On another site, there is a discussion on soundstage, and there are a few people clamming, that, since there is no vertical information encoded on stereo recordings, that soundstage height does not actually exist. It is a product of our minds filling in missing information.
Are they correct?
Please explain your position, with as much technical details as you feel needed.
I certainly do get height from my system, but then my front wall is ~16 feet high and the back wall is ~7-1/2 feet high, so there could be some reflection adding to it.
If you want to hear height, the best thing I find is to listen to "sharp" percussion. Xylophone. marimba, glock, wood blocks, etc. always seem to come out higher.
Then of course there is the actual height of the speakers that can replicate the height of the actual instruments they are reproducing. For example, when I listen to the Big Red Supers, drum kits/solos come out very realistic as to their height. The aux woofer at the bottom of the cabinet reproduces the slam of the kick drum, whereas the 604’s horns are placed at the level of cymbols.
… what I do know is that when Jim Winey decided to make Magnepan speakers 6' high, the listener was treated to a source that more closely mimicked the experience of being at a live concert. The "sound stage" of a concert is the hall you listen to it in. Most halls are designed to provide a quality listening experience that is as tall as the hall and as wide as the stage.
+1
The actual radiation field and its overall size and height is by far the most influential factor with regard to perceived realism and immersiveness of sound staging, as I see it. Again: with speakers there’s no escaping physics, inconvenient they may be to many.
Speakers outside would be similar to being in a hemianechoic chamber. Good for testing but not much fun for listening. The room has a lot to do with the imaging.
Sounds stage beyond the speakers width is mostly room reflections. Try taking the speakers outside and see how they sound. I would bet they sound pretty different.
It‘s not just the speakers. Good isolation of the components and cabling, I found helps to sharpen and focus the images. My current system, depending on the recording will paint a 3D soundstage that goes beyond the walls- if I close my eyes or turn out the lights. It was fun af first. I could close my eyes and hear the large sound stage and then open my eyes and see the walls cutting right through the band. Now I can hear the full sound stage mostly with my eyes still open.
Eric Clapton records are a good example. On one he is standing. His voice is about 6 feet high and his guitar is about 3-4 feet high. On the Unplugged album, he is sitting and his voice is 4 feet high while his guitar is 3 feet high. Several recordings do things like that. Drums will be about 2-3 feet high and cymbals just a little higher up. Other albums have everything at the same height- instruments and voices. Some albums are a flat wall of sound while most have instruments and voices in various positions front to back as well as left to right. Some Chorale pieces have voices from floor to ceiling- very dramatic. Well recorded piano is interesting. Sometimes the piano seems placed at a diagonal and sometimes it is at a right angle. I can think of one recording where the piano is left to right on the stage. Makes it feel like the piano is almost in my face. Just depends on the recording.
I have used the Roger Waters track for a few years as one test for speaker placement. My current speakers put the dogs at the extreme right far away and the talking man at my extreme left about 8 feet away. I hear sounds behind me now and then. Don‘t really care for that.
Vinyl used to be the best for a big open soundstage and images but my current digital side does the job just as well as vinyl now.
I have very much enjoyed this discussion, found after a google search on the subject. Now I have a bunch of resources to explore.
A couple of examples.
Highway 61 Revisited by Dave Alvin / From an Old Guitar.
Near the start of the song, as it starts to get loud, there is sound coming from high and to the left - way lefter than the left speaker, and as high as the ceiling in my room. My ceiling is 2.9 metres and my tweeters are about ear level.
The Devil and the Deep Blue Sea by Brendan Perry / Ark.
As this track evolves there is a constant tick tick tick of something I assume the drummer is doing, I am no expert in musical instruments. This ticking sound, to me, floats around the sound stage like a butterfly. Left to right, forward and back, up and down. It’s fun to track and follow it in the mind.
Bonus track -
The Ballad of Bill Hubbard by Roger Waters / Amused to Death.
Must surely be a phase trick here. Turn it up loud and sit in the sweet spot, the (about 3) dogs will be barking behind you to the right, at a distance, perceived to be outside.
