loudspeaker stereo imaging
 

"Wally" wrote in message
...
Ian Molton wrote:

Pop music is usually multitracked, isn't it? Would two widely-spaced
mics also be 'normal'? Do you mean that normal recording is anything
that isn't binaural?

The vast majority of soud systems is a stereo pair of loudspeakers.
therefore most music will be designed for such.
normal is the 'most usual'
I dont think I can make it clearer, sorry.

I was meaning normal in terms of recording technique, not in terms of the
intended use of the recording after processing...

And a 'normal' stereo recording is 'adjusted' to make up for the
deficiencies of its typical playback medium - stereo speakers.

What is a 'normal' stereo recording and how is it 'adjusted'?



Sliders on a mixing desk - if the ME gets really bored he'll have yer grand
piano motoring backwards and forwards across the speakers.....

loudspeaker stereo imaging
 

"Ian Molton" wrote in message
...
On Tue, 18 Nov 2003 11:48:07 -0000
"Keith G" wrote:


There is a *lot* more to good stereo than a simple 'ping-pong' effect!
Having said that, although the soundfield tends to follow one around
more, it is also a fallacy to think that mono reproduction isn't
capable of producing the effects of 'left and right', depth and
spatiality, but I will address this elsewhere.

Absolutely agreed. just to be clear:

*nowhere have I said front/rear stereo imaging doesnt work, nor that it
is valueless
*nowhere have I said mono cant image left/right (in fact, I made a point
of the fact that it can).

Also, dare I say it? - the choice of media and type of amplification
is very important to get the best demonstration of the above effects.

well, it'll affect it, sure - bass being omnidirectional to a far
greater degree than treble - the 'reflection' effects are far more
noticeable in the treble, so any medium that boosts treble or attenuates
bass will score 'well' on imaging (other things being 'correct').



I was trying to be tactful and avoid stirring up a format-bashing war (which
we have not seen here for a while - possibly the greatest success of the
'new' group, so far), what I was alluding to is that the dreaded valves and
vinyl combo is by far and away the best to demonstrate the potential of a
good mono recording. Of course, it could be argued that it's probably the
*only* way, given that even DAB just about manages to avoid mono
transmission of music (FWIW).....

One of the main reasons for using valve amps is because of their superior
ability to separate point sources of different sounds (instruments, voices)
and portray a sense of 'air', 'space' and 3D 'soundstaging' which helps
avoid the planar 'wall of sound' that I (for one) feel you get with a)
'digital music' and b) SS amplification and which does nothing to help
create a good 'stereo image' other than to fling it high and wide, as I said
earlier. (Whether this is down to a higher content of 2nd order harmonics or
a lower 3rd order harmonic content, as I have seen suggested, I neither know
nor care........)

For me, a perfect demonstration of this is possible with the Chinese (?)
wood blocks that are used in a couple of Laurie Anderson's tracks (there's a
good one on the Mr Heartbreak album) while a perfect demonstration of the
total lack of 'soundstage' can be got from the telly, using external SS
amplification and speakers, even with one's eyes closed......

loudspeaker stereo imaging
 

"Ian Molton" wrote in message
...
On Tue, 18 Nov 2003 11:48:07 -0000
"Keith G" wrote:


There is a *lot* more to good stereo than a simple 'ping-pong' effect!
Having said that, although the soundfield tends to follow one around
more, it is also a fallacy to think that mono reproduction isn't
capable of producing the effects of 'left and right', depth and
spatiality, but I will address this elsewhere.

Absolutely agreed. just to be clear:

*nowhere have I said front/rear stereo imaging doesnt work, nor that it
is valueless
*nowhere have I said mono cant image left/right (in fact, I made a point
of the fact that it can).

Also, dare I say it? - the choice of media and type of amplification
is very important to get the best demonstration of the above effects.

well, it'll affect it, sure - bass being omnidirectional to a far
greater degree than treble - the 'reflection' effects are far more
noticeable in the treble, so any medium that boosts treble or attenuates
bass will score 'well' on imaging (other things being 'correct').



