What creates soundstaging?

[BobMaximus]

I don't think you will find soundstaging at any concert, as I said above it is pure artifice.

Please tell me, why do you then need it?

 

[DonQuixote99]

It helps create a pleasing simulation of live music.

 

[BobMaximus]

But it's artificial and it doesn't simulate live music. Though it is pleasing yes.

PS. I'm naturally obstreperous.

 

[Tony L]

I don't think you will find soundstaging at any concert, as I said above it is pure artifice.

Disagree entirely. Listening to an unamplified jazz band, string quartet or orchestra it is blindingly obvious where the instruments are. Obviously with loud rock and pop stuff is just wherever the sound guy has panned it, but acoustic instruments image to a location just as every other sound in the world does. It is why we have two ears!

 

[BobMaximus]

Drat, I've answered my own question.

 

[gassor]

Disagree entirely. Listening to an unamplified jazz band, string quartet or orchestra it is blindingly obvious where the instruments are. Obviously with loud rock and pop stuff is just wherever the sound guy has panned it, but acoustic instruments image to a location just as every other sound in the world does. It is why we have two ears!

I was thinking as I read the above comments, we haven't set out what we mean by soundstaging. I take it to mean more than just being able to tell where the sound is coming from. What I look for is a panorama of sound that extends beyond the location of the speakers and voices (esp) and instruments can present themselves hovering in mid-air between the speakers and some instruments can sound like they are on a wider plane than the distance between the speakers.

 

[davidsrsb]

... the speakers were really crap, shrill and just all round tonally wrong, but in my bedroom where I had free reign to play with placement, it did image brilliantly. With the 8r back in there and a pair of ELAs, it was much, much better tonally but only just on par for imaging.

That is a clue that speakers with certain tonal errors do seem to image better, in other words an effect.

 

[Tony L]

I was thinking as I read the above comments, we haven't set out what we mean by soundstaging. I take it to mean more than just being able to tell where the sound is coming from. What I look for is a panorama of sound that extends beyond the location of the speakers and voices (esp) and instruments can present themselves hovering in mid-air between the speakers and some instruments can sound like they are on a wider plane than the distance between the speakers.

I’d agree with that and argue a decent system should be capable of achieving it.

 

[davidsrsb]

A decent system should be able to create a stable and focused L-R panorama of suitable material.
Image "Depth" and "Height" are harder illusions to explain

 

[audiopile]

Here's something interesting -when imaging or soundstaging are "tested" for under controlled conditions -most folks don't hear it ? But we audionutz can identify aspects of it (instrument placement within a plain -depth of the stage) pretty reliably - again under test conditions. Average joe or Jill off the street -no. So -somehow we have trained ourselves to identify/appreciate this aspect of stereo playback . Sensitivity to phase error is another one of these odd questions : supposedly we shouldn't be particularly sensitive to this -but I swear everytime I've found some way to diminish phase issues it's been close to instantly addictive ?

 

[david ellwood]

Soundstage is not an end in itself but a symptom of a well set up system.

 

[Rug Doc]

I’d agree with that and argue a decent system should be capable of achieving it.

Yes, this is achievable quite easily. It’s simply a case of having the sound reach both ears at the same time from each speaker. Not difficult at all.

Hearing sounds beyond the width of the speakers is wholly due to the producer sat at the mixing desk being skilful with phase, usually with a spatialiser.. Here’s an explanation..

But you don't even really need an effect to do it. mid-side works on the principles of sum and difference in a stereo signal (or mono signal panned in a stereo field - so now it's really a stereo signal). Essentially you add a phase inverted signal with the panning backwards and blend it in. The more you add, the wider things get. People have been doing this trick for decades.

There are some things to be careful of though:
1) If you your 'side' signal is greater than 6dB more than the 'mid' signal the phase essentially folds back in on itself (because it's more than twice the signal). So there are limits (unless you are going for an 'effect' LOL).
2) You have to be careful about what things will sound like in mono because the amount of the effect you add will essentially cancel itself out so things could get significantly quieter in mono. But the upside is that the ONLY negative thing that will happen in mono is that it will be quieter, no other bad stuff or phasiness will happen. This is why mid-side is a good way to go.

