I believe that where the microphones are placed are critical to depth perception. If a recording is made properly I hear layered depth. Some musicians like Sonny Rollins use a clip-on microphone to the bell of his saxophone and his later recordings especially come right off the face of my speaker plane. Depth perception and image specificity seems to stem from microphone placement.
When music gets carefully mastered in the studio to sound in a certain way, the speakers are not backfiring. When you add a pair of backfiring speaker you add an ambience effect that was not intended. In some cases with certain music, especially live music, that effect is beneficial. Personally I prefer my system to be maximally loyal to the intend of the mastering engineer as any deviation will be a hit and miss depending on the kind of music I listen to. Recently I had a meeting with one of the top award winning and famous respected mastering engineers in LA and he made this same point that he too often see music systems skewing the output in directions not intended.
The one time I had an amazing depth effect was when listening to the Proprius recording of Contante Domino. There is one track where the image was wide, the sound was coming from behind and higher up. I have DCM Timeframe 600 speakers and they are about 6 ft from the back wall. I once heard them at a stereo show in a large hotel conference hall and they did the same thing with a big band recording on vinyl... except the image was 10 times as large.
I have a recording of live performance with Luis Armstrong in a club - it is about from early 50ties mono and he plays his trumpet to microphone on stand and then playing walks probably to any person or for other reason , then walks back to microphone . That is good example how speaker placement is constant but sound has many locations - even it can puzzle with one speaker used.
I get it but, my question is how many recordings are recorded with stereo mics in a room of singers and musicians? I know there are some biaural recodings but very few, and most of the time people are not in the same city let alone the same studio. Since I think the goal of my system is to reproduce the recording accurately how can my system produce more sound stage than was present in the recording? BTW love your talks!
Thanks for all your shows. I enjoy them. In addition to the sound stage behind the speakers , maybe you could do a show on sound outside the speakers. Same idea. You guys are going to love this. I'm a cabinet maker and my speakers are made from concrete. ???? Why ? 40 years ago I worked with a sound engineer and he told me that a ''' SPEAKER BOX ''' could make up to 50 % of the sound you hear. Our ears can hear this. Ruins the sound. It's really distortion. I made inverted cones of concrete [rounded tops too ] with AUDAX 1'' tweeters and 8 '' mid - woofers. Dynaudio subs. Eureka ! Even in a poor acoustical room for these days, you couldn't tell where the speakers were. All the music was behind and around the speakers. There were sounds outside the speakers. and. The band played on. cheers.
i get it but how many recordings do we listen to where the mic's are that far in front of the singer very rare, musicians pretty rare. unless in orchestral music I would understand or something like Chesky records where there being recorded within a church.
Let's see, I here the 3D stage behind the speakers on albums by The Beatles, The Rolling Stones, Led Zeppelin, Janis Joplin, The Doors, Stevie Wonder, Fleetwood Mac, The Bee Gees, Olivia Newton John, Robert Palmer, Joy Division, Sting, John Mellencamp, Van Halen (DLR), Journey, Vangelis, The Motels, New Order, Enya, Annie Lennox, Above & Beyond, Loreena McKennitt, Chicane, Clannad, Ladytronic..... Nope not many at all.
@@Bob-Fields yes I get that to. But I don't believe that the mic distance is the only reason. Possibly a sound engineer can chime in. There must be a time delay filtered into the mix.
@@gtric1466 I can't speak to recording technique. I only know what I hear. Is at all natural? Certainly not. And, not all recordings will throw an image, even on the same album. But, every link in the reproduction chain has be in sync to achieve it. Out 20K+ tracks I have (no I haven't listened to all of them) maybe 4% or 5% can do it. Fewer still do it well.
It's hard to explain magic and there really is a little bit even when the physics is clear. With vinyl, that microscopic mechanical wiggle becomes a microscopic electrical signal that is manipulated and amplified, then fed to a speaker driver that returns it to mechanical motion, that can recreate a performance astonishingly accurate. Thanks.
Paul looks tiny standing next to the mighty IRS V! Ive always wondered if he keeps them too close to each other being such large speakers. Im sure they are set up to exact spec though.
