mick wrote:
On Wed, 17 Nov 2004 23:35:44 +0000, Ian Molton wrote:

snip

mick - if you wish to continue discussing this Im happy to respond to you.


Cheers, Ian.

Np. Im happy to natter when things are kept civil.

But our ears don't perceive an instrument as a point source. We hear
positional information

Nothing about a point source says it cant be somewher eother than
directly in front of you (although I had assumed that in my previous
example)

Even stereo point sources with perfect reproduction *may* be insufficient
to reproduce all the necessary information as much of it must be at very
low level

I dont think the level matters. But I agree that a stereo speaker setup
wont be able to reproduce a given scenario as it was originally, even in
a perfect room.

You are quite right - providing that the listener is comparing a point
source live instrument to an isolated single driver speaker in an anechoic
chamber. Another perfect microphone at the original listener's location
should give an exact copy of the source (although if you used a human
listener he/she should only have one ear, with the outer bit (pinnae? not
sure...) cut off!).

I think your logic is flawed there. the human wouldnt need to cut off
their outer ear.

I just have a hunch that the THD produced by a valve amp is doing more
than just giving a "warm" and "easy" feeling to the sound. I am wondering
if it is fooling the ear/brain combination in some way. That deception is
translated by some people into a feeling that the sound is more lifelike,
giving rise to their almost unanimous descriptions. This could be going
further than simple addition of even harmonics being used to "fill out"
musical sound to make it feel "bigger".

Its not *im*possible, but I dont think that adding information is
inherently better than simply accurately reproducing the original.

I don't know. Someone must have done, or be doing, research on this.

Probably.