Other tricks too, the voice on the radio to the left - literally beside you to the left.
Two years ago I was using a pair of B&W CM9 speakers, a Musical Fidelity M6i amp and either a CD or a computer for source.
I had that for a decade and I thought it was good. Little did I know.
I cannot recall hearing height, or spacial effects such as those mentioned in this topic. I had stereo, that was about it.
In the last 2 years I have evolved my system through various hardware changes including B&W 702 S2 Signature speakers, Sonos Port, Bluesound Node, Auralic Aries and Sirius, Musical Fidelity M8xi amp, PrimaLuna EVO 100 DAC and EVO 400 preamp, Musical Fidelity M8-700M monoblocks, REL S/510 sub. And every piece of that hardware is now gone. I now have a full on end-game system, Tidal Contros (streamer/DAC/preamp), Tidal Ferios monoblocks, Tidal Contriva speakers and two REL No. 31 subs. A lot of money, probably out of the reach of many. My advice there is if you are at an age to do so, stick extra from your pay into your superannuation. When you can access it, you should have the funds to enjoy life, it worked for me.
That aside… Until I got the Tidal electronics to go with these speakers, I had no idea what was possible when it comes to soundstage quality and definition.
It’s early days but my experience so far has been beyond wildest expectations. Never heard anything even close to this level. It’s like I was fluffing around at the edges before compared to how good it is now. I did not know what to expect - I knew what I had was good so I was a bit concerned I wasn’t going to hear much difference. Damn, those fears are history.
Getting myself back on topic, and why I found this topic, I wanted to see if other people experience this height phenomenon. I don’t understand how it works, but whether it is a trick of the mind, imagination, room characteristics, or whether it is real, I am glad it exists.
I have had friends come and listen, I have asked them to close their eyes, I play a track with this effect and ask them to point to the source. Their results prove it isn’t my imagination.
Now I’m off to explore the suggestions people have commented on here, so thanks for the suggestions.
Stereo is an illusion imaging is a trick it’s not there your brain just thinks it is. Just like your brain thinks a moving picture exists when it’s all just still images flashed at a high rate just like you perceive motion in an animated film. If you move off center the image vanishes because it’s not there. If I had only 1 ear would I hear this movement of sound? if you played only 1 speaker would it still be there? No, it wouldn’t because it was never there in the 1st place. During playback, the listener’s brain uses those subtle differences in timing and sound level to triangulate the positions of the recorded objects.
Then how do you explain Northwestern's LEDR recording, already mentioned several times on this thread?
The track in question, starts with a tone in the left speaker, which then moves straight UP to at least 8' or more feet up, moves across to directly over the top of the right speaker, then down to the speaker level.
Yes, this track was created specifically to exaggerate this effect, but if speakers were incapable of producing height, please explain this track.
So far, this same phenomena occurs on every system I've played it on. Even speakers not known for their great imaging.
There is no soundstage image height or image at all. It's just your brain trying to make sense of what it's perceiving its a trick an illusion. Just like when you watch all those non-moving fixed images on your TV your brain makes it seem like real motion is going on.
It exists but recording as well as room and equipment dependent. My reason for saying this, I can hear it in my room at times. Certainly the depth, left, right and center aspects of sound stage are much more frequently present. When I say height its not that the wall of sound is high as well as wide it is I can hear specific sounds as coming from a tall specific spot within the sound stage.
If height information is encoded in a recording I’ve found it doesn’t take much of a system at all for it to be perceived. Pretty much any basic system will make it work. Height perception should even work in mono. I’ve found it also easy to get sounds extending well beyond the speakers to even behind the listener. Speaker placement and listening position are a little more important for the wrap around effect but it doesn’t require a great system. I find forward depth is far more difficult for me to perceive, pretty much impossible if I can see the front wall too close to me, although it can work if I close my eyes and the system is well balanced tonally and speakers positioned well.
I have never had a problem getting height in my images, when the material calls for it.
Like in the track on Chesky's first "Ultimate Evaluation Disk", with the Mozart flute concerto, where, on all my previous systems, and my current one, the flute is always at the correct height for a person standing and playing the flute.
