advertisement


What exactly is "imaging" ?

Bass/mid is about 450Hz 1st order electrical and mid/tweet about 4.2kHz 2nd order electrical (tweet reverse polarity).
I might just try mid/tweet with no bass as this is easy as it is configured bi-wired as bass units and mid/tweets so can just pull one lead off each of the bass units.
 
Bass/mid is about 450Hz 1st order electrical and mid/tweet about 4.2kHz 2nd order electrical (tweet reverse polarity).
I might just try mid/tweet with no bass as this is easy as it is configured bi-wired as bass units and mid/tweets so can just pull one lead off each of the bass units.

I don't think that listening to just the mid and tweeter will make much difference in terms of how you perceive location but it will be interesting to hear your impressions.
 
This is fairly common on Rudy Van Gelder recordings and is a result of bleed between instruments due to the live recording, e.g. when he fades up a mic feed for a sax solo it also picks up some piano or drums and they move slightly in the soundstage as a result. There is a very obvious example somewhere on Coltrane’s Blue Train where the whole drum kit moves for a solo on one of the brass instruments!
I'm surprised you made it that far through an RVG recording!
 
I'm surprised you made it that far through an RVG recording!

I love Rudy Van Gelder’s recordings! He was responsible for most of my favourite jazz albums. A genius engineer/producer. My issue is specifically with the late ‘90s-2000s ‘RVG Edition’ CDs which butcher his work with compression, bad EQ and a ridiculously narrow soundstage. I suspect he had very little active involvement in them.
 
I love Rudy Van Gelder’s recordings! He was responsible for most of my favourite jazz albums. A genius engineer/producer. My issue is specifically with the late ‘90s-2000s ‘RVG Edition’ CDs which butcher his work with compression, bad EQ and a ridiculously narrow soundstage. I suspect he had very little active involvement in them.
Music for the masses which sounds good on headphones etc? Double edged sword? Could draw some in but alienate others? Don't really know TBH. My copy of 'Someday...' has arrived with the credited 'full version' of Drad Dog. Something for the weekend Sir? :)
 
In Episode 86 of Jamie Lidell's "Hanging Out With Audiophiles" podcast (confusingly about music production, not music reproduction...the title is from a lyric from one of his songs), Jamie demonstrates some field recordings made with Neumann's head-shaped microphone. Skip ahead to IIRC ~12 minutes into the podcast. There are a few: some nature recordings, some distant fireworks, him walking around the head while clapping, the ocean, and some of the recordings put through processing (granulation and some kind of spectral difference effect). Note that all of them have some talking in-between, so you might have to skip ahead a bit.
https://en-de.neumann.com/ku-100

product_detail_x2_desktop_KU-100-Diagonal_Neumann-Dummy-Head_M.png


Now, as I understand it, the binaural effect of these recordings should only work with headphones. In truth, I struggled to confidently place anything in front of or behind me when listening on Sennheiser HD650 headphones. Nevertheless, I would be curious to hear what people experience on their stereo setups. How easily can you place sounds around you in these various recordings?

You can find the podcast in whatever podcast app you might use but here's a couple links:
https://tunein.com/podcasts/Storyte...-with-audiophiles-p1102825/?topicId=164595018
https://podcasts.apple.com/us/podcast/hanging-out-with-audiophiles/id1279148418
https://open.spotify.com/show/2Ki06WzDw222nLnVgiyfFz

Episode 86 - Cristian Vogel
 
Music for the masses which sounds good on headphones etc? Double edged sword? Could draw some in but alienate others?

I guess that was probably the logic, though I’ve personally never had an issue with wide stereo and dynamic range on headphones, even when listening on the bus, train etc. My iPhone is full of jazz including a lot of Blue Notes!

PS Just had a listen to Autumn Leaves on Somethin’ Else (US RVG-stamped ‘60s ‘Liberty’ Blue Note stereo pressing, a really nice copy) and I think Adderley and Davis are sharing the mic which is panned hard left and I suspect Rudy is riding the fader a little to balance the solos which impacts the bleed from other instruments/the room a bit. It is a superb sounding recording IMO, just so much presence and feel. Miles may be standing a bit further from the mic as he seems to have a bit more room to the sound and appears behind and to the left of the left Tannoy here. Adderley is in the same place, but maybe a smidge closer. One of the first jazz records I ever bought!
 
