 
|
Audio Asylum Thread Printer Get a view of an entire thread on one page |
For Sale Ads |
|
|
Audio Asylum Thread Printer Get a view of an entire thread on one page |
For Sale Ads |
206.255.203.68
In Reply to: RE: There's a very simple answer to that which you seek posted by Posy Rorer on June 02, 2007 at 00:37:28
rw
Follow Ups:
See my reply to Morricab, you are letting your idiotic presumptousness get the better of you.
Music making the painting, recording it the photograph
I can always rely upon you for levity! :)
rw
ES: "Wherein you state that diddling with FR constitutes "soundstaging"?"
TAH: And where did I say that?
Music making the painting, recording it the photograph
Sheesh. Might want to have that looked into.
Well, in chronological order, there's this post where in response to my observation "An equalizer is utterly incapable of deepening the soundstage", you opine:
Ignorant and wrong, a quick demo of a modest receiver will prove otherwise, some of the preset equalisation setting accomplish that easily and that has been the case for many years.
Then you said Your point about the Lexicon processor feature is conceded, however the original points remains, my old boom box has preset equalization settings that improved the soundstage of flat recordings here
More recently in this post, you said: Nope, I tweak the FR to get the desired effect.
Finally, you provided the unsupported "details" in this post where we learn your "secret" to soundstaging. tweak the frequency response in upper midrange & lower treble specifically between 900Hz-5kHz. A good place to start is to look at the frequency response of the speakers famed to have deep soundstages and copy their FR in the region.
You improved the soundstage of your boombox? Dude, we're not talking about the same thing at all.
rw
Rather, it is your comprehension that is so poor. And this nonsense suggests that you do not understand the basic relationship between FR and the presentation of the soundstage, sure there are other facts, but the FR is a key factor. I suggest you look at Stereophile's audiophile glossary of audio terms and look up forward, laidback, there is basic primer that will help you and if you are up to it read about loudness compensation curves.
If you cannot tell the deference between "Wherein you state that diddling with FR constitutes "soundstaging"? " and " tweak the frequency response in upper midrange & lower treble specifically between 900Hz-5kHz (to depend the soundstage)", then we really should not be having this discussion at all, since it means lack basic prerequsite knowledge and/or comprehesion to discuss the topic in the first place.
Music making the painting, recording it the photograph
FR is not the only factor at issue with regard to soundstaging...its not that simple. High frequency distortion and retrieval of low level ambient cues are just as important to a convincing recreation of soundstage.
The FR manipulation you speak if a cheap parlor trick to give a SEMBLANCE of soundstage but it also affects intelligibility of lyrics or movie dialogue and creates an artificial sense of depth that is there whether it is on the recording or not. It can serve to "tame" overly hot recordings or extremely close miked recordings but it is not correct. Recordings with real soundstage information don't need this manipulation and will benefit most from a very clean HF (no Class D amps need apply) and excellent low level resolution (again noisy Class D is left out in the cold).
For "diddling", substitute any equivalent term. Adjusting the FR. Modifying the FR. Shaping the FR. Altering the FR. Setting the FR. Assigning the FR. Whichever term you use, the concept is the same. You believe that soundstaging is a function of frequency response. The characteristic to which I refer is not.
I suggest you look at Stereophile's audiophile glossary of audio terms and look up forward, laidback, there is basic primer that will help you and if you are up to it read about loudness compensation curves.
Soundstaging and perspective are two separate concepts. Indeed, there are some components where the image is "up front" or conversely, "laid back", but that in no way describes the acoustic space described by the image. Since you reference SP, perhaps you will find this description helpful to understand the difference.
About Soundstaging
Perspective and soundstaging (called depth-of-field in this case) both exist in the photographic world as well. You can take a picture of a tree where the tree lies close in the foreground and or you may take it from further back for a more distant approach. Neither choice implies any notion of depth-of-field of the space around the tree. That is determined by the aperture chosen. One may use a faster, wide open aperture of say 1.4 or 1.8 and end up with a very shallow depth-of-field. Objects nearer to the observer or further away from the focal point are out of focus. On the other hand, one could choose a stopped down aperture of say f16 or f22 and achieve a very deep depth-of-field.
Different concepts. To suggest, however, that alterations of any sort to FR alone are capable of creating real depth enhancement, however, is silly. To quote JGH from the above referenced page, "There will be an awareness of the reflective boundary walls of the acoustic space behind and to the sides of the performers, and the spatiality of the hall itself will extend a considerable distance beyond the distance between the loudspeakers. " I am speaking of this quality that Mr. Holt is discussing.
rw
E-Stat:"Soundstaging and perspective are two separate concepts"
TAH: They are not or at more correctly very closely related in audio, it is perspective that gives the illusion of depth of a given soundstage, whether it is deep or shallow is entirely down to the observer's perception of the sounstage. To claim that soundstape depth perception is different from perpective is an excercise in self-contradiction. A forward soundstage is by definition more shallow than a laid back one, there are factors but as previously stated, frequency response is a key factor. In audio terms at least, the issue of perception is central to the definition of the soundstage, as the listener has no other means of determining the soundstage beyond perception. And this where your photographic example breaks down, The observer has at their more information at their disposal but even then the perception of depth can be manipulated up to a point.
E-Stat: Different concepts. To suggest, however, that alterations of any sort to FR alone are capable of creating real depth enhancement, however, is silly.
TAH: What is silly is your continued attempts to twist my comments to suit your purpose, I said " And this nonsense suggests that you do not understand the basic relationship between FR and the presentation of the soundstage, sure there are other facts , but the FR is a key factor " In other words, you are building a strawman.
Music making the painting, recording it the photograph
To claim that soundstape depth perception is different from perpective is an excercise in self-contradiction.My perpective of the soundstape is governed by the hall (and whether or not that was captured in the recording), not my seating position. Whether I sit in row C or row S, the apparent depth of the source is the same. All the folks on the stage remain in their same seats playing the same instruments creating the same sonic space. Unless, of course you suggest they excercise moving around during the performance. :)
What is silly is your continued attempts to twist my comments to suit your purpose.
Nonsense. I quoted two sets of your pearls of wisdom verbatim. As usual, this is getting tedious. Signing out.
rw
E-Stat: My perpective of the soundstape is governed by the hall (and whether or not that was captured in the recording), not my seating position. Whether I sit in row C or row S, the apparent depth of the source is the same.
TAH: The depth of soundstage is not the same, the distance from row C to the end of the stage is different from that of row S, and you have your visuals to confirm it. The depth of the soundstage is much shallower for an individual in Row A than individual in Row M cos everything in front of the observer is effectively the soundstage. So while the actual stage remains the same, the 'soundstage' is different.
Music making the painting, recording it the photograph
E-Stat:Still didn't fix the misspelled words with the edit
TAH: So what!
E-Stat: My perpective of the soundstape is governed by the hall (and whether or not that was captured in the recording), not my seating position. Whether I sit in row C or row S, the apparent depth of the source is the same
TAH: Still trying, your perspective of depth is governed by your VISION i.e. you have visual information which helps define your perception of depth. On a AUDIO recording, there are no visuals.
In other words, keep trying because so far you simply come up silly.
Music making the painting, recording it the photograph
| FAQ |
Post a Message! |
Forgot Password? |
|
||||||||||||||
|
||||||||||||||
This post is made possible by the generous support of people like you and our sponsors:
Top of Page ]
[ Contact Us ]
[ Support/Wish List ]
[ Copyright © 2025, Audio Asylum, all rights reserved ]