Like wise, on the title track of King Crimson's "Islands", there is a cornet that comes in at about 2:00 in, that is also at about 5.5 feet above the floor, just at the correct height.
I ordered Chesky's CD with the LEDR test on it, even though I know you can get it for free. I also want the rest of the material on the disk.
I always took it for granted until I had some very much non-audiophiles over in my much too small for the big speakers I had, studio apartment. There is a track that starts with a skateboarder in a half-pipe. The friend who happened to be sitting in the sweet spot basically stopped all conversations and made everyone take turns listening to the opening of the track from the sweet spot. You can very much tell that there is height. The half pipe extends through the floor. Maybe it was expectation, and they were each familiar with the sound and could immediately contextualize it, but I doubt it.
I don’t know if showing height is a goal during mixdowns. I do know there was an project I read of years ago that was able to make a sound appear to be generated from anywhere in a room with a single speaker. I don’t know how much calibration was needed to adjust for room acoustics, but it certainly worked as a proof of concept.
People "clamming" are generally not aware of soundstaging so much as the splort and sucking sound the mudflats make as one clams. Otherwise, soundstage height, width, location of instruments either accurate of not (drummer's kits are generally not 25 feet wide, although some engineers think they should be), is a fundamental part of great hifi without which the whole damn thing would be senseless (pun intended).
On this @nonoiseand I agree. It took me a long time to get the speakers set up properly and longer still to get the subs right but now that I am at least much closer to perfect I most definitely perceive height differences.
Without reading any of the posts, I've decided this post is nonsense. Obviously if you have ears and decent equipment this post is moot. I'm fairly new to autophila Started with 1 adcom and added another, bi-wired in stereo. They had a nice soundfield. 5 foot oval in the middle. Oh the speakers Cornwall iv's preamp Mc M70 sound was very good Loved it. Came across a mcintosh 452. the owner wanted to upgrade to the mc462. {THANK YOU} pulled the adcoms and added the mac. an amazing difference, The soundstage expanded 3 foil, to the whole back of my sound space.The room is 15 by 20 with a couch 15 feet back. there is no way I'm mistaken the difference is obvious, there's no denying it. The perfect listening spot is about 10 feet back but she wont let me move the couch.
Gee, I don't know. BUT, what I do know is that when Jim Winey decided to make Magnepan speakers 6' high, the listener was treated to a source that more closely mimicked the experience of being at a live concert. The "sound stage" of a concert is the hall you listen to it in. Most halls are designed to provide a quality listening experience that is as tall as the hall and as wide as the stage.
When you first hear Maggies that are set-up properly in a room that is decent, you then may understand the concept of reproducing the live experience. If you wish to call that "sound stage" or "image height" then feel free.
Another interesting fact is that, soon after others heard Maggies, THEY started making their products TALLER. Wonder what caused that, eh?
The experience of sitting in YOUR ROOM and listening to well-set-up Maggies driven by superb hardware is one that SHOULD remind you of the live concert experience. Call it whatever you wish; to me, that is part of the goal of all this.
One considertion to ponder here in this discussion of xover box types trying to compete with a higher end FR design is the evident fact that woofers are not so good at fq's above 1500hz and Tweeters not so good at below the critical 3k hz range.
There is this huge gap, falling within the heart and soul of the musical image.
Which is the reason for Dali, Wilson and countless other designs have evolved into complex multi driver designs.
Creating a big problem. A 2 way has always sounded better than a 3,4,5 way.
With each added driver the musical image gets more crop, splice, sliced and butchered. Chop Suey.
Yeah sure its **full range** but full of e xactly what, its not easy to say.
I will atempt to explain why a FR is superior form of speaker in all classical music vs a xover box design With my dual FR drivers at 92-95db and dual tweeters at 91 db , the most subtle, hush instrumentaion/ notes can be detected without having to crank up the vol on the amplifier. Now when the cresendos crash in, sure SPL can go up a bit, but not near as loud as a xover box design in these fq peaks.