So if you want stuff outside the speakers, you have to use phase and mid-side is the way to go (virtually all of those plug-ins that put stuff outside the speakers use mid-side with some unique twist... or no twist at all!).

I love listening to producers that have great skill with sound shaping, it’s my favourite part of sound reproduction. The system I have built is specifically setup for soundstage and imaging and sounds can easily be heard outside the speakers. If you listen to a Dolby encoded surround soundtrack (in stereo) I can also hear things on far left, far right and even behind me. It’s magic and I hope my ears stay working for many years to come - i’d really miss being able to hear stereo.

 

[BobMaximus]

Sensitivity to phase error is another one of these odd questions : supposedly we shouldn't be particularly sensitive to this -but I swear everytime I've found some way to diminish phase issues it's been close to instantly addictive ?

I’d certainly be willing to propose that sound-staging is due to phase differences between the speakers. It depends on the listening room though. Where I last lived, if I reversed the phase of one of the speakers, then certain sounds would move into the corner of the room. It doesn’t happen where I listen now however.

There are various speaker phase test websites. For example:

https://www.audiocheck.net/audiotests_polaritycheck.php.

 

[gingermrkettle]

That is a clue that speakers with certain tonal errors do seem to image better, in other words an effect.

Nope. ESL63s do imaging and soundstage depth better than pretty much anything and they have low distortion and a linear response.

 

[zippy]

First and foremost, the recording.

Secondly, the speakers.

Thirdly, in my own personal experience, I think the preamp and source are two key areas that can flatten a soundstage, or retain the '3D' representation of it.

Absolutely - if you think about it the whole concept is artificial as in the studio the recording probably consists of a number of tracks, that the engineer then puts together in whatever manner he/she chooses.
I have any number of 'weird' recordings, e.g. where for some reason the lead vocals come from the right or left rather that the middle as we might expect.
Maybe an unadulterated live performance is the best test for soundstaging as there's relatively little 'messing about'.

 

[Jim Audiomisc]

I was thinking as I read the above comments, we haven't set out what we mean by soundstaging. I take it to mean more than just being able to tell where the sound is coming from. What I look for is a panorama of sound that extends beyond the location of the speakers and voices (esp) and instruments can present themselves hovering in mid-air between the speakers and some instruments can sound like they are on a wider plane than the distance between the speakers.

I agree with Tony. I also take 'soundstaging' to mean what you describe. This is what I want when listening to, say, concerts on R3 from venues I've visited in the past. When I close my eyes it sounds like being at the hall/venue in terms of where instruments are, and the surrounding acoustic of the hall.

So far as I can tell, choice of speakers, positioning of them, and the listening seat, and listening room acoustic are all vital. I can't say I've ever felt that the choice of amp made any difference. But I guess one with a non-flat frequency/phase response or high intermod might. FWIW I've also never heard any other speakers that can locate instruments in the source acoustic as well as QUAD ESLs that are carefully placed and used.

Note, however, I am talking about items like classical music recorded in suitable locations. Not 'bricklaid' pop music which has no real original acoustic or set of meaningful relative locations. And in reality stereo and 'imaging' are an illusion produced by 'tricking' our hearing system. So the ability to hear it may be a 'flaw' in the individual's hearing processes... just a very useful one.

 

[Rug Doc]

Some of the best acoustic soundfields laid out before you are actually totally electronic rather than two mic recordings of acoustic venues.... listen to something like Oxygene and you realise that the effort Jarre went to to place sounds exactly where we wanted them is actually harder than just setting up two microphones and pressing record.

 

[Nagraboy]

I suppose if you don’t want soundstaging you could always go mono.

 

[Dozey]

IME point source speakers are best.

 

[Sibbers]

It's all about sound reflections and decay times. Sit somewhere that you don't suffer reflection problems and you will get a sense of space and beautiful imaging.