What really amazes me is the Quad ESL-63, which emulates a ‘virtual’ point source behind its large flat diaphragm. Learned something new today. I wish I could also grab one on the used market
Better get two if you want a walk-in soundstage!
Walk-in soundstage
Coupled with his Weiss DAC 204 and T+A DAC 200, Mr. Steve Huff claimed to have experienced the so-called "walk-in soundstage" when using the Lumin U2 as the streaming transporter. This refers to a deeply immersive, three-dimensional stereo image where the listener perceives the musical space as so realistic and spacious that it feels as if one could physically walk into the soundstage.
This level of presentation is notably different from the more common “layered” sound field that many average listeners or reviewers report—where the sound is merely projected in front of the listener with some layering or spatial envelopment.
I'm curious how many of you have also experienced this effect in your own systems and listening spaces. If you're open to sharing, I'd love to hear about the components and setup that helped you achieve it.
74 responses Add your response
@richardbrand Well, I don't have a surround sound system, just your basic two channel, but this recording gives me the feeling at times like I'm in the orchestra, almost like I have a seat in it, and depending on where I look(turn my head), I can distinguish a particular instrument. Some years ago, I went to see Gidon Kremer at Symphony Center in Chicago, a sort of last minute thing where we checked the box office just before the concert for any return seats and we ended up with front row, near center. Amazing perspective that I never experienced before. When Gidon came out on stage, he stood right in front of us. The sound of his violin,not to mention the rest of the CSO, with us, being below the orchestra gave this uncanny ability to listen to specific musicians in a way that surprised us. I used to think that it would have been a terrible seat, but turned out to be a new refreshing experience, also considering that the row , 2nd, right behind us were considerably more expensive and would not have been any better, outside of maybe less strain on your neck. |
@richardbrand I think ESL 63 has similar trait to 57, correct? Two panels for sure to get stereo sound because one panel is mono and mono is difficult if not impossible to achieve walk-in soundstage. People even stack two panels per channel (side) for higher sound pressure (see below), wider dispersion and better bass presence. With that being said, I will probably put this thought on hold until I sort out the basic technicality.
|
I see it as counterproductive to keep this subject contentious simply because it’s not supposed to be. I can only agree with the “Money ≠ Performance” part of the statement, and I’m a strong proponent of that notion. I recently acquired two sub-$1k DACs—far from the price range you referred to—that are fully capable of producing a tall, wide, and deep soundstage with pinpoint-focused imaging. I don’t know which specific DACs or digital transports in the $60k+ range fail to do that effect, but if such units exist, it would be a huge pity to see that investment wasted. I don’t pretend to hear what I don’t. Before acquiring these two DACs, all my previous units could produce a decent soundstage (SS) in all dimensions except depth. And believe me, I’ve already optimized my setup and speaker placement in rooms prepared to reveal deep SS once a capable DAC and digital transport were in place. After months of tireless experimentation, the day my R2R DAC and transporter combo was fully broken in, I could hardly believe what I was hearing from that combo—a soundstage wider than the speakers, taller in a way that mimicked an actual singer’s or performer’s presence, and most importantly, deep enough to feel as if you could walk into it. Without pinpoint imaging and a dark background, such a space simply doesn’t exist. Of course, this experience doesn’t occur with every piece of music. As many have noted, the spatial cues must be present in the recording. Ultimately, it comes down to whether your gear can preserve and reproduce that information. As I’ve said before, if your DAC only produces a “wall of sound,” forget about a walk-in SS. And if your digital transport suffers from jitter or electrical noise, spatial cues will be lost due to timing errors. Here are two specific music tracks that reproduce this effect in my listening spaces:
Let me know if you’d like more examples or different genres. Speaker placement is equally important—on par with the digital front end, in fact. In my case, I pull my speakers 4 feet from the front wall (for depth) and 3 feet from the side walls (to avoid smearing from early reflections). The speakers are 11 feet apart with a slight 15° toe-in for my main rig in the living room, and 8.5 feet apart, facing straight ahead, for my second rig in the master bedroom. I’ve found these distances beneficial for widening SS and improving instrument separation. Finally, I have heavy window drape up front and bass traps but don’t treat the side walls, since I’ve found some reflective sound can help widen the SS—as Floyd Toole has also pointed out. |
When i read such thread i measure how much most people had no clue about acoustics concepts and parameters... A walk in soundstage is a way to describe the balance ratio between ASW/LEV parameters if we learn how to control them... I created it in my first acoustical dedicated room with my "mechanical room equalizer " a grid of 100 Helmholtz resonators mechanically tunable but we need a recording very well done to achieve complete "walk in" like the Weil four penny opera with with Lotte Lenya for example... No room/ speakers controls replace recording trade-off limits and possibilities...A bad recording stay bad even in controlled environment... I could not create it in my near field actual location for many reasons linked to the speakers design limitations and the impossibility to use my grid of resonators in my specific location.. My resonators work on "timbre" perception but not in the same way on spatial qualities,bunched together in a very small room and not distributed in a larger room Neither with my headphone, even if they give me "out of the head speaker like impressions" i enjoy a lot ... The K340 save my life when i lost my room...