After listening to my dual FR + dual Tweeter design, (no other in the world, I am the only audiophile employing this unique design), I could never go back to any xover box style speaker.
My local tech here in new orleans bangs away at my design saying ** YOu still have a xover,,its not xover-less** true and not true.
A single 8.2 Mundorf Silver cap on each tweeter acts as NOTHING MORE THAN A FILTER. THe **woofers** = FR, have no xover components./
If you wish to call a single cap a xover, feel free. He demands I confess I employ a xover. I refuse to do so.
Itsa filter of the barest minimum. Vs say Troels Gravesen's xover designs which employ at least a dozen components in each speaker.
The dual FR are really 80% of the sonics, completely free of any xovers. The dual T's kick in at 4-5K hz, and carry minimal sonics as most classical music falls below 5k hz.
The dual T;'s are acting more for a lil **Pizzaz** and ambience.
A single FR w/o a T is not going to deliver the goods. A tweeter is a absolute must.
But a tweeter will not save a xover/box type.
Wilson can stack as many drivers they wish ina cabinet and hope to copy the sonic fq range which a high end FR can accomplish. Its not going to work. What you get with Wilson is more sound, a true LOUD-speaker.
Attacking is the code word. vandersteen's, Tektons, ZU's all attack with LOUDNESS.
Buts thats not high fidelity Its low fidelity which is nothing more than distortion which equates to fatigue. My speakers are fatigue free. On a scale of 1 to 100, they are a zero. vs your avg box/xover types, , which offer fatiguing and tiresome to endure for any length of time.
Wish I had known this extential facts decades ago, would have saved me some sufferings.
I guess the Cowboy Junkies on Trinity Sessions were just an artifact of the recording engineer and their positions had nothing to do with what I hear concerning their placement on the soundstage?
They used just one mike and sat or stood around it while playing. Any decent setup will show their position and height differences. This is old news.
Sounds to me that whoever said that doesn't have a good enough system to show a proper soundstage. That's not accounting for what an engineer can do by moving performers (and instruments) around the soundstage and even then, the height can vary.
There are omnidirectional (picks up from all directions), unidirectional (mostly from one direction) and bidirectional (from two opposite directions) mikes that when nothing is done to alter their intake, will allow playback of approximately what they heard. That includes height.
A narrow floor-to-ceiling line source like the Carver speaker will do this better than any speaker with multiple drivers of varying sizes (B&W, Focal, Magico, Wilson ... as examples).
But that’s a side-effect of a line-source. Completely unnatural, when a guitar image like a Pipe organ
That speculation cannot be disproved, but with my line source speakers there is no height with the sound stage. The stage expands laterally from both speakers due to phase interactions. This also might explain the sound source coming from behind the listener, in a room where all four walls are completely insulated.
There is a lot of neurological processing regarding phase reception given the fact that the 1D axis of two ears yields 3D hearing so I would look more to that as an explanation.
height which equates to me as better/best sound quality. It usually correlates to high frequency content and higher or highest resolution in the music being played
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Exactly, the higher sens drivers always presents a cleaner more accurate = more detailed musical image vs low sens drivers.
Ideally no driver under 91db and not over 95db are the ideal sens range for any driver
= High Fidelity = Full range. Box/xover speakers aint going to out perform a Full range, = Sensitivity issues. under 90 db vs over 92db, High sens always wins out in a shootout every single shootout. My tech here in new orleans continues his mantra,, **Well you do have a xover in your speaker, ..** I tell him over and over,, sure its a single cap, acting as a filter on the 2 tweeters per channel. Each T has a 8.2 Mundorf SESGO cap,. Which blocks fq's at the 4kish range. I am speaking of xovers on both tweeters and woofers ina typical box design. My Seas Thors had 1 coil + 2 resistors + 4 caps per tweeter then the woofer had like 1 res + 1 coil + 1 massive cap.
A Full Range has no xovers.
Which allows the purity of the music to sing natural.
A woofer never will out shoot a Full Range, = Higher end FR, not lower end.
Some FR are garbage. A few are true high end speakers, which IMHO will never be surpassed in high fidelity.
