@kota1 I’m familiar with immersive audio, I guess I should have been more clear, I’m not knocking it, binaural, 5.1 surround or other ways people are trying to change the traditional home audio listening experience. As an audiophile, I just prefer stereo and all that brings to the table.
Immersive Audio and How to Achieve It
100% of music listeners prefer live music to recorded playback, why? A live performance "immerses" you and frees you up to move around the room, the dance floor and still be immersed. The goal posts have moved away from two speakers to an array of speakers all around as well as above you to reproduce the illusion of a LIVE performance. Why, in 2023, would anyone voluntarily use only two speakers to recreate this illusion of a live performance in a large room?
Even the artists themselves are using immersive audio in concert to WOW their audience, why not do it at home:
https://www.mixonline.com/live-sound/venues/on-the-cover-las-vegas-takes-immersive-live-part-1
134 responses Add your response
I’m going to go way out on a limb here and say that 100% of the membership of this group enjoys (quality) music. Live music. Reproduced music in our listening rooms. Showers. In our vehicles during our commutes. On the water. Under the water. In the air. Alone. With friends. Outdoors. I’d also like to submit that we don’t enjoy live venues where the music is (literally) painful, or the acoustics and/or persons running the sound board present a sound environment where the energy of reflected sound exceeds the energy of the direct sound. Or, bad recordings at home. Or, blown tweeters. Or, when the neighbor’s idea of an "outdoor musical experience" ioverpowers our concept of an "outdoor musical experience" at our home. Or, when someone pulls up next to us at a traffic light and the low bass energy shakes OUR rearview mirror. "Immersive sound" is a marketing term that begin a few decades ago back when I was a peddler of audio/video gear. It attempted to "sell" the concept that if you bought an <insert brand/model> that the experience would be so up close and personally that it would be literally indistinguishable from being in the hot tub with your all-time favorite recording artist/pinup. I sold lots of "immersive" systems in the day. When it comes to enjoying music at home, I prefer the phrase "suspension of disbelief", which is to say that for some moment in time, you cease to believe that you listening to arificially created prerecorded material, and are, in fact, IN the music venue WITH the performers. The number of channels required to pull this off is debatable. Some suggest that 2 channels is the "correct" number. Some say more. In my world, "immersive" translates to: - at home - room temperature, volume, sweet spot, music, and number of guests selected by me - dog at, or near, feet - beverage (hot or cold) (boring, or otherwise) - fully resonating with the performance where 99.9% of what’s left of my brain is engaged with what is happening sonically in the space My wife and I enjoy live music as well. We attended Moondance Jam, a live music festival in Walker, Minnesota a few years ago and camped out in our(small) motorhome. It was a blast. Interacting with people made the event what is was. Expecially "meeting" the attractive young lady who forgot to lock the door on the Port-a-Potty. The sound was generally awful, about 10db over my preferred listening level for live music. We, literally, went back to the motorhome at one point, opened the windows, sit at the dinette table, broke out some wine and listened to the performance there. Joan Jett’s crew managed to get the sound right. Others, not so much. Okay, it’s time to immerse myself in some oatmeal, and buttered toast. Afterwards, my goal is to suspend the disbelief that I’m an old guy when I take one of my hot rods out for a drive. |
I think the premise of this discourse is flawed. Live venues attempt to create balanced & even sound throughout the venue for as many people as possible which is why the line array was developed & generally works pretty well. The digital amps used for these are designed for huge power, low Heat production & durability w/ actual sound quality an after thought at least at he standards most here expect although this is a different subject. Most of these set ups sound, hard, harsh, & very fatiguing in my experience. A really good, two channel home system can .reproduce a large, deep, detailed soundstage w/ great dynamics & sound better than most live venues at least fior amplified music. Maybe a sub is required to really do the job for some speakers & systems. More speakers & electronics etc is just more, not necessarily better.
|
Immersive audio is NOT the same as immersive acoustic... Immersive audio use DSP generally without psycho-acoustic measures of the inner ears and HRTF. ... ( save for example the Smyth realizer) Immersiveness in PHYSICAL acoustic is created by passive material treatment and active mechanical control of the room... Immersiveness in psycho-acoustic use measures of the inner ears and also Head-related transfer functions (HRTFs) describe the filtering of the acoustic field produced by a sound source arriving at the listener’s ear. It is used in smyth realizer but at a more sophisticated level by BACCH filters...