I have a first pressing mono of Somethin’ Else. May have needle dropped a bit from Autumn Leaves back when we were allowed to do such things.
 
A couple of snippets from "Acoustics 
Of
 Small Rooms" by Kleiner & Tichy:

Spaciousness and diffusivity

Localization of externalized single sound field components was shown to be fairly straightforward but dependent on many factors. Localization of sound field components that have identical sound levels at the ears will depend on further factors such as phase difference.
When sounds are correlated, such as a monophonic signal that is presented binaurally, the auditory event occurs inside the head, inside head localization (IHL). If the sounds at the ears are fully uncorrelated, such as two separate noise signals that are presented binaurally, there will be two auditory events, one at each ear.
An interesting effect can be heard when presenting a monophonic wide bandwidth noise signal in stereo (over loudspeakers or headphones) if the stereo signals are out of phase. The noise frequency components below 2 kHz are then perceived as spatially diffuse—having spaciousness— whereas those for higher frequencies are perceived as located between the loudspeakers (or for headphones, IHL occurs). The time difference in the low-frequency components provides phase cues that are ambiguous thus providing apparent sound field diffuseness, whereas the high-frequency sounds are analyzed by their envelopes and those will be identical at the two ears causing a located auditory event.
Similarly, when a wideband noise signal is provided over headphones to a listener and one of the headphones is fed with the signal delayed by a millisecond or more, the sound is perceived as diffuse.
What constitutes a diffuse sound field is thus different in the physical and psychoacoustic domains. In the latter, a diffuse sound field is that that provides non-locatedness of sounds or, alternatively phrased, that provides a sound that is located over all spatial angles (or rather upper hemisphere in a concert hall that has sound-absorptive seating).
In physics on the other hand, a diffuse sound field is defined as a sound field where all angles of sound incidence have equal probability, where the sound from each spatial angle is out of phase, and where the energy density is the same everywhere.
Obviously, the two ideas of what constitutes diffuseness are different in the two sciences. A physically diffuse sound field will also be psychologically diffuse but not necessarily the reverse. From the viewpoint of listening, it is of course the psychoacoustic properties that are of importance, not the sound field properties.


Auditory source width and image precision

As we listen to sounds, the apparent width of the auditory event, often called the auditory source width (ASW), will depend on many issues. To those listening to stereo or multichannel recordings of sound, it is quite clear that the width of the array of phantom sources treated by the recording or playback is determined by not only the layout of the loudspeaker setup in the listening room and the directional properties of the loudspeakers but also on the listening room itself. The more reflections arriving from the sides of the listening room, the wider will the ASW be. However, the ASW will be frequency dependent above 0.5 kHz and a 2 kHz sound arriving at ±45° relative the frontal direction will produce maximum ASW [38,39]. This is to be expected since the masking by direct sound is the smallest for this angle of incidence of early arriving reflections [16]. The ASW also depends on the low-frequency content of the signal, more low-frequency energy increases ASW [38,40,41]. Psychoacoustic testing shows that the spatial aspects of the early reflections are primarily determined by the reflection spectrum above 2 kHz [33].
Reliable data for sound reproduction in small rooms are difficult to find. A single omnidirectional loudspeaker judiciously placed close to the corner of a room may well create as large an auditory image as a conventional stereo loudspeaker setup placed out in the room as discussed in Chapters 9 and 11.
Using digital signal processing, the ASW can be made to extend far outside the bounds set by the stereo baseline. Sound field cancelation techniques