I have a 8 inch FR + a 6 inch FR + dual T's per channel. Open baffel. FR sound like garbage ina closed/ported box.
But of course most of you here have not heard a FR in action, so you would not know what I am tlking about.
I apologise as I have not had time to read all the responses to your question about image height but this article was published in the Absolute Sound and was part of a series of articles about being able to determine the best digital audio music files - wav/flac etc - and computer file servers - windows/Mac. The writers of the artiicles used image height as a 'measurement' of sound quality - the higher the image the higher the quality. I use this method - not in a measured way - but listening for the height which equates to me as better/best sound quality. It usually correlates to high frequency content and higher or highest resolution in the music being played. The article - one of them is here - if you scroll down until you find image height the context can be read. Hope it helps?
"My system has great imaging!" "I can hear sound coming from beyond my speakers." "The depth image in my system goes back at least 20 feet." Yes, we audiophiles are proud of our imaging (footnote 1), and we've worked hard to get it. My back is still aching from the last time I tweaked my speakers until the image was just right. Wouldn't it be nice if we had a test to set up and check a stereo system for correct imaging? Yes, Virginia, there is an imaging test—your LEDR is here (footnote 2). LEDR, which stands for "Listening Environment Diagnostic Recording," is available on a test CD from Prosonus, the Studio Reference Disc (footnote 3). The CD is rather expensive (about $50), but there is no other official test for imaging. [Since this article was published, an LEDR track was included on the first Chesky Records Jazz Sampler & Audiophile Test CD (JD37).—Ed.]
The Stereophile article has a rather lengthy explanation about what you should hear - the short version again quoted from the Mastering Engineer's Handbook is:
If the sound for the up image doesn’t go straight up from your loudspeaker, six feet in the air as you sit there in your position, then you’ve got a problem with your crossover or with reflections above the loudspeaker.
If the sound doesn’t travel from left to right evenly and smoothly with the left-to-right test, then you’ve got problems with objects between your loudspeakers.
And the same with the beyond signal, which is supposed to go from about one foot to the left of the left speaker, gradually over to one foot to the right of the right speaker, which detects reflections from the side wall.
Whenever imaging or soundstage are mentioned, I like to remind people about these resources: The following provide tests, with which one may determine whether their system actually images, or reproduces a soundstage, as recorded. ie: On the Chesky sampler/test CD; David explains in detail, his position on the stage and distance from the mics, as he strikes a tambourine(Depth Test). The LEDR test tells what to expect, if your system performs well, before each segment. The Chesky CD contains a number of tests, in addition to the LEDR. (https://www.audiocheck.net/audiotests_ledr.php) and (https://www.amazon.com/Chesky-Records-Sampler-Audiophile-Compact/dp/B000003GF3) The shape of your ears’ pinnae is also a variable, regarding your ability to perceive images/locate sounds. A Stereophile article, that explains the LEDR test: http://www.stereophile.com/features/772/
With speakers I guess it’s all about the way the drivers disperse the sound.
+1
I like that the actual, total radiated field of sound extends somewhat beyond the listening height (with a line source ideally terminated at both the floor and ceiling) dictated by ear level above the ground. My own speakers are just above 6 ft. tall, but the acoustic center at the LP is situated between the upper edge of the bass bin and the lower edge of the horn above (i.e.: at 100-105 cm’s). This way there’s a sensation of what’s presented to the ears as being less restricted and more immersive (or fuller), and so there’s a larger "canvas" for the sound to emit itself from. Physical properties of sound that to my ears more closely emulates the signature trait of an acoustic live symphony orchestra concert, or even a live amplified one.
This first time I heard height reproduced through a hi-fi system was when I played Boult's recording of Holst's The Planets (EMI ASD 2301) on a Thorens TD-125 Mk.2/SME 3009/Decca Blue pickup turntable, feeding pair of Magneplanar Tympani T-I's bi-amped with ARC tube amps. Way, way at the rear of the hall (which itself could be heard) I could "see" the percussion instruments (particularly the triangle), raised on a podium above the instruments in front of them. I didn't yet know symphony orchestras were so situated, and had no expectation to hear that sound. Yet I did.