Many audiophile are more interested by stereo system able to give a REALISTIC natural timbre instruments experience than interested by DSP as such ... They will use physical acoustic and psycho-acoustic measures to create acoustic immersiveness not mere audio immersivenes or dsp immersiveness as with many more speakers than two ... The only DSP preserving the integrity of the timbre natural experience , and the only dedicated audiophile one is Dr. Choueri BACCH filters... Without the BACCH filters and without psycho-acoustic measures we can create a relative partially convincing immersive stereo experience with passive acoustic treatment and active mechanical control of the room... But BACCH filters are a DSP perfect control of the room without distorting the timbre , the only one preserving timbre quality from the acoustic original recording conditions...Other DSP can create immersiveness artificially but loosing integrity of the original acoustic timbre recorded experience in various degree ... Immersiveness from a living show with amplified music as in pop and rock is not the same as immersiveness in a concerrt hall with non amplified instruments as the recording engineer proposed his set of acoustic microphones trade-off ...
Then stereo and home theater DSP are two different experience , in these two we can experience a form of immersiveness... One is digitally driven , the other serve and emerge from mechanical acoustic and/or from a set of specficic psycho-acoustic measures for EACH listener ... It is my limited understanding... 😊 In digital audio of home theater for music theater the main point is NOT PRESERVING the physical recorded experience of a specific non amplified musical instrument , which reflect the trade-off choices of the recording engineer IN A CLOSED ACOUSTIC SPACE , the main point with home theater music experience in is rrecreating the general atmosphere of AMPLIFIED instruments ... A live concert of pop in open air on an outdoor scene with big speakers is not the recording of an organ concert or a piano concert in a church or in a small studio ... |
@brianlucey Wrote:
I agree! 😎 Mike |
A really good, two channel home system can .reproduce a large, deep, detailed soundstage w/ great dynamics & sound better than most live venues. I don’t disagree, but I don’t think I would ever confuse a recorded playback on any system for a live performance of am orchestra. More speakers & electronics etc is just more, not necessarily better. Yep, more speakers also means more ways to screw it up, but you can screw up a stereo too. I found that although the Dolby specs for speaker setup are meticulous they were still not right for my room. Their diagram has the MLP toward the back of the room, equidistant between front and back walls worked better for me. Here are dolby’s specs:
This model where the MLP is equidistant was night and day better for my room:
|
Immersive audio is NOT the same as immersive acoustic... True dat, most receivers and processors use some type of DSP to help with the acoustics. Immersiveness in PHYSICAL acoustic is created by passive material treatment and active mechanical control of the room... Yep, I agree 100%. In digital audio of home theater for music theater the main point is NOT PRESERVING the physical recorded experience of a specific non amplified musical instrument , which reflect the trade-off choices of the recording engineer IN A CLOSED ACOUSTIC SPACE , the main point with home theater music experience in is rrecreating the general atmosphere of AMPLIFIED instruments ... This is where the room acoustics come into play. There is a blueray concert by Kraftwerk recorded in Atmos and 3D video. It is the most lifelike recording I have ever heard in my room when played at reference levels. I think because the amplified instruments are easier to reproduce (mainly synthesizers). When I play back solo piano I like minimal use of height channels, more use of wide channels and room acoustics help recreate the sound of the hall or studio the piano was recorded in.
|
Thank you, Kota, for the nice words regarding my system. Yes, the walls. They are due for treatment next. You don’t see it in the pics, but there is a nice thick area rug just in front, and a very large over-stuffed corduroy sectional 9’ from the system which absorbs a lot of the reflections. Sounds good in there most of the time (unless the music or movie is bad!). I realize some artists have wide-ranging ideas on how to present their music, but keep in mind most musicians care little about what we audiophiles (yes, I called myself that—yikes!), care about in sound reproduction. They just want to make music. It’s not unusual to hear stories of brilliant classical musicians, for instance, who play music at home on boom boxes. They are not always the best choice to ask how to setup sound in a room or hall. For me, immersion is an emotional, psychological, if you will, experience of musical art being carried by sound waves. Not the other way around. The art comes first, and it can come in 2 or 3 or a thousand dimensions. As long as its good (to me). But right-on to you for seeking the best sound you can. |
For movies / home theater, I get multiple channels immersing you in sound. I saw the new Mission Impossible last night. Pretty good overall as usual w/ bullets flying all around, car chases, moving trains etc sound on many channels all over the place is fun & makes sense. None of that is true for watching live music. The stage & performers don’t move & neither does the audience. |
Everyone needs some “new & different” to sell more equipment & more music sources ( this is often for convenience). I get it, it’s called business.. The really good turntables & R2R decks, virtually 100 year old technology, are still thee best, most natural sources for recorded music but can get pricey. I really do enjoy my Innuos server & it’s so fun dialing up virtually anything I want on Qobuz. Fantastic technology! I’m not stuck in my old ways but also not on highly processed, multi channel sound for home music listening. |
I really do enjoy my Innuos server & it’s so fun dialing up virtually anything I want on Qobuz. Fantastic technology! +1, agreed, I’m not stuck in my old ways but also not on highly processed, multi channel sound for home music listening. But ALL studio recordings are HIGHLY processed: https://www.avid.com/pro-tools Would you like sauce with that? It is a question of WHAT type of processing you prefer, please see:
|
Someday soon AI will fill in the acoustics, but then there will still be many variables in the original recording that the listener will have to understand. Will the listener be put in the position of a listener in the audience, will the listener be put in the position of hearing direct and acoustic sound that is in the mind of the musician and producer, will the listener hear something totally apart from the experience in reality like sounds coming from every direction. I played in orchestras and jazz bands and sometimes it was wonderful hearing the instruments around me but that is a unique position that no one records for. Ultimately immersive sound is a moving target.