Gave me 7,000 bucks and i will buy the " dac " or best said the acoustic set of filters tailored for your hearings created by Edgar Choueiri in a battling of the eye... No need to create a tuned 100 Helmholtz resonators precisely located around my room and listening position... Which task i cannot do no more because i dont have the room for it now nor i want to go redoing this tuning by ears arduous task again on many months ...
|
Yes and mainly NO! Both are electrostatic, so have no box around them to resonate. The almost-as-light-as-air diaphragms have no overshoot unlike massive conventional drivers. Both are meant to be full range speakers. But the original ESL (now known as the 57 because 1957 was when it was released) was not conceived for stereo. It dealt with the problem of flat panels by curving them slightly about a horizontal axis. It is a three-way design with three panels per speaker and crossovers and compared with modern speakers lies on its side. The ESL 63 was conceived in 1963, after stereo records became commercially available, but the 63 was not released until 1981. One of the objectives was to reduce the treble beaminess of the ESL 57 and another was to ensure a long service life - not easy with ultra-light diaphragms charged to over 5,000-Volts in a narrow gap between stators which carry the audio signal transformed to high voltages. Peter Walker named the 63 "FRED" for full-range electrostatic dipole. With minor modifications, it and its successors are still in production. Note that these have no conventional crossovers - another source of distortion removed. Overly high stator voltages are eliminated by attenuating signal voltages above 40-Volts. To reduce the possibility of sparking which can burn holes in the diaphragm, an ionization detector could shut the speaker down by in effect making it look like a short circuit to the amplifier. Alastair Robertson-Aikman, the founder of SME, tried various modification to the ESL-63 including stacking them. Quad themselves introduced models with 50% more panel area to extend the low bass. In the last few weeks, Quad has introduced two models with an -X suffix. One of the things they seem to have done is to add insulation to the stators, and to remove the ionization detector in order to get a bit more volume. My only real criticism of these speakers is that they don’t play loudly enough in big rooms, especially with the dynamics available from high resolution sources. One way to boost their apparent output is to pair them with subwoofers. Although they are big panels, the concentric stator design means they can also be used as near-field monitors which is an easy way to effectively crank-up the apparent volume. A second criticism is the life of the panels, especially when they were produced in China. The story is that Peter Walker specified glue with a 10 year minimum service life and the glue maker took him too literally |
Swapping, mixing and matching high fidelity components and cables is a long cherished audiophile activity which undoubtedly has produced countless hours of audio enjoyment. The drawback to this process is the amount of time and expense that it consumes. Today with digital signal processing (DSP) you can tune and optimize your system real time. First start by combining excellent speakers, modern power amplifiers with a digital source which will leverage Dirac or other DSP System / Room correction algorithms. Once you have your speakers positioned, the next step is to optimize your system using tools like REW and Dirac Live room correction. Now you can make adjustments, listen to the results and measure the results rapidly. It’s enlightening to be able to make adjustments to your system and measure them in real time. About Deer Creek Audio Here are some examples of Dirac Live correction
|
@deer_creek_audio Thank you for the DSP/RC recommendation. I had been experimenting with Wiim RC/PEQ to boost the missing low end, but since the arrival of the two sub-$1k DACs, the bass has really come alive. I want to get an external mic. to get more accurate SPL measurement for my room though. |
@richardbrand Thank you for letting me know about the various improvements Quad has made to enhance the performance of the ESL, such as increased volume and improved bass. Has there been any discussion regarding the treble roll-off above 10 kHz (as seen in the ESL 2805)? I’ve never seen a roll-off quite like that.
|
Geez, people still paying attention to Steve Huff? The guys a grifter and fraud. Makes a living talking to the dead with his spirit box, or whatever he calls it. I like seeing different gear almost as much as the next guy but can’t stomach Huff. He should be ashamed of himself. |
If you want to read someone who know a bit much than gear name and price and "colors" read Dr. Edgar Choueiri articles and youtube videos and you will understand why audio is not about electronical design first but about physical acoustics and psycho-acoustics... And you will understand why even honest reviewers miss the main point about audio...