I was trying to be tactful and avoid stirring up a format-bashing war (which
we have not seen here for a while - possibly the greatest success of the
'new' group, so far), what I was alluding to is that the dreaded valves and
vinyl combo is by far and away the best to demonstrate the potential of a
good mono recording. Of course, it could be argued that it's probably the
*only* way, given that even DAB just about manages to avoid mono
transmission of music (FWIW).....

One of the main reasons for using valve amps is because of their superior
ability to separate point sources of different sounds (instruments, voices)
and portray a sense of 'air', 'space' and 3D 'soundstaging' which helps
avoid the planar 'wall of sound' that I (for one) feel you get with a)
'digital music' and b) SS amplification and which does nothing to help
create a good 'stereo image' other than to fling it high and wide, as I said
earlier. (Whether this is down to a higher content of 2nd order harmonics or
a lower 3rd order harmonic content, as I have seen suggested, I neither know
nor care........)

For me, a perfect demonstration of this is possible with the Chinese (?)
wood blocks that are used in a couple of Laurie Anderson's tracks (there's a
good one on the Mr Heartbreak album) while a perfect demonstration of the
total lack of 'soundstage' can be got from the telly, using external SS
amplification and speakers, even with one's eyes closed......

loudspeaker stereo imaging
 

In article ,
Ian Molton wrote:
Surely the idea is for the speakers to reproduce what the mics are
'hearing'?

Would rather depend on the placement of the mics, as has been said many
times now..

For simplification, I'm only considering a 'straight' classical recording
where the purpose is to give the listener as close an approximation of
hearing the piece as one would at a concert.

A manufactured performance - made up via multi tracking, as most pop music
is, can be made to sound as the producer etc wishes on either headphones
or speakers.

And with, say, a classical piece, to near reproduce what an audience
would hear in the hall? And in that hall, you'd hear the main sound
from the stage, but other sounds - audience, reverberation etc from
other than the front? If you aren't interested in this information,
why not just stick to mono?

mono can still reproduce reverberation from the back. in fact its not a
bad time to point out that if you are claiming a stereo pair can produce
rear sounds, then it would not be unreasonable to suggest that a mono
speaker ought to be able to image both left and right in the same
manner. of course it can, but I doubt anyone here would recommend it as
a decent listening experience.

Of course the mono speaker can reproduce all the information fed into it,
but this doesn't include reproducing that directional information
accurately, anymore than a B&W TV set can reproduce a colour picture in
colour when fed with one.

--
*A bartender is just a pharmacist with a limited inventory *

Dave Plowman London SW 12
RIP Acorn

loudspeaker stereo imaging
 

In article ,
Ian Molton wrote:
Surely the idea is for the speakers to reproduce what the mics are
'hearing'?

Would rather depend on the placement of the mics, as has been said many
times now..

For simplification, I'm only considering a 'straight' classical recording
where the purpose is to give the listener as close an approximation of
hearing the piece as one would at a concert.

A manufactured performance - made up via multi tracking, as most pop music
is, can be made to sound as the producer etc wishes on either headphones
or speakers.

And with, say, a classical piece, to near reproduce what an audience
would hear in the hall? And in that hall, you'd hear the main sound
from the stage, but other sounds - audience, reverberation etc from
other than the front? If you aren't interested in this information,
why not just stick to mono?

mono can still reproduce reverberation from the back. in fact its not a
bad time to point out that if you are claiming a stereo pair can produce
rear sounds, then it would not be unreasonable to suggest that a mono
speaker ought to be able to image both left and right in the same
manner. of course it can, but I doubt anyone here would recommend it as
a decent listening experience.

Of course the mono speaker can reproduce all the information fed into it,
but this doesn't include reproducing that directional information
accurately, anymore than a B&W TV set can reproduce a colour picture in
colour when fed with one.

