.

Tim

 

[RogerD]

I always look for a scientific answer but these words have always guided me also......


MEASUREMENTS DO NOT RELATE WELL TO WHAT THE EAR PERCEIVES.

MEASUREMENTS DO NOT EXPLAIN WHAT THE EAR PERCEIVES; THIS IS TO SAY, WE DO NOT KNOW WHAT TO MEASURE.

LISTEN AND TRUST YOUR EARS.

 

[Robh3606]

My point is all the research I've done done and cited on this forum has changed very few if any minds.

Do you mean like the research you did in this thread?? Where you did a quick Google search found a reference. Obviuosly didn’t understand it and posted it as part of your argument?? That’s hardly research and will not change anyones mind.

My goal is to make sure my side is heard.

OK so you come into these discussions with a fixed agenda, not an open mind.

It is sure that if I followed the science I would be listening to two dimensinal, ear bleeding, lifeless music.

Funny I have had the opposite result I quess the difference is I don’t do quick Google searches and actually understand what I reference in my posts.

Because I started this hobby forty years ago listening to the science. Then I decided to listen to the music and never looked back.

You need balance to have a true understanding.

Blah Blah Blah

 

[Soundproof]

Do you mean like the research you did in this thread?? Where you did a quick Google search found a reference. Obviuosly didn’t understand it and posted it as part of your argument?? That’s hardly research and will not change anyones mind.



OK so you come into these discussions with a fixed agenda, not an open mind.



Funny I have had the opposite result I quess the difference is I don’t do quick Google searches and actually understand what I reference in my posts.



You need balance to have a true understanding.

Blah Blah Blah

Same old story, isn't it. A hobby that is completely dependent upon precise science, where every single stage in the process has taken considerable ingenuity. technical savvy and know-how, has magazines and fora where science and technology is ridiculed, and the wildest notions are proposed, completely counter to the insights that makes it possible to listen to music in the first place.
I doubt that this is wise, in the long run. If only the wild notions agreed just a touch, but they are also contradictory, and people who may be interested in seeing what it's all about get to become very confused about the whole thing.

 

[Steve williams]

Do you mean like the research you did in this thread?? Where you did a quick Google search found a reference. Obviuosly didn’t understand it and posted it as part of your argument?? That’s hardly research and will not change anyones mind.



OK so you come into these discussions with a fixed agenda, not an open mind.



Funny I have had the opposite result I quess the difference is I don’t do quick Google searches and actually understand what I reference in my posts.



You need balance to have a true understanding.

Blah Blah Blah

Like I said Rob if all of you hit the "ignore" button he is a voice that won't be heard. He will never learn, never admit he's wrong and honestly I feel he has masochistic tendencies because IMO he thrives on everything everyone slings his way. The more you reply to him the worse it becomes. Don't reply to him as should everyone else not as well. Otherwise it merely fuels his fire. From my point of view his opinions are only that.
As the saying goes "if a tree falls in a forest does it make a sound.

All of the members here would be best served with this suggestion otherwise you're nothing more than fodder for him

 

[Robh3606]

OK

Rob

 

[bblue]

I always look for a scientific answer but these words have always guided me also......


MEASUREMENTS DO NOT RELATE WELL TO WHAT THE EAR PERCEIVES.

MEASUREMENTS DO NOT EXPLAIN WHAT THE EAR PERCEIVES; THIS IS TO SAY, WE DO NOT KNOW WHAT TO MEASURE.

LISTEN AND TRUST YOUR EARS.

But question and challenge when what you hear doesn't make sense (hopefully an astute listener will know when that is). Ears can be trained and educated if used with an open mind. Without the necessary training and understanding they can lead you into a wild maze of mis-assumptions. Various system (mis)configurations can produce amazing sounds on some source, but they aren't repeatable across all sources and usually aren't consistent even from day to day.

Saying that your ears are trained just because you've been an audiophile for 40 years means nothing if you haven't had any guidance and practical application to the world of recording, know what various frequencies sound like, know what eq and compression/limiting sound like and just generally understand all/most of the variables that contribute to a recording.

--Bill

 

[FrantzM]

Hi

I have a hard time figuring out how a microphone can povide the height information we are so much discussing about here. I will ask this and hope sincere answers:

Do large (tall) speakers provide in general better of the so-called "height " than small (short) ones?