Quite interesting. So, all that money didn't buy improvements in fidelity, dynamic range, tonal accuracy, image placement horizontally, depth, frequency extension, etc? It was all wasted? Now I'm not sure where the BS is situated.
Lee
What is "Sound Stage?"
- Thread starter Phelonious Ponk
- Start date
Quite interesting. So, all that money didn't buy improvements in fidelity, dynamic range, tonal accuracy, image placement horizontally, depth, frequency extension, etc? It was all wasted? Now I'm not sure where the BS is situated.
Lee
The messages are so mixed here, I'm not sure what you're trying to say. Are you looking for an "accurate spatial re-creation of the recording event," or the "captured illusion?" And what is a "captured illusion?" Information is captured. Illusions are created. Regarding this...
It's not the playback system's flaw, regardless of quality or cost. I'm sure your system does a fine job of reproducing what it has to work with and your perceptions take over from there.
Tim
Everybody might not like my conclusion,but if you read this thread,it is the only conclusion that is possible. Like a said Tim you talk like a lawyer.No apologies,either this time.
Last edited:
Tim,
Check out this track
Stars Fell On Alabama - Renee Olstead's Skylark album
Please let me know what you observed about the soundstage's overall dimensions.
Thanks.
Check out this track
Stars Fell On Alabama - Renee Olstead's Skylark album
Please let me know what you observed about the soundstage's overall dimensions.
Thanks.
And Roger, you speak in cryptic, disconnected phrases that often appear to be lacking the critical information to communicate anything, if related to the subject of discussion at all. If you can't see the conflict above between accurate and illusion, and can't grasp the gobbledygook that is "captured illusion," well, I am sorry about that.
Tim
Can microphones capture height information in a stereo recording?
"Stereo recording does not encode meaningful height information."
But it goes way beyond that quote from above.
And Stereo can be from up to four channels (speakers); and even more...
Stereo means Solid Sound.
_____________________________
* Quick fast reads (easy for anyone):
1. http://www.stereophile.com/asweseeit/390awsi/index.html
2. http://www.johnleonard.co.uk/styled-4/index.html
3. http://www.soundonsound.com/sos/1997_articles/feb97/stereomiking.html
{This one above just a little longer.}
_____________________________
** If you are up to it (educational):
4. https://pantherfile.uwm.edu/type/www/420_Field_Audio/StereoMicingTheory_Readings.pdf
"Stereo recording does not encode meaningful height information."
But it goes way beyond that quote from above.
And Stereo can be from up to four channels (speakers); and even more...
Stereo means Solid Sound.
_____________________________
* Quick fast reads (easy for anyone):
1. http://www.stereophile.com/asweseeit/390awsi/index.html
2. http://www.johnleonard.co.uk/styled-4/index.html
3. http://www.soundonsound.com/sos/1997_articles/feb97/stereomiking.html
{This one above just a little longer.}
_____________________________
** If you are up to it (educational):
4. https://pantherfile.uwm.edu/type/www/420_Field_Audio/StereoMicingTheory_Readings.pdf
Last edited:
Stereo - solid + phonic - sound
It's why all those Golden Era records have Stereophonic on them.
And stereo can be dozens of channels/speakers, for that sake. Bell tried it out with eighty microphones/speakers.
It's why all those Golden Era records have Stereophonic on them.
And stereo can be dozens of channels/speakers, for that sake. Bell tried it out with eighty microphones/speakers.
True, Stereo can have as many channels as you wish.
____________________
Telephone is a French word. ...For Sound Communication (Vocal + Hearing).
{Telepathy: the path of communicating...}
____________________
Height information can be captured in the recordings with careful mic techniques,
and from the floor reflections (ceiling too), and distances of the mics in the vertical plane.
Plus other technics using several mics and special positioning & with the help of physical 'reverberators'.
We are in the year 2012; just wait till we hit year 2062.
Last edited:
Some more reading
http://www.avatar.com.au/courses/PPofM/space/index.html
http://artsites.ucsc.edu/ems/music/tech_background/te-03/teces_03.html
Heck. Go to town on the references on this one
http://www.pa.msu.edu/acoustics/loc.htm
Enough theory. How about application?
On-location recording techniques by Bruce Bartlett, Jenny Bartlett Paragraph 1 page 92
Some humor perhaps?
http://www.recordproducer.com/?a=432
Ma! I can GOOGLE!!!!!!
http://www.avatar.com.au/courses/PPofM/space/index.html
http://artsites.ucsc.edu/ems/music/tech_background/te-03/teces_03.html
Heck. Go to town on the references on this one
http://www.pa.msu.edu/acoustics/loc.htm
Enough theory. How about application?
On-location recording techniques by Bruce Bartlett, Jenny Bartlett Paragraph 1 page 92
Some humor perhaps?
http://www.recordproducer.com/?a=432
Ma! I can GOOGLE!!!!!!
From one of Jack's academic sources above:
Do anyone's microphones have earlobes? No, I didn't think so....
Tim
Do anyone's microphones have earlobes? No, I didn't think so....
Tim
Well to require formal proof from you would hold you to a standard that I don't subject myself to on this forum. To be quite frank I don't know , short of just accepting the others assertion/opinion as fact, how to resolve this issue.
Certainly I do not beleive the arguments "hold water" In my own work I have frequently "known" but was unable to convince others. No big deal.
Tim,
No, but each loudspeaker, each room have their own acoustic signature
and characteristically sound attributes.
And microphones come in all type, forms & shapes, and sound capture as well.