Symmetry

Early reflected sound will confuse hearing and make the stereo stage and its phantom sources appear incorrectly located or even blurred. As explained in Chapter 8 the listener’s placement of the phantom sources is dependent particularly on the transient nature of the sound that comes from the loudspeakers so it will be affected by the early reflected sound from the room surfaces. The early reflected sound will also affect the global auditory source width for an orchestra for example and may make it extend considerably beyond the baseline between the loudspeakers.
In asymmetric rooms where the walls on the left and right of the listener have different acoustic properties, the stereo stage may become biased towards the wall that reflects the most. The curve in Figure 8.23 shows the dependency more clearly for different levels of unbalance as applied to the center phantom source in a stereo loudspeaker system. The intensity will then be higher at that ear and the sound stage distorted. This distortion is usually compensated by changing the balance in amplification between the stereo channels.
At low frequencies in the modal region, symmetry may not be desirable since someone sitting in the middle of the room may be on or close to modal node lines. One way of avoiding such node lines is to make the room asymmetric in the low-frequency region.
This can be achieved by having an asymmetric rigid shell surrounding the inner room which is symmetric for mid- and high frequencies by suitably reflective side walls, ceiling, and floor. The inner room must be open acoustically to the outer shell at low frequencies, for example through ventilation vents, and similar large openings, for example at corners. In this way, one can have the desired listening position sound field symmetry for mid- and high frequencies while at the same time have asymmetric conditions in the modal frequency range. Bass traps to control the damping—and thus the reverberation times—of these modes can be placed between the outer and inner shell. It is important to remember though that noise transmission to the surrounding spaces will then be dependent on the sound isolation of the outer shell that must be physically substantial.
 
This site contains affiliate links for which pink fish media may be compensated.
A couple of snippets from "Acoustics 
Of
 Small Rooms" by Kleiner & Tichy:
Symmetry

At low frequencies in the modal region, symmetry may not be desirable since someone sitting in the middle of the room may be on or close to modal node lines. One way of avoiding such node lines is to make the room asymmetric in the low-frequency region.
This can be achieved by having an asymmetric rigid shell surrounding the inner room which is symmetric for mid- and high frequencies by suitably reflective side walls, ceiling, and floor. The inner room must be open acoustically to the outer shell at low frequencies, for example through ventilation vents, and similar large openings, for example at corners. In this way, one can have the desired listening position sound field symmetry for mid- and high frequencies while at the same time have asymmetric conditions in the modal frequency range. Bass traps to control the damping—and thus the reverberation times—of these modes can be placed between the outer and inner shell. It is important to remember though that noise transmission to the surrounding spaces will then be dependent on the sound isolation of the outer shell that must be physically substantial.

Very interesting and on par with my finds. Has the symmetric/asymmetric room been done in reality?
 
This site contains affiliate links for which pink fish media may be compensated.
In Episode 86 of Jamie Lidell's "Hanging Out With Audiophiles" podcast (confusingly about music production, not music reproduction...the title is from a lyric from one of his songs), Jamie demonstrates some field recordings made with Neumann's head-shaped microphone. Skip ahead to IIRC ~12 minutes into the podcast. There are a few: some nature recordings, some distant fireworks, him walking around the head while clapping, the ocean, and some of the recordings put through processing (granulation and some kind of spectral difference effect). Note that all of them have some talking in-between, so you might have to skip ahead a bit.
https://en-de.neumann.com/ku-100

product_detail_x2_desktop_KU-100-Diagonal_Neumann-Dummy-Head_M.png


Now, as I understand it, the binaural effect of these recordings should only work with headphones. In truth, I struggled to confidently place anything in front of or behind me when listening on Sennheiser HD650 headphones. Nevertheless, I would be curious to hear what people experience on their stereo setups. How easily can you place sounds around you in these various recordings?

You can find the podcast in whatever podcast app you might use but here's a couple links:
https://tunein.com/podcasts/Storyte...-with-audiophiles-p1102825/?topicId=164595018
https://podcasts.apple.com/us/podcast/hanging-out-with-audiophiles/id1279148418
https://open.spotify.com/show/2Ki06WzDw222nLnVgiyfFz

Episode 86 - Cristian Vogel
For part of my degree (20ish)years ago I did some binaural recordings, I did not have a Neumann anything at my disposal. My solution was Panasonic WM-61A mic capsules, the mods on Segfried Linkwitz' site with the smallest dia headphone cable I could find and poke the mic capsules as deep into my ear canals as I dare. The recordings are long gone, but I remember them having good spatialness and people being able to localise sounds reasonably accurately (7 points across, above below and behind, the stuff behind was much harder to localise). I did a recording af a drag race with me at the 1/8th mile point in the middle of the 'strip', and that was almost as frightening as a recording as being there!