Nice explanation, kind of amazing that the ear/brain can still pick up all the cues it uses to resolve depth after it (the sound) has gone through a microphone. ps:- you'd be horrified by my speaker placement, diagonal in an odd shaped room. I still enjoy the music though, so it's doing it's job. I don't think there is much depth info in what I listen to, most mic's are positioned 1 inche in front of the performers tonsils, and most instruments are directly connected to the mixing desk.
If the microphones are pointed at the band isn’t the band in front of the microphones, not behind them? Therefore when you turn them around, into speakers, shouldn’t the band likewise appear in front of, not behind, the speakers?
I rarely listen to music recorded acoustically like that so it probably wouldn't help. Might cause weird effects for multiple mics on drums or guitar amp.
How our brains interpret sound is profound, considering a simple and pure sine wave is converted into spikes and that our brains listen - with no spikey harmonics? The number of spikes is proportional to the rate of change, for a sine wave the max rate is through zero crossings. And, that is just a beginning - ears are extremely complex and can easily be damaged! Thanks, Paul for highlighting these remarkable instruments of ours.
I actually think this was a pretty good explanation. At least I understand it now a little more. But what tangles me more: are those 2 plant real or plastic??
This is a better explanation than any I’ve heard, but wouldn’t it still be preferable for the speakers to project the position of the imaginary microphones to a space near your ears (i.e., your listening position) rather than on a plane between the speakers? I hate it when the soundstage is created in what is basically a blank wall behind the speakers (my ELACs do this) when the soundstage should fill my listening room (which my Focal speakers do, imperfectly). My *ears* should hear what the microphones heard, not what some guy six feet behind the microphones heard.
I disagree that some sounds at least should not come from in-front of the speakers. One of my light-bulb moments was when a sound came from; to my left. I was sat maybe 2.5m from the speakers. (I have also heard an individual sound behind me.) Sometimes with some recordings, you are sat within the soundstage. For reference, I find Chord Electronics DACs to be excellent at soundstage and 3D effect. Even the humble Chord Mojo in a hifi set-up, creates great soundstage depth. It takes sound way behind the speakers, giving excellent front-to-back definition.
What I don't understand is how can you have a "soundstage" when the majority of recordings are not done "live" but of each instrument recorded separately onto separate tracks which are mixed together in the final track......there's not actually a "stage" at all but a mixture of instruments and/or the singer(s) in booths which are mastered........so how does the engineer "place" each performer on this imagined "stage"? They are not really at a particular "distance" behind a pair or more of microphones, unless that track is ACTUALLY recorded in one live session (kinda like the beatles in their early years, thank you George Martin!). Hey, I will be more than happy to wait for a new video if it takes one to explain this.
If you make own good sounding recording DIY you will realize that 90% music coming from speakers must be modified in studio to add heard information about place in which it is performed. It is done else by recording original hall where it is performed or added in studio from different setups. Otherwise it will sound dry in room and just like instrument in speaker. Of course also is 10% of recordings where is mainly one performer and he plays / sings direct to microphone (close recording) and then any rear impression is although possible to achieve but wrong Balancing effects is possible to produce not only rear sounding but also 3D.
@@johnholmes912 I see no flaw in his argument. In modern recordings, many productions fail to set up good image, but then are artists such as Above & Beyond, Enya, Daft Punk and Massive Attack who achieve very good results. If you feed BS into your system, you will get BS out. Not that earlier recordings were all good either. You have to hunt for the good content.
Here's the basics of how they do it. First imagine listening to a recording with a strong center vocal image. If you adjust your balance control, the center vocal image will move from side to side depending on which way you turn the knob. One speaker is louder than the other, so the image shifts to the louder speaker. Now, lets say the engineer wants to place an image of a vocal or instrument further back to create depth. You would start by using the same ratio used in previous example to get lateral placement. To move it back, you would lower the volume of the track relative to the images you want up front while keeping the placement ratio the same. Doing that will make the track sound further away. The engineer can also use effects, like reverb, on a track to further enhance whatever it is they are trying to do. A good engineer can take a multitrack recording and mix it using the above techniques to create a soundstage of musicians playing in real space. Its artificial, of course, but if you can't record using only a pair of stereo mics, this is your only option.