Image height is a function of the reproduction chain, loudspeakers in particular. If it was simply a matter of saying that there is no vertical information encoded in stereo recordings then the resultant sound stage would be non existent in the vertical plane.
My understanding of human sound perception of height is that it occurs mostly in the pinnae, causing the tonal relations and phase relations to change at the eardrum. There are no timing or level differences that can give us height information so a two channel playback system doesn’t inherently have anything to work with. But we may perceive a ceiling echo in a concert hall recording as coming from above from other unconscious means of deduction. You could say it’s our imagination but it would be informed imagination. If a recording is made using a dummy head then tonal relations associated with height do get encoded onto a 2 channel stereo recording. All directions are possible, but it usually doesn’t work super well because 1. Our pinnae are not all the same, and 2. The sound goes through the pinnae transformation twice - once at the dummy head microphone and again when the sound from the speakers hits your pinnae. My experience with listening to dummy head recordings through speakers is that the height effect can make it through all these issues with powerful effect sometimes. I have a recording of airplanes flying over that creates a very powerful directly overhead effect on every speaker I’ve tried so far.
Any system that has a tonal response that mimics your tonal response for height can cause a height effect for you. Ceiling reflections can also create a height effect. And of course speakers up high can create that effect. My speakers tweeters are higher than my seated position so I have an elevated sound stage.
@simonmoon I don’t know about the mastering process, but my recent experience with entry level gear may provide some insight. In the last 4 years, I started with KEF Q150 stand mounts on Monoprice Monolith stands. I didn’t know it at the time, but my soundstage and imagining was limited to a line between the tweeters--a 1 dimensional soundstage. I replaced the KEF’s with B&W CM9S2 towers. The line of a soundstage expanded to a wall, which was only 2 dimensional, being height and width. More recently, that wall gained some depth when I upgraded the streamer to the iFi Zen Stream.
Two channel mastering is likely very different from the object placement afforded by the new spacial audio music mastering. But I would argue that there is some way in which soundstage height does exist. I would guess that someone who argues that soundstage height doens’t exist is probably proceeding from a set of definitions from the spacial audio world. Probably just a definitional problem where people are talking past each other.
There are some people who honestly don't, won't and can't hear it. Everyone is physically and emotionally different. But sometimes these people can't fathom that other people can. And some of those people think that it's their responsibility to tell people it's nonsense.
As many of you know the visual center of your brain uses a ton of "CPU cycles" to recreate what we perceive as our own reality. When you take that processing load off your brain as a matter of course it uses whatever input is left and draws on past visual input to complete the picture.
That is why I mostly listen with the lights off and my eyes closed. I suspect many of you 'philes do the same thing.
In my 50+ years of playing this "game" I have found that there certainly is height information that is being processed by your brain, albeit a phantom, as is the center channel.
Moreover, to my ears this is very recording dependent, acoustic guitar and singer I prefer not to hear them on the ceiling as that is outside of my live experience.
Large orchestral pieces "should" sound like you're in a proper theater setting.
At about three minutes into Steely Dan Aja there is a police whistle, on my rig it actually sounds like it is outside and across the street. YMMV.
As has been noted already, everyone knows that their speakers, no matter the design, can project an image in the center, where there is no driver. Obviously, speakers radiate sound: to the left, the right, above and below. Why would this not create an image above, just as it does to the left and right, assuming the ceiling is high enough to allow for it?
If you want to test this dimension of the stereo image, acquire Northwestern's LEDR recording. It's available free online, but is also on one of the Chesky jazz samplers. Here's a link to a Stereophile review of it:
Finally, riley84 asks why anyone would be interested in anyone else's "opinion" in such matters, and was accused of "arrogance" as a result. This doesn't look arrogant to me; quite the contrary, in fact: live and let live. But I still find riley's question naive. OF COURSE we care about others' opinions regarding audio; that's what this forum exists to disseminate! More: I expect those opinions to be backed up by either evidence or argument. I visit this forum for tips on how to improve my system. I'll try those tips which are defended convincingly. Same is true in just about anything else ("life partners," "friends"...). We live among others, some of whom seem to us to be on the right track, others not so much. For me, I'm open-minded, but I want reasons to believe.