|
I watched the video. Is the difference between us that I view immersion more in terms of the capacity of the listener while you seem to view the listener more as a passive factor, with technology facilitating immersion? Or perhaps we define immersion differently. I don’t need to have my walls "painted with sound" in order to experience what I describe as immersion. This sounds like a remedy for people’s senses having become dulled. If one is esthetically sensitive by nature, as I am, and has experienced making music, as I have, there is no need for any "added stimulation". I’m reminded of a current local Van Gogh exhibit I read about, which incorporates blowing up and projecting his paintings onto museum walls, so people can "walk through them". As a life-long art lover and someone who's been involved in drawing, printmaking and photography, this strikes me as very odd -- that people can only perceive and appreciate art when it’s turned into an IMAX experience.
|
Listener envelopment is a rigorous acoustic concept abbreviated by LV and the apparent source width abbreviated by ASW is also a rigorous acoustic concept ...
«The auditory system has mechanisms that separate the processing of late reverberation from the processing of direct sound and early reflections referred to as precedence effect. While the late reverberation contributes to the perception of listener envelopment and reverberance, the direct sound and the early reflections mostly affect source localization, intimacy and the apparent source width.[3] The balance of early and late arriving sound affects the perceived clarity, warmth and brilliance. » Wiki Now in a small room or in vas hall acoustic there is means and acoustic design and tools to create IMMERSIVENESS which is the result of the right balance LV/ASW ... I created it in my small room but not with only material passive treatment but i needed active mechanical one : aqn oriented grid of tuned Hemholtzs resonators around speakers and my listening position... It was stereo on steroid as if i had many speakers... The recording trade 0ff of each musical album was plain to hear and astoundingly different between all albums.. All recording were interesting even the bad recording because the speakers/room revealed the recording engineer choices... I lost my acoustic room selling my house, i was sad... I discovered the only headphone i can modify for my acoustic needs and now i came back here with an headphone system... An immersive one for an headphone without the BACCH filters or no dSP associated like the Smyth realizer... The K340 is among the few the best designed headphones ever... |
Great post... There is some truth in the idea and experience of kota1, but stereo system with no DSP and and dsp for home theater and multichannels are TWO world,..Then there is another sort of truth in stereo system... Accoustic for small stereo room is one thing , and home theater another one...
|
Is the difference between us that I view immersion more in terms of the capacity of the listener while you seem to view the listener more as a passive factor, with technology facilitating immersion? Yes, I am focused on the tech side in this thread, buying a single pair of speakers for $$$$ is the costliest, least effective way to achieve an immersive experience or "a suspension of disbelief". The room is more important than the equipment so that means room treatments and some type of tech to measure and possibly use DSP. Finally to have two sources, one for channel based audio and one for object based audio. My guess is less than 50% of the members here have experienced high end object based audio in a properly setup room. that people can only perceive and appreciate art when it’s turned into an IMAX experience. There is a lot of truth to that statement, and not just IMAX size screens. The members here have some incredibly luxurious systems and rooms. It is a matter of preference I guess.
