You are there vs. They are there

@mylogic 

If anything spatially changes a recording in any way…. the reproduction is flawed.

How would you know the recording is changed unless you were at the recording studio or the live venue. Also, there is a difference between adding things and restoring things that were actually lost. 

mylogic

If anything spatially changes a recording in any way…. the reproduction is flawed ...

Every recording is flawed, some more than others. They are all an illusion.

Seems like a lot of gobbledee gook to explain "depth of field". 

+1 @spenav 

Regards,

barts

Close miked recordings/performers will be inherently more in room than those distantly miked, your system should reveal both. Hard panned info will also have more inherent projection into room. I've never had a system setup where all info behind plane of speaker, that would be both loss of depth and homogeneous presentation. Seems to me one would want both projection and recession of sound stage to create sound stage depth and more three dimensional imaging.

I agree with @sns, one can have both You are there vs They are there. I also have time aligned horns that are actively Bi-amped and project a 3D image with real life scale. It’s somewhat recording and system dependent. My system plays on the slightly cool side of neutral with gusto and passion. For in the what it’s worth category, the equipment, room, and recording all play their part in the 3D illusion of sound reproduction.

@spenav +2

Mike