These recordings never really worked on speakers, I did some stuff for loudspeakers and found delaying and eq each source manually as a stereo signal worked much better than purely more level in one channel for playback in a space. so if your sound was coming from the left, the right hand speaker would have a small delay and treble cut, rather than just less level. probably quite easy to do now we have digital mixers and even easier with Dolby Atmos etc!
 
Very interesting and on par with my finds. Has the symmetric/asymmetric room been done in reality?

I’ve always been conscious of it and just won’t rent or buy homes that have odd-shaped rooms I know I’d not be able to get a good sound in. I’ve been doing this long enough I can now predict pretty well what sort of room I can work with. Obviously room impact diminishes the more near-field you listen and the more damped the room, but it is always a factor and one people shouldn’t ignore.
 
Very interesting and on par with my finds. Has the symmetric/asymmetric room been done in reality?
Possibly, if I understand the issue correctly.

My listening room is asymmetrical. One side wall has a lot of "structure" and very little flat surface. AIUI it is very diffusive. The other side wall is mostly plain surface. AIUI it is very reflective.

Loudspeakers driven with symmetrical audio levels bias a central image quite obviously towards the reflective wall - just as in the "Symmetry" snippet above.

I have active loudspeakers with a gain trim. I have verified (with REW) that at the reference settings they are well matched and I have also checked that swapping them over leaves the bias unchanged.

Decreasing the gain on the 'speaker closer to the reflective wall returns a central image to the centre. I perceive no obvious damage to the overall soundstage or to the precision of image location. I did for a while use asymmetrical placement of the loudspeakers to obtain (partial) compensation for the asymmetry. The gain adjustment seems to work rather better for me.

Note that I have not fully eliminated the possibility of my hearing being asymmetrical too, but the obvious test of listening to the location of a central image with my back to the 'speakers does not seem to produce a big image shift compared to normal. However, image precision seems not the same to me in the two cases so I won't eliminate a possible contribution.
 
My listening room is asymmetrical. One side wall has a lot of "structure" and very little flat surface. AIUI it is very diffusive. The other side wall is mostly plain surface. AIUI it is very reflective.

Loudspeakers driven with symmetrical audio levels bias a central image quite obviously towards the reflective wall - just as in the "Symmetry" snippet above.

I have active loudspeakers with a gain trim. I have verified (with REW) that at the reference settings they are well matched and I have also checked that swapping them over leaves the bias unchanged.

The problem you will likely find is that the asymmetry will not be wide-band or consistent, it will alter depending on frequency. If you have a system that images well it can be infuriating as sax, trumpet etc can effectively wander about in the soundstage depending on the note-range being played. This drives me nuts which is why I tend to go for as symmetrical rooms as I can find, damp them well, and listen fairly near-field (even my Tannoys are only just over 2 metres from the listening seat).

PS Playing a good mono jazz record is a great test!
 
The problem you will likely find is that the asymmetry will not be wide-band or consistent, it will alter depending on frequency. If you have a system that images well it can be infuriating as sax, trumpet etc can effectively wander about in the soundstage depending on the note-range being played. This drives me nuts which is why I tend to go for as symmetrical rooms as I can find, damp them well, and listen fairly near-field (even my Tannoys are only just over 2 metres from the listening seat).

PS Playing a good mono jazz record is a great test!
Indeed.
And the issue is aggravated when the typical speakers with a dip off-axis in the crossover frequency are used.

I have issues with some of Toole’s interpretation of some research but this is an area where I agree in full.
 
And the issue is aggravated when the typical speakers with a dip off-axis in the crossover frequency are used.

As stated upthread I’d personally argue narrow dispersion is an advantage for most audiophiles as you get the sound before the room reflection. A lot of the best speakers from a imaging/soundstaging perspective are ESLs, horns etc IME. If you have an uneven/asymmetrical room the very last thing you want to be doing is bouncing sound off all the walls if you can aim it at your ears first. I suspect Toole resides more in the home cinema/pro install market, I certainly don’t hang off his every word for serious 2 channel home audio.
 


advertisement


Back
Top