I am interested by theoretical acoustics because speech mystery, hearing mystery, are key to understand audio but especially ourselves as beings ... https://www.theoretica.us/References/Immersive_Sound_(Excerpts_from_Chapter_5).pdf
|
This is about the crosstalk cancellation (XTC) algorithm implemented in BACCH. Thanks for sharing. If the XTC-induced tonal distortion during playback with only two loudspeakers is the main factor affecting the perceived 3D sound effect, would reducing crosstalk (XT) be the ultimate solution? If so, one could use two mono amplifiers or a true dual-mono amplifier to greatly reduce crosstalk and enhance stereo imaging. However, complete elimination of XT is not necessarily beneficial. If the sound reproduction had no crosstalk, as in pure binaural audio fed into headphones without processing, the outcome can be unnaturally wide or even disorienting. Simply put, our ears are accustomed to some crosstalk in real life—sound from the left still reaches the right ear, and vice versa. From this excellent article, I am not sure how Professor Choueiri addresses this aspect in an optimal way. In addition to the aforementioned electrical XT, there is also acoustic crosstalk to consider. I have already addressed this with speaker separation, toe-in adjustment, room treatment (in process), and reflection control. Beyond that, it seems the use of digital filters such as BACCH will be the route but what else? |
I used a form of mechanical crosstalk control in my past acoustic room... But the between way is Choueiri way because it is proven there is no distortion of timbre with his filters and we recuperate a lot of spatial information loss... My digital grid of 100 tuned resonators around my speakers and listening position was spectacular: almost total suppression of the stereo speakers with good recordings...But there is a slight price to pay with some distortion of the tonal timbre...Anyway i was in acoustic heaven... There is not this price to pay with Choueiri suppression of crosstalk,.... |
I sold my house 3 years ago, abruptly, I had no picture ( it was homemade and if i had pictures you will laugh) . Anyway my point is not about my room but about the way Helmlholtz resonators well located and in bundle grid mechanically tuned as we tune a piano can use crosstalk to transmit spatial information lost in "normal" system/ living-room.. Choueiri, it was my point, dont use crosstalk but suppress it and without distortion which is his main advantage and use head and aural measures to recover the acoustics of the recording in our room... If you may listen his many articles or youtube interview it is enlightening... When i discovered his information i was spell bound...Then yes crosstalk can be used positively but at a price... I will prefer Choueiri solution i understand it enough to know it work ...
|
If by “walk in” you simply mean “holographic”, “3D” or surround, I’m there. The synergies between the pieces of equipment and the room have to be working just so. my EQUIPMENT: Cartridge: Koetsu Leopard, Koetsu Onyx, Koetsu Rosewood Signature, Grado 78 Tonearm: Sumiko MMT Table: VPI HW MK IV with SAM Phono Stage: Pro-Ject Tube Box DS2 Preamp: Beard P505 Phase Alignment: BBE282ri sonic maximizer Subwoofer: Velodyne ULD-15 Amps: Julius Futterman OTL3s, converted to triode by Jon Specter Crossovers: Mastering Lab Speakers: Altec Lansing 604C coaxial studio monitors Semi-anechoic room design and treatment: by architect C.B. Wayne |
My system/room was not fooling me sorry... With the proper acoustics control of the system/room relation you are able to interpret and translate what is the many spatial information cues recorded by the sound recording engineer set of trade-off... The recuperation of this acoustic information in the play back process by a well optimized system/room is not an illusion nor a placebo but resulted from a rigorous set of acoustics concepts ... The best explanation is given by Edgar Choueiri... |
'Walk In' as a description is a play on the word Soundstage, to make the notion the Soundstage had Volume and Separation that seemed more increased in dimension than typical. In my system certain tracks do this, but many with a Q Sound CODEC embedded, will expand the Soundstage and imagery with precision, where space seems without boundaries. On a particular track from a artist who has a history of using Q Sound, one Track with a Helicopter and references to an importance of a education. Has the Helicopter being heard approaching from above and outside the building. The Helicopter descends through the Roof - Ceiling and Hovers in front of the listeners in the Soundstage. If a High Powered Fan was in the listening space, one would be ducking Rotors. I have not got a Play On Words, but the experience is indelible and much enjoyed. When prompted I do stand still.