|
In fact, some of the best recordings available are only minimally processed. I agree, too bad it isn't the standard though.... https://www.cnet.com/culture/compression-is-killing-your-music/ |
Will the listener be put in the position of a listener in the audience, will the listener be put in the position of hearing direct and acoustic sound that is in the mind of the musician and producer When they were recording the London Symphony Orchestra they miked it and positioned the objects so the listener was positioned at the conductors stand! Listen to how Brian Eno discusses about how he uses his intentions to place the listener in space, about 3:00 mark:
|
@kota1 100% of people don't prefer anything, I don't care if it's chocolate over nuts or sex over being alone, and I certainly don't prefer live music to being in my studio. your approach is not good for the format that you're trying to be good for, please turn it down like 30%
people like you perpetuate the image that this format is for overly excited idiots who don't understand stereo
people like me, are working hard to learn and educate engineers to make better work, so that beating the stereo in headphones and having a great speakers experience is the expected standard
we are not there, yet, and your enthusiasm is not helping, it's just getting in the way
thank you |
First, your reply is very welcomed, thanks. Next, I am just a consumer with preferences, like everyone else. Now, you got a dog in the race so if anything, feel free to take this discussion down 30% and I’m happy to engage. As for 100% this or that, let me state it like this. 100% of the time I can tell the difference between a live orchestra and a recording of an orchestra as well as most people on the planet (maybe not 100% but close). Your point is well taken and I will tone down the usage of absolute anything. Now, you have the luxury of using a personally curated immersive playback system with actual master tapes that "most" (I avoided the use of 100% of us, I’m learning) will never have access to. I’m in, what will help pioneers and engineers like you perpetuate a helpful image of immersive audio? |
Da Vinci used to teach his students the skill of "seeing in" to a scene, even if it was a stucco wall -- so they could lose themselves in it and then release their imagination's free play capacities. When I think of the requirements for "immersive" experience, I think of tonal and timbral accuracy -- an oboe sounding like an oboe. The notion that the gear must push me into immersion seems like a way of releasing myself from the necessary mental skill which Da Vinci was trying to teach his students. It's a way of game-ifying and Disney-fying the sound. |
The best surround sound mixes I like are generally but not always good stereo mixes often they have extra dry vocals in the center than wetter vocals in L, R. The other instruments using the speakers to create points near the front and sides. If surround is used too much it brings attention to its self and looses flow. Surround can be much better than stereo but that is surprisingly rare. There will be a time when you’ll be able to set the acoustics, channels and everything else where you want it if you want to A I is about to change everything. I think Dolby Atmos will be a memory in about 3 or 4 years. |
Most music I listen to was mixed in stereo, then upmixed by my processor into another more immersive format. Stereo sounds flat compared, not bad, but flat, it lacks that "third dimension". For Atmos I think Steve Genewick did an amazing job with the Miles Davis atmos mixes and giles martin did great with the beatles remixes. Revolver sounds sooo good, it is an interesting video he did on the remix process as well. Also I like the tracks that are being dropped mixed natively in atmos, not just remixed. I get an e-mail from dolby about new drops every few weeks. Giles Martin on the Revolver atmos remix:
|
A properly set up stereo system can't be beat (in my experience). What I have heard in regards to surround sound was gimmicky, at best. It was not natural sound. I've never experienced sound coming from my sides or from behind unless I was turned away or around from the source. Might as well get one of these if you want to immerse yourself:
This Disney-fying the sound is not my cup-o-tea either. All the best, |
I cannot add anything to what has just been said by Hilde45 and nonoise and stuartk... I prefer stereo acoustic because it is possible to have localization even listener envelopment ( immersiveness) without compromising TIMBRE ...
Kota1 buy the BACCH filters... It is the only DSP i would buy.... Because it is the only one who preserve room acoustic and timbre and your own head/ears profile measurement...And this filter cannot affect the timbre recorded of the album, it is explained mathematically why in Dr. Choueri article... Go and read... 😊 |
All speakers and audio systems in the world sound veiled and bright that includes $100k cd player, $million speakers, $100k power amp, $20k power cords, etc. The sounds of surround receivers are not good and can't compete to the sound of a good stereo amp. Also, sounds from many inferior surround speakers are even worse. All these bad sounds from many inferior speakers are directed to a listening chair in the center. It can be something special for a short time but ears will be tired soon. 2 channel set up is easier to make smoother musical sound and better for long term listening music. Alex/Wavetouch |
All speakers and audio systems in the world sound veiled and bright that includes $100k cd player, $million speakers, $100k power amp, $20k power cords, etc. Agreed, that doesn't mean I don't like them, just not as much as live music. If I could have Norah Jones or Billy Joel at the piano in my living room or a CD you know which one I (but not everyone apparently) would choose. The sounds of surround receivers are not good and can't compete to the sound of a good stereo amp. My Onkyo receiver sounds "good" but my Carver amp is in another league, agreed. BUT, the gap is getting narrower every year. 2 channel set up is easier to make smoother musical sound and better for long term listening music. I can't disagree, you can see my desktop system and my home theater, no question my desktop system was easier and still sounds quite satisfying for casual listening.
|
Perfect, you will be very astounded...Read about Choueri , it is really a genius in audio...
