Pin point imaging isn't for everyone


A subject my posts touch on often is whether pin point imaging is desirable, or natural. While thinking about wide-baffle speakers in another thread I came across this quote, courtesy of Troels Graveson’s DIY speaker site. He quotes famous speaker designer Roy Allison:

I had emphasized dispersion in order to re-create as best as I could the performance-hall ambiance. I don’t want to put up with a sweet spot, and I’d rather have a less dramatically precise imaging with a close simulation of what you hear in a concert hall in terms of envelopment. For that, you need reverberant energy broadcast at very wide angles from the loudspeaker, so the bulk of energy has to do multiple reflections before reaching your ear. I think pin-point imaging has to do with synthetically generated music, not acoustic music - except perhaps for a solo instrument or a solo voice, where you might want fairly sharp localization. For envelopment, you need widespread energy generation.


You can read Troel’s entire post here:

http://www.troelsgravesen.dk/Acapella_WB.htm

This goes, kind of, with my points before, that you can tweak the frequency response of a speaker, and sometimes cables, to get better imaging, but you are going significantly far from neutral to do so. Older Wilson’s were famous, and had a convenient dip around 2.4 kHz.
erik_squires

Showing 12 responses by erik_squires

Hi Everyone,
Lots of very interesting reading going on here and in the related thread. I really want to thank everyone for listening, participating and letting me know your own personal experiences, especially when they aren't like mine!

Also to Tom for reminding me of my own advice!!

I've learned a lot, and it will take me a while to digest it all. :)

I still think Neo6 is pretty cool, as is a center channel in HT, but I also don't think they are make/break items for systems. I keep trying to convince myself to go back to HT and listening to my 2 channel I can't baby, I just can't.


Thanks again, and look forward to even more contributions from all of you.

Best,

Erik
I'm also thinking of early sympohonic recordings which used the 3 microphone approach, which were down mixed to 2 channel stereo.
Duke,

I'm a little curious about when they were aware of it though.

Having had a HT system with and without a center, the benefit of the center was much better than I had expected. I wonder if that's because the HT system at the time didn't do more than a simple split of the center signal?

Best,
E
Duke:
That's very interesting! :) I'll have to cogitate on this for a bit. :)


Thanks so much for the detailed background information.

Best,
Erik
@ieales

I’m going to have to listen for a while, in most recordings they don’t actually move around.

Probably going to have to find some choral works. :)

There is by the way quite a body of work on HRTF and how the phantom center can’t compensate for it, which is related to what I’m discussing, and I think a lot of people will have trouble hearing it if they’ve spent decades listening to 2 channel stereo. You don’t notice it until it’s gone.

Kind of like recording a room of people talking. You listen with headphones on and suddenly the acoustics of the room become glaringly obvious.


But again, please put this along with geek curiosities. I'm not going to bang a drum that we must all do something differently. I'm an apartment dweller living happily with 2-channel for now. I learned all of this while having a HT set up and listening to the difference between a real center speaker and phantom, and listening to music with and without a center. It's curious and interesting, but not worth upending how we enjoy music.

Best,
E
Hi David.

Listen for a while to your 2 channel. Even with very good imaging I notice the following:

Instruments are always louder at the sides than in the center.

A horn playing hard left will get softer when it is in the center. Neo6 seems to really help that, and I never heard anything negative using it.

However, lets be clear, I don’t have a HT processor right now, and I’m not going to sit and bang a drum for it. :D :D

I was just pointing out that even with the best systems, the center instruments seem lower in volume than the sides. Neo6 corrects this and you notice it when it’s gone.

I repeat: This isn't about imaging, it is about relative volume. We're so used to it we don't notice it.

Best,

E
Hi @ieasles,
I also worked in theater sound equipment.

I find your statement a little hard to read.

My experience with Neo6 and classical or Jazz was that it did a really good job of filling in the center, an area where traditional 2 channel playback is lacking, but we are so conditioned to hearing it we don't notice.

Best,
Erik
Speaking of 3 mike recordings, for those of you with a multi-channel setup, I strongly suggest you try the Neo6 music mode if you can. It’s really pretty good.



Point taken, geoff.

I think a lot of that is in the reverb too, so there's something to be said for speakers with rear facing drivers.


Erik
@mapman I only read about it in reviews for $300K speakers and $40K cables.

:D


Erik
I think you missed the point a little, Miller.

How natural is pin point imaging in acoustic music? Roy argued, as do I, that it’s really not.

The second question is whether you want it, and want it more than other features of reproduction.