I agree @snapsc !
Is Imaging Worth Chasing?
Man, am I going to be torn apart for this. But I says what I says and I mean what I says.
Here’s a long term trend I’ve noticed in the audio press. Specs that used to be front and center in equipment reviews have essentially disappeared. Total harmonic distortion, for instance. Twenty years ago, THD was the start and end of the evaluation of any amplifier. Well, maybe power, first. Then THD. Armed with those two numbers, shopping was safe and easy.
The explanation for the disappearance is not hard to figure. Designers got so good in those categories that the numbers became meaningless. Today, most every amp on the shelf has disappearingly low distortion. Comparing .00001 to .000001 is a fool’s errand and both the writers and the readers know it. Power got cheap, even before Class D came along to make it even cheaper. Anyone who tries bragging about his 100 watts will be laughed out of the audio club.
Stereophile still needed to fill it’s pages and audiophiles still needed things to argue about so, into the void, stepped imaging. Reviewers go on and on about imaging. And within the umbrella of imaging, they write separately about the images height, width, and depth. “I closed my eyes and I could see a rock solid picture of the violas behind the violins.” “The soundstage extended far beyond the width of the speakers.” And on and on.
Now, most everyone who will read this knows more about audio equipment than me. But I know music. I know how to listen. And the number of times that I’ve seen imaging, that I’ve seen an imaginary soundstage before me, can be counted on my fingers. Maybe the fingers of one hand.
My speakers are 5-6 feet apart. I don’t have a listening chair qua listening chair but I’m usually 8-9 feet back. (This configuration is driven by many variables but sound quality is probably third on the list.) Not a terrible set-up, is my guess from reading lots of speaker placement articles. And God knows that, within the limited space available to me, I have spent enough time on getting those speakers just right. Plus, my LS50s are supposed to be imaging demons.
I’ve talked to people about this, including some people who work at high-end audio stores. Most of them commiserate. It’s a problem, they said. “It usually only happens with acoustic music,” most of them said. Strike one. My diet of indie rock and contemporary jazz doesn’t have much of that. “You’ve got to have your chair set up just right. And you’ve got to hold your head in just the right place.” Strike two. Who wants to do that?
(Most of the people reading this forum, probably. But I can’t think of any time or purpose for which I’ve held my head in a vise-like grip like that.)
It happens, every now and then. For some reason, I was once right up next to my speakers. Lots of direct sound, less reflections. “The Name Of This Band Is Talking Heads” was playing. And I literally gave a start because David Byrne was standing on the coffee table. Cool.
But, generally speaking, imaging is something I only read about. And if that little bit of imaging is the dividend of dropping more money into my system, I’m not sure that I want to deposit into that account.
I think that I still have a few steps to take that will pay benefits other than imaging. But maybe the high-end is not for me.
- ...
- 102 posts total
You are right, of course, and I never said otherwise. It was Holt's experience at High Fidelity (a quite good magazine at the time, though not as good as Audio, imo) that led him to create Stereophile. That was the first subjectively-based audio magazine, as far as I know. But by the early '70s, Stereophile was struggling with content and a very irregular publishing schedule. (And I'm being kind.) Harry Pearson admitted multiple times that he founded The Absolute Sound mainly to goad Holt to get serious about publishing again. Along the way, Pearson discovered for himself many of the challenges of the publishing business and - in the process - helped usher high-end audio into a new era. |
@paul6002 Your OP sounds like you're hoping we'll all chime in and tell that it's not worth it, because you don't want to set up your room in a way that will optimize the sound reproduction that your gear is capable of. If you go to any decent audio show or good dealer's showroom, almost every room will do a decent or great job of producing imaging. Yes, there's always a best seat or two, but you can usually hear it plenty well in many locations in the room. Perhaps consider bringing your partner along. You'll leave excited or non-plussed. After hearing what so many systems/rooms can reproduce you'll be in a better position to decide if this hobby is for you.
If that's true, you have no idea what most of the posters here listen to daily. You've gotta get out and listen. Reading in isolation and toying in isolation without serious effort to set up your room properly is a recipe for disaster. Cheers, Spencer |
IMO imaging is great when it is dialed in just right. But, I do notice and I don’t like that the mixing done on some recordings is all over the place. The drummer is almost 99% of the time located back center position. This is where I want to hear the drums coming from I do not want the drums moving from right to left and occasionally located in center. I hear some recordings with snare on left and high hat on right. Same with guitar I want the guitar player positioned on stage left to come from left speaker. It’s like the sound “engineer” is trying to give the impression of a studio recording being live snd the musicians are moving about the stage. My question is do they place the drum kit on a wheeled platform? You can do a lot system dependent twerks on imaging but in the end you are at to mercy of the recording. This could be my set up as well as my speakers are set 10 feet apart and if I did have them at 5 to 6 the mix might not be so noticeable wide. I have tried toe in but I still feel it is more recording mix than set up. Enjoy the music. |
Hmm, where to begin? One of the main qualities of "stereo" is to provide a sense of space and placement. Wiki has a pretty decent article about it: So in that regard, imaging is rather important element of stereo else we’d all have one speaker and listening monaurally. It certainly is to me as I’ve kept and and enjoyed my Acoustat 1+1s since new. What they lack in punch and absolute definition they make up for in imaging. Their imaging, granted after LOTS of placement/tuning, always brings a smile to my face. I must say that one thing that helps is closing my eyes. Suddenly a soundstage mentally appears and it’s quite easy to "see" where the performers are. Or, to be more accurate, where the producer/engineer put them in the case of close mic’ed studio recordings. Live recordings are different of course, especially orchestral music. Now does that mean imaging should be as important to you? No, of course not. It sounds to me that you value other components of a musical performance. Tonal qualities like balance and definition. Maybe it’s dynamics. You mentioned that you had toed-in your speakers once and found them too bright. That implies to me that you value finding a tonal balance that is pleasing versus placement/imaging. One of the things I find fun about this hobby is tinkering with speaker placement and hearing the different effects it can have. When you can, spend an afternoon or evening playing with just that. Pick a couple familiar albums and see how different your system will sound by moving your speakers a bit. One thing that somewhat concerns me is you say you have no listening chair. If you aren’t in one spot but up wandering about, you can likely just forget imaging. If you read the article in the link you see why. Anyways, have fun! Happy listening...🎶 |
- 102 posts total