Don't be rude even if that might be funny. I do like Paul. If Paul did what the audiophiliac does, you would joke about his shirts😉 Paul, keep being you, we love you even though I wouldn't buy your electronics. I was more japanese 'oriented' pun intended 😆 PD. 'I do like Paul' that sounds weird, What I wanted to express is that I tend to wear the same type of clothes. I heard that the smart people don't worry about aesthetic details, some wise men had many of the same suits, so they didn't loose time thinking what to put every day.
I would like to recommend another way of explaining this. Headphones simulate what the original audience of a live performance is hearing. So if a headphone was doing its job properly, the sound source should not sound like it's coming from something that's against your ears (headphone drivers), but instead, it should sound like it's somewhere in a virtual three dimensional space regardless of the size of the room you're in. So speakers are supposed to do the same job as a headphone (I know, blasphemy) with how it's intentionally positioned with reference to your ears, to make things sound like how they were originally recorded or how the sound designer intended. Speaker systems just dump all that fine tuning task on the user as opposed to with headphones where the engineers/specialists know exactly where it would be from your head.
It's not "happening". It *sounds* as if it's coming from behind the speakers, it's an auditory illusion. The speakers should ideally melt away - the ear and the brain interpret location, which is why it's sometimes difficult to accurately pinpoint the exact source of sound. For two channel music - you don't want it to be too directional. It's only when you're talking movie surround sound, when you *want* to hear that car accelerate from left, alongside and disappear off stage right. The brain is the most important element in all this - it has to be fooled every step of the way, as we know we're not actually listening to an orchestra, a band, a singer but to a recording of them, reproduced via an amp and sent to our ears by wooden boxes. The only way to achieve that illusion is trial and error, and listening. Forget about doing that from a 200 page book - every room is different, every furniture set-up is different, every assembly of amp/DAC/speaker/speaker stand is unique, and most importantly, every ear is different and every expectation is different. Don't be confined by what one expert says you should want!
This made no sense to explain how the sound is to be made to come from behind the speakers, other than saying that how the source material is recorded affects how we perceive the sound distance. Well yes of course. You didn't explain how your secret sauce of speaker placement or room setup accomplishes this, unless I missed something
Ah, the microphone analogy - hopefully they are using time-aligned microphones during the recording session a la Steve Albini and Stereophile's John Atkinson.
Many times, when someone wants to make a point, they will posit exaggerated examples to get the idea across. Often, using practical illustrations runs the risk of glossing over important details or concepts.
This is a Poor and Incorrect Example. Studio Mics tend to capture sound from a very singular plane. An example is a Singer, that Sings very close to their Mic, which is protected by a wind-screen. They do not place this Mic 6ft away from the singer. In fact... if the singer moves a hair too far away from the mic, these mics end up losing over 50% of the volume levels. Furthermore... when famous bands are recorded... they dont simply use dual mics, and play all together. They have each member of the band play separately. The Mic is placed in specific ways, optimal to each instrument utilized. But more importantly, again.. is the Mic situation. Even if the Mic is designed to take in sound from 360 degrees... How exactly would the Mic know which direction is in Front of it... or Behind it? IE: If we stand 10 ft apart, and place a Mic in the middle... What happens to the sounds recorded, when played back? One of the main reasons why something MIGHT sound behind the speakers, is merely down to an Audio Illusion that forms in the brain. This illusion, is likely brought on by the differences in VOLUME levels For example... if I recorded two tracks: 1) I sing the LEAD vocals at normal volume levels 2) I sing the backing vocals at 1/4 volume levels. What do you think will happen when this is played back together? The more quiet sounds, will appear to be Behind the Louder vocals. The distance, will likely be somewhat relative, to the differences in actual volume levels between these tracks. When you listen to music with Headphones... the Audio is pumped directly into your ears. Its not pumped in front of... or behind your ears. Yet, certain music and or game sounds... will seem to be in front of, or behind you. The rest of the 3d effect, depends on the actual recording methods, and or mixing effects. A real world example, is something like the 3DIO mics. These are human ear shaped mics, that are spaced apart about the same as a humans ears. As