|
As the Thread has also included ESL Speakers, the arrival of the Helicopter is experienced as an End Sound on Stacked Array Quad 57's and a 3 x Driver - Floor Standing Cabinet Design. Both are capable of creating a similar impression of a Soundstage when Q Sound embedded data is in a recording. As an individual who has spent many hours in the Company of all Quad ESL's minus the latest 'X' Model, I can assure they have traits produced within their End Sound that are very much wanted to be maintained and heard as an End Sound. Also I am totally confident in saying Cabinet Design Speakers in different designs are as capable of producing traits in an End Sound that are very much wanted to be maintained. For this reason, I am not a committed monogamous speaker user, I am Polygamous in a commitment to experiencing End Sound from Speakers. In my Local HiFi Group, Quad ESL users also have moved on to being Polygamous with Speakers after being many many years wed to the Quads. I thoroughly enjoy their alternate options as do they mine. One of the easiest methods one can adopt to reinvigorate a keenness to experience owned recorded music and also encourage the want to add new recorded music. Is to learn music listened to, remains totally impressive when the End Sound is heard from another option selected to produce the End Sound. Trials with different Speakers will bring discoveries that compels one to have them maintained and lived with, but shared with another/other readily available options.
|
@pindac Thank you for introducing Q Sound. You must refer to The Happiest Days of Our Lives on The Wall by Pink Floyd for the helicopter spatial sound effect. Q Sound was subsequently used in, for example, The Division Bell, to achieve 3D effects. Additionally, to name a few, Roger Waters’ Amused to Death also incorporates this technique. I’ve noticed that the “walk-in” spatial sound effect becomes more prominent in my system with the latest recordings that contain these spatial cues, even when using traditionally designed (box-type) speakers. In that setup, the elevated spatial height achieved with my Harmony Micro DAC becomes an important factor I would say. I would also like to revisit the unanswered question I posted earlier regarding the significant roll-off above 10 kHz of the Quad ESL panel. I believe this characteristic is one of the sound traits that warranted his stacked HQD systems implemented by Mark Levinson, where: D: Decca Kelly Ribbon (> 7 kHz) Again, I am curious what experience the end-users like yourself have and how you cope with this. https://www.stereophile.com/content/mark-levinson-hqd-loudspeaker-system
|
@lanx0003 I hope I'm on the same path as your inquiry as a reply to your query. I have always had the 57's as a 40Hzish to 17Khz listen and accepted them for this. Most recorded music falls within this frequency range, so the 57 user is not sold too short on the entirety of the recorded music experience. I can say with total confidence there are other Speaker Designs that cost up 20-30 x 57's using average UK prices as the guide. Where designs of Speakers with a cost of £15K - £25k can't offer what the 57's can do with certain recordings in the upper mid's and maximum frequency. At the same time a lot of monies can be spent to create a End Sound that surpasses the overall 57 experience, but is noticeable for not being as attractive in certain areas of the produced End Sound. Stacking 57's supplies a 3dB increase in the Upper Frequencies and a 6dB increase in the lowest frequency and what is said to be a improved flatness to the frequency response. Adding a Subwoofer is a failure in the demo's received for both 57's and other Quad ESL's. Myself detects the change in the sonic of the Bass and this becomes a detractor as the presence of a sonic trait that differs is detected. As I use a range of Speaker Designs I am not off the view the 57's or other Quad ESL's are lacking in Bass, the models are delivering the least adulterated Bass, which becomes very very attractive when lived with. Experiences of other Speaker Designs, some £20K+, are able to produce Bass that can become an unattractive experience as the shortcomings are recognised whilst exposed to their End Sound. If a Upper frequency driver is able to be used that blends seamlessly, then why not, I am yet to hear a seamless blend driver used in conjunction with a Quad ESL. I have ideas, own the drivers to be used as part of the design, but have not rushed to create the experience. When a End Sound is wanted to be heard different I simply swap out the 57's to another Speaker that creates a Bass that is much more familiar to the average Speaker user and has a extension of the Upper Frequency. The ESL has been a very good teacher, very few Speaker Designs remain in the system that have noticeable Colouration, it is knowing the ESL very well that allows such a prompt decision to be made about an alternative design of Speaker. The the Irony, I have to have a poor designed Speaker in waiting, the use of such a Speaker fits perfect with my recreating experiences of PA Produced End Sound, from a time when a young man was out and about having social experiences inclusive of live music experiences. Early era Chicago Blues also sounds wonderful when the End Sound is noticeably coloured from a Poor design Speaker. Halcyon Days with great memories. |
I wasn’t surprised that the sub fails to integrate well with ESLs, given how difficult it already is to achieve good integration with traditional box speakers. I’m actually not too concerned about bass performance with more modern ESLs, such as the 2805, since they can reach below 30 Hz. As for the treble, I’ve been considering adding super tweeters, such as ribbons or AMTs from brands like Aperion. They offer crossovers starting from 8khz, as well as adjustable attenuation levels to help address sensitivity differences. However, issues like phase coherence, synergy, and sonic character could still pose challenges. You might be right that ESL enthusiasts often accept—and even enjoy—the speakers as they are, without worrying much about frequency response. I was amazed by how realistic and natural the sound from an electrostatic panel can be. |