--
*A bartender is just a pharmacist with a limited inventory *

Dave Plowman London SW 12
RIP Acorn

loudspeaker stereo imaging
 

In article ,
Ian Molton wrote:
But of course. And you'd have to define a point source, since nothing
will be exactly that. A voice might as well be called one too.

And when the voice is 'supposed' to be imnaged directly in front of you
- the centre... what then?

in 'real life' your little head movements might help but on a pair of
speakers you are SOL - the voice is comming from far away on each side.

You've just confirmed my worst fears. On *any* quarter decent stereo in a
room which doesn't double as a bathroom, a mono source should come from
directly between the speakers and *easily* be confused as just the one
central speaker. If your system doesn't do this, I'm not surprised you
prefer headphones. You might start by checking the phase of your speakers,
and or the drive units within.

--
*We waste time, so you don't have to *

Dave Plowman London SW 12
RIP Acorn

loudspeaker stereo imaging
 

In article ,
Ian Molton wrote:
But of course. And you'd have to define a point source, since nothing
will be exactly that. A voice might as well be called one too.

And when the voice is 'supposed' to be imnaged directly in front of you
- the centre... what then?

in 'real life' your little head movements might help but on a pair of
speakers you are SOL - the voice is comming from far away on each side.

You've just confirmed my worst fears. On *any* quarter decent stereo in a
room which doesn't double as a bathroom, a mono source should come from
directly between the speakers and *easily* be confused as just the one
central speaker. If your system doesn't do this, I'm not surprised you
prefer headphones. You might start by checking the phase of your speakers,
and or the drive units within.

--
*We waste time, so you don't have to *

Dave Plowman London SW 12
RIP Acorn

loudspeaker stereo imaging
 

In article ,
Wally wrote:
Pop music is usually multitracked, isn't it? Would two widely-spaced
mics also be 'normal'? Do you mean that normal recording is anything
that isn't binaural?

Widely spaced mics give a poor stereo image - you end up with a 'hole' in
the middle of the soundstage. The 'conventional' technique is two
directional microphones pointing forwards but at an angle to one another
of perhaps 30-45 degrees with the actual capsules as close to one another
as physically possible. A single unit stereo mic will be something like
this - although there are many possible permutations.

--
*Gun Control: Use both hands.

Dave Plowman London SW 12
RIP Acorn

loudspeaker stereo imaging
 

In article ,
Wally wrote:
Pop music is usually multitracked, isn't it? Would two widely-spaced
mics also be 'normal'? Do you mean that normal recording is anything
that isn't binaural?

Widely spaced mics give a poor stereo image - you end up with a 'hole' in
the middle of the soundstage. The 'conventional' technique is two
directional microphones pointing forwards but at an angle to one another
of perhaps 30-45 degrees with the actual capsules as close to one another
as physically possible. A single unit stereo mic will be something like
this - although there are many possible permutations.

--
*Gun Control: Use both hands.

Dave Plowman London SW 12
RIP Acorn

loudspeaker stereo imaging
 

In article ,
Ian Molton wrote:
I have disagreed with much of what you have said in this thread but on
this point I am with you 100%.

I agree also, but its not entirely wrong to do that. for example,
removing a chimneybreast is NOT a cheap thing to do, and you'd probably
have to bin a lot of your furniture...

I'm not quite sure why you'd want to remove a chimney breast -
'irregularities' in a room's shape are a good thing for sound.

I guess some people just figure they'll ge the best equipment they can,
if they cant do anything about the room

I'd personally rather have a modest Hi-Fi in a good room than the very
best money could buy in a lousy one.

You'll all, I'm sure, know of my preference - everything being equal - of
CD over vinyl.

But that preference is as *nothing* compared to my preference for a good
listening room.

--
*According to my calculations, the problem doesn't exist.

Dave Plowman London SW 12
RIP Acorn