such... they capture sound in a similar way that we actually Hear. One of the main reasons why we know what is behind us... is because the ear lobes are pointed forwards... so any sounds from behind, are slightly changed, due to the path they travel, and the tissue that gets in the way. And likely, frontal sounds are amplified in details, (and volume) due to the cone shape. Anyway... when you play music loud enough on your speakers... the louder things will appear to be more forward in the Image.. .and the quieter things, will appear to be further back. The actual soundwave cancelations + dominations themselves, may also play some factor in this. But most of the depth is likely being generated from your own mind, as it differentiates between the volumes. To enhance a 3d sound stage, special EQ and effect methods, can be employed to enhance the finished depth and directional effects. A very simple example is reverb (echo). Personally, I have some great speakers, that have inverted tweeters in them. They make the entire room 3D.. where you could tell exactly which instrument was approximately where. They do not need you to put the speakers away from the wall, for this amazing 3D effect. In fact, moving them too far away from the wall, reduces the wonderful bass response levels, so thats a big No-No for me. In my opinion, Im wondering if there is an issue with the narrow directionality of Ribbon tweeters, that causes a need for them to be further away from the walls, to gain a much deeper image. What I can say, is that Ive heard a 360 degree dipole tweeter on a small radio shack bookshelf set of speakers... and they were a total Mess, due to the sound bouncing all over the place, causing echo-like effects that distorted the music. Obviously, the typical Ribbon tweeters are single direction, which would not cause such an effect. Ive also heard an audiophile reviewed specifically state that one of his speaker sets that he tested.. which had ribbon tweeters... required the listener to be EXACTLY at a certain spot in the room, to get the best effect. He stated that spot was extremely narrow. (Unlike the inverted tweeters, in which Nearly entire room becomes the sweet spot).
Boy John you said a mouthful. Hard for me to understand because I don’t know the recording process that well. If you want to hear what great voices sound like a-cappella listen to “no more walks in the woods“ by Eagles in the long road out of Eden recording. It’s staggering. Every one of their voices is separated beautifully and their harmonies and tonality cannot be matched. It’s not an answer to your comments but something I think you may want to listen to. Whoever laid out the mics did an incredible job
@@stimpy1226 One day I was walking through my friends slot-car shop. Hes a sloppy hoarder, with no organization at all. So, there were chaotic piles of papers, magazines, DVDs, and slot-car stuff. Anyway... I walked in, and I was completely blown away at the music that was playing. It was a Disco song... and of course everyone knows how many instruments there are in 70s disco. That, and it was recorded at the height of Dynamic potentials.. way before horrible Digital Compression. The music was all around me.. sounding like the damn band was playing LIVE, in the room. Thing is... my ears are extremely good, and I still have ability to hear high-frequencies, even though Im now 48 (most adults lose a lot of high freq. range, before they hit 30)... Despite having excellent hearing... I could NOT find the speakers! I spend about 15 min searching for them, which is insane. Eventually I finally gave up and asked my friend where the speakers were, and what they were. He pointed to the front of the shop, near the glass window. One of the speakers was vertically placed. The other speaker was about 6ft away from it, laying on its side. There were magazines on top of them. There was a sit-down arcade machine partially blocking one of the speakers. They were like 6 inches away from the glass. Basically speaking, it was the WORST possible setup that you could imagine... AND YET... the sound was the clearest and most dynamically 3d, that I had Ever heard in my entire Life. These speakers, were the EPI 100v speakers. The ones with the upgraded model Inverted Tweeters, that have the plastic frame housing. (the older tweeters are OK, but not quite as clear and dynamic) I ended up getting a refoamed pair... placed them in my attic, and I was in total AWE. Everything I played through them..it was like listening to all new music. Things like unclear lyrics in certain songs, were actually legibly clear. Unlike all of my older speakers... where there is a clear sweet-spot in the room... with these speakers.. nearly the entire room, was the sweet spot. Its was hard to even fathom possible. At one point in time, I had them in the living room, setting on top of a pair of 12" bullnose Advents. I played a high def. blueray on... with something that had a lot of bass / bass effects.. and I asked him which speakers he thought were playing. Mind you, he was only about 7 ft away from them. He pointed to the large Advents. He was blown away, when I said Nope! Of course, the Advents have insanely more bass potentials.. which I also showed him.. BUT.. IMO, the bass on the advents were overkill and distorted to musicality. (but worked very well for movie effects, such as the rumbling train that comes in on, The Polar Express)