And you can also use different positionings, and the numbers of mics used also contribute to the overall sound acoustic capturing from the venues (like classical concert hall's soundstages).
Plus you have access to physical external helpers (like home-made acoustical designs).
Maplehade studios for example. And others we have already mentioned in this excellent thread here.
No, but each loudspeaker, each room have their own acoustic signature
and characteristically sound attributes.
And microphones come in all type, forms & shapes, and sound capture as well.
And you can also use different positionings, and the numbers of mics used also contribute to the overall sound acoustic capturing from the venues (like classical concert hall's soundstages).
Plus you have access to physical external helpers (like home-made acoustical designs).
Maplehade studios for example. And others we have already mentioned in this excellent thread here.
Last edited:
Frank,
Although it will not add nothing new to the debate, the basic ideas seem to have quality enough to be granted a patent . I did not read it in full, but I got the idea that the device pretends to extract the height information processing the recording and then carry the the proper pinna-like filtering to the signal to recreate the height and other environmental perceptions in a conventional system. In 1988 this would be a mirage, I think it could be done in 2012, although not with real music. I have read an article where the author records the source using a single microphone at different heights and processes the signals with adequate algorithms to extract the height information with success. All we need is high power computing, some computer genius to develop and implement the algorithms and proper knowledge of the psychoacoustics to try it!
From one of Jack's academic sources above:
Do anyone's microphones have earlobes? No, I didn't think so....
Tim
I know I do
The key point is that which I have been saying. Notches in the FR spectrum are perceived as height. Remember what I wrote about EQing that bass guitar? That cue is in the recording baby. On of the .edu links also mentions pitch shifts and how these become perceived as height movement on the sagittal plane. That can be in the recording's manipulation too.
As for mics do check out the book by Bartlett and Bartlett on location field recording
Your honors. I rest my case.
I know I do
On of the .edu links also mentions pitch shifts and how these become perceived as height movement on the sagittal plane. That can be in the recording's manipulation too.
As for mics do check out the book by Bartlett and Bartlett on location field recording
Your honors. I rest my case.
Like I said before, I don't doubt the possibility, just the commonality. Well,I also question the utility. All that phase and eq manipulation, if you used it enough to create a vertical image, I bet you'd seriously mess up something else. Maybe some day.
Tim
Micro, you didn't follow the discussion in the thread in the key area! That is not a mirage, that is precisely how this now infamous Chesky LEDR track was constructed: it's a real working "mechanism", which a lot of members on this forum have experienced the effect of -- a musical sound can be made to totally arbitrarily move to any point in the room, vertically, to the side of the speakers, behind you; just by playing around with virtually created echoes in a very sophisticated way. For those who missed it, this was in my post:Although it will not add nothing new to the debate, the basic ideas seem to have quality enough to be granted a patent . I did not read it in full, but I got the idea that the device pretends to extract the height information processing the recording and then carry the the proper pinna-like filtering to the signal to recreate the height and other environmental perceptions in a conventional system. In 1988 this would be a mirage, I think it could be done in 2012, although not with real music. I have read an article where the author records the source using a single microphone at different heights and processes the signals with adequate algorithms to extract the height information with success. All we need is high power computing, some computer genius to develop and implement the algorithms and proper knowledge of the psychoacoustics to try it!
Frank,
Although it will not add nothing new to the debate, the basic ideas seem to have quality enough to be granted a patent . I did not read it in full, but I got the idea that the device pretends to extract the height information processing the recording and then carry the the proper pinna-like filtering to the signal to recreate the height and other environmental perceptions in a conventional system. In 1988 this would be a mirage, I think it could be done in 2012, although not with real music. I have read an article where the author records the source using a single microphone at different heights and processes the signals with adequate algorithms to extract the height information with success. All we need is high power computing, some computer genius to develop and implement the algorithms and proper knowledge of the psychoacoustics to try it!
DSP loudspeakers ... A la Meridian.
High-end McLaren designed loudspeakers, B&W Nautilus Series, Dynaudio Evidence Series?
That sort of thing can be done, very easily: the trick is not to try and process the audio track at the time of playing, but do it beforehand, offline so to speak. Get an album, have some software suck it up, grind away for hours sorting what can be done with it, using parameters, knowledge about your current equipment and listening space and spit out a new, customised version of the album, MkII. Burn that to CDR, or add to the music server and away you go: a "perfect" version of your music, without having to invent or buy expensive extra electronics. Unless, of course, your thing is being a "gear head" ...
Frank
No Frank, you know me, I'm into software first. ...Spent easily half mill there. Both Music & Movies.
By the way, I like QSound music recordings and the likes. :b
...Extra wide soundstage with very spacious presence.
And of course multichannel SACDs, DVD-Audios,
and Blu-ray music concerts with high res multichannel audio.
=> 5.1 LPCM, DTS-HD MA & Dolby TrueHD, up to 7.1 surround sound channels encoding.
...44/24, 48/24, 88/24, 96/24, 176/24, 192/24, 352/32, 384/32, DSD, ...
Next for me is Audyssey DSX with Front Width & Height channels.
By the way, I like QSound music recordings and the likes. :b
...Extra wide soundstage with very spacious presence.
And of course multichannel SACDs, DVD-Audios,
and Blu-ray music concerts with high res multichannel audio.
=> 5.1 LPCM, DTS-HD MA & Dolby TrueHD, up to 7.1 surround sound channels encoding.
...44/24, 48/24, 88/24, 96/24, 176/24, 192/24, 352/32, 384/32, DSD, ...
Next for me is Audyssey DSX with Front Width & Height channels.
Last edited:
Similar threads