I cannot give a technical explanation, but I definitely have experienced a soundstage. My listening room is untreated, but filled with soft furniture, carpet and drapes. I stream music using McIntosh solid state electronics and Klipsch La Scala speakers. It is not the same with all recordings. Some of the best have been old recordings from the 1950's as well as newly issued material. At its best, the music comes from each side, above and behind me, and the speakers "disappear." I have even experienced a soundstage with headphones. I recall a Tony Scott recording where the clarinet clearly "appeared" from across the room. I speculate that it involves the quality of the recording and the interplay between my ears and brain. The soundstage also expands after listening for a while, which reinforces my speculation that the brain becomes acclimated to the sound, and then produces the soundstage.
In my fully acoustically treated house of stereo with 9 ft ceiling, I have used 40" tall towers and 69" ones. Both pairs projected imaging all the way to the top of the wall. So, in my case, yes.
of course it exists...WHY its there? the differences among sound at the source, often 2 lil boxes, how it fills our room and our ears...theres a ot going on there. our brains make sense of it. there must be a whole slew of factors at play. the size and dimension of soundstage is quite different from system to system in my house, and tweaking each system changes it. my desktop system has a wild freakin 3D soundstage thats really high...well, when i lower my speakers, the sound stage height lowers. when i flip em upside down it changes again. barely change the toe-in and i get pretty significant changes in width and separation, placement of sounds. ive only recently learned of this holographic experience, and man its wild. but of course its real. you have sound coming at you in a particular manner from a particular place and places.
we perceive sound as 3 dimensionally with our ears as we do the world around us with our eyes.
The brain always fills in information and creates illusions that are not real. Close your eyes and listen to vocals, they invariably appear to be dead centre, but there is no speaker there, its an illusion created in your brain, you hear two separate signals one in each ear, your brain processes that and informs you its from the middle, its not is it. Soundstage is the same, some systems give much wider soundstage, more often how they placed is more important.
the human hearing mechanism encodes height information based on frequency contouring caused by the shape of the ear. there is a tone map in the brain that instantly "translates" certain directional sounds as "higher" or "lower." SOME stereo music recordings contain enough of this information, a FEW of them. i have heard it demonstrated on the LEDR [Listening Environment Diagnostic Recording] on a Chesky test disc, with the synthetic cabasa rising above one speaker and sailing across the ceiling to the other speaker, as well as sailing backwards.
My friends and I have tested this by trying the same gear in different rooms. Our conclusion is that image height is a function of ceiling height and position of the drivers. Canting the speakers fore and aft can change the image height as well. Give it a try.
If you can hear it, and I think most of us can, then it (perception of height) exists. It's not just speakers. Years ago, I had an Apt Holman amplifier and a McIntosh 2105 and I tried them in the same system with the same music. The Apt Holman had a very squat height and the McIntosh much taller comparatively. With speakers I guess it's all about the way the drivers disperse the sound. With electronics, I'll leave that to better minds.
I run Acoustic Zen Crescendo speakers. Transmission line design. There is clearly the impression of height in the soundstage. Sometimes it's actually annoying to hear an instrument that appears to be several feet above the rest of the band. I put in down to the upper postion of the midrange and tweeter. They are a couple feet above my ears in the listening position. I just close my eyes and picture a two tier stage. Works for me.
Well I have no idea if they are right or wrong regarding the non-vertical coded information, but what I do know is I prefer my speakers (Forte III) adjusted slightly up. If I were to keep them leveled to the floor I find myself looking down to hear the music. Sound waves seem to travel in the direction you send them, and I would imagine expanding the farther they travel. It is possible that there is no need for a vertical code only a slight speaker adjustment. And, might I dare say a little imagination or trickery of the brain.
You must have a verified phone number and physical address in order to post in the Audiogon Forums. Please return to Audiogon.com and complete this step. If you have any questions please contact Support.