@@stimpy1226 I will have to add a special note. Not everyone's ears are the same. Especially as they have aged. Part of this can also be due to the very SHAPE of your ears. If, for example, you lack some sensitivity to Midrange frequencies... you might not enjoy a speaker that I enjoy, because I can hear the midrange levels fine.. and you will find them weak. Similarly, if you lack some high frequency detection... then you may want an Extreme amount of Tweeter presence, which would help make up for your losses. A friend show me his new headphones, and they were so over-bearing with midrange, that I could not bear to listen to them. I tried every EQ setting possible to try to reduce it was much as I could.. but it was still Ear-DRILLINGLY painful... like nails on a chalkboard, or Squealing Brakes. But, he LOVED the things. He clearly had hearing damages, and it made sense, when I remembered our various interactions ("What did you say?"). The other problem that is frequently had in Audiophile circles, is in EQ. A lot of people should be using EQ to customize and maximize a speakers / headphones potentials. But, too many so called "Purists" refuse to mess with EQ. The final piece of the puzzle, is Tube vs normal amps. From what Ive seen from another reviewer... is that a Tube can help smooth out a poor recording. Its likely that its not actually superior, in audio replication and distortion levels... but more so, that its making their poor quality recordings, sound better. I dont have money to invest in Tubes... so I cant confirm my suspicions. Thanks for the recommendations. I will try to check them out. I love all kinds of music.
I do agree that in speaker silent sounds are perceived like distant sounds and it is due to lack of physiology correction - our ears cut sound details leaving middle Anyway in natural instruments it is no problem because silent sounds have different known well spectrum. Loud sound of piano played in speaker with low loudness will sound like distant. Silent sound of piano played with the same loudness will sound natural
Yes, I liken the effect to an audio version of the old school View-Master 3D. Two slightly different images simulate 3D when viewed through the View-Master. Except here we have 2 channels of audio coming together to make a 3d audio illusion. Except audio is more finicky to focus properly.
Paul has used the analogy of speakers being microphones “flipped 180°” before but I don’t think he is actually explaining why it happens. At Ieast I don’t get it. How cool would it be if you could have a 3D stage in front of the speakers? The artists would really be in your room.
He is getting the explanations wrong. There is no way for the mics to detect what is in front or behind them, unless they are a single-direction mic. And if they were a single vector mic... I dont see why they would play the sound "Backwards". Think of it like this: If you had a speaker that was 5ft away from a Mic... and the speaker played a sound... The Mic would record this sound, the same as if it were your human ears. As if, someone was talking directly at you, in front of you. Now.. if you play that recording back on speakers that are facing your ears... the sound sound be the same as they were heard, as if your ears were the MIC itself. The only way you might get a sound "Behind" the speaker... is if you had a single direction mic that was insulated decently... yet was able to pick up a different persons vocals, that were physically behind the mics front facing sensor + backer insulation. The sounds that it picked up, would be slightly distorted in tone and details, due to the insulation, and extra distance + vectors away from the main sensor orientation. Most speakers SHOULD be able to provide a 3d Image into the entire room. Mine do. I suspect there is an issue with Ribbon tweeters, which may be causing a lack of depth to be spread out, causing a very narrow image... that gets some help from placing the speakers more centered in the room. I dont need to do that with my old 70s era speakers. If you check my other reply, it goes into better detail.
Dipoles distort the sound, because they pump it out in every direction at once.. which causes echo-like effects.. as the sounds bounce off the walls at different times and angels. I heard a pair at radio shack, and while the detail was crystal.. the distortions were horrendous. Id image you would have to put foam on every surface of the walls, to fix this issue. IMO, Id try to wall off half of the dipole, to see if limiting its direction to 180 degrees would work much better. Thing is.. when someone talks to you... it comes largely from a single vector. If the sound of their voice came from every direction all at once.. it would be a real mess. This is where Dipole design fails. Its simply unrealistic to actual natural sounds, and true 3d depth imaging / soundstages.