For the headphone, you will not like it... This is an old headphone, AKG K340 , he aged not well... And i make modifications to it...But you can buy it for peanuts then , dont be angry at me if you dont like it... 😁 For me it is my favorite... And i did not like it so much the first day... It takes me 6 months to optimize it... buy a contemporary headphone , a top one.... budget seems not for you a problem as it is for me... 😊 By the way i take a plunge, and buy the microzotl 2 as pre-amp for my Sansui AU 7700 to serve my headphone...
|
It is better if you read what it is first...
Read that and you could decide after ..
https://www.theabsolutesound.com/articles/theoretica-applied-physics-bacch-sp-adio-stereo-purifier/ https://research.princeton.edu/news/edgar-choueiri-bacchtm-3d-sound https://www.theoretica.us/index.html
This discovery eclipse all other audio gear news...Because it is an application of fundamental acoustic , not a new electrical gear design for a mere dac or multichannels etc ... But very vew people spoke about it in audio forums...
|
@kota1 I don’t disagree with you at all. The sound cloud would of course help and the center speaker would be great also. What you just dont seem to take into consideration is that everyone’s system is designed by them for them and their intended use or familes use. Your ideas are great for someone who wants the same thing as you but not so great for others. I could have a dedicated sound room and an Atmos system if I wanted one, but my intent with my system is to integrate it into our daily lives. Its a family room ,and as such its where all thing’s family take place and most of the time there is music involved. TV,s not even connected to the music system at all , theres a modest sound bar mounted underneath. Everythings thought out for us , and so as is the way with one size fits all things ,compromise is necessary. Im not trying to be a Richard but seems to me that there’s gotta be boards out there where the members have interests more in line with yours. I’ve only been a member and posting here for a few years even though Id snoop around sometimes before that, but I always thought Agon was just a for dinosaurs old school two channel forum, of course I could be mistaken and apologize if so.Your ideas are great I’m sure for people interested in exactly the same things you are, and this dinosaurs not interested in the consumer electronics industries latest iteration of Qudraphonic, did that already back in the late 70,s btw. |
I’ve been playing music professionally for decades and have also spent many years as an overpaid live sound system designer and mixer. I’ll wait for the applause to die down...OK then...note that nearly zero live systems are stereo mixes because that would leave people on either side of the venue hearing a weird mix. I’ve successfully used lightly applied stereo reverb at live shows but that’s it. Something about live music makes this work well regardless of the type of music because the essence of live music is the energy or general vibe of the performer (s) plus the feel of the venue. There’s always a lot of pseudo cerebral blathering about surround being "more real" but do you want Miles playing to the back of your head? Maybe you do...I don’t use room conditioning because musical performance generally takes place in rooms and who am I to deny my great sounding room to these artists? More applause...really...thank you very much. |
I’ve been playing music professionally for decades and have also spent many years as an overpaid live sound system designer and mixer. Thank so much for joining this thread. Must be a fun way to make a living! The link in my OP was specifically about live performances at Vegas residencies. There’s always a lot of pseudo cerebral blathering about surround being "more real" but do you want Miles playing to the back of your head? Kind of Blue in Atmos is available on Tidal and Atmos music, highly recommended, see "Stunningly Good in Atmos" below: https://www.soundandvision.com/content/miles-davis-gets-re-mixed-dolby-atmos
|
Headphones are like underwear, gloves (for general 'rough duty' stuff), and tools of various sorts...very much like ones' prefs in speakers and that in front of them. Hard to sort through all the offerings....word of mouth or forums, since previews are hard to come by, the actual wear and Listen with.... Sweetwater is the only b&m that I'm aware of that has a 'wall of phones' to 'browse', but requires the jaunt to do so... I settled on V-Moda M-100 Crossfades....studio stuff, but comfy....corded, but plugs into either cup. *S* One still misses the 'feel' of the bass lines tho'....at least, one doesn't have to pay big bucks to swap them out for the 'next better thing' (one hopes....) |
@kota1 ....*L* True....The Martha would have your 'cloud' in a pleasant color, spruced up to resemble a cloud....vanishing into a ceiling of textural reference.... (I still wonder what goes down when Snoop Dog hangs with Da Martha....) Inhalation Therapy? 😎🙄😆... "...you might see me tonight with an illegal smile....it don't cost all that much, but it lasts a good while..." *cough* |
| Post removed |
