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
People say there is no pinpoint imaging in a big concert hall. But if you were standing at the conductor’s place, you would hear pinpoint imaging and soundstage depth. That’s where the microphones often are too, a bit behind the conductor, above his/her head.
@erik_squires 
filling in the center, an area where traditional 2 channel playback is lacking

A friend once said "It's like Joe Pass is sitting right there." No system I've ever owned or used in the studio had a center hole.

If there is a hole in 2 channel play back, it's improperly set up or the speakers are deficient.

I don't recall the track, but I when I first heard Neo:6, I left the demo. IMO, it's unbearable on music I know and downright annoying on music I don't.


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.

@erik_squires   Can you explain? This statement is a head-scratcher for me at the surface. Thanks. 

[Emphasis on "filling in the center, an area where traditional 2 channel playback is lacking"]
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
@erik_squires   Erik, I'm glad you clarified you were referring to volume vs. a centre image as I thought you meant 'image.'

Off memory (and even as I'm listening right now) this isn't the case (re. volume falling off in the center) BUT I will pay attention to it!!!

Appreciate your response and take on the topic.

As I evaluate, I have an additional question for you and others:

Do differentials in volume guide perception of distance (of the performer) relative to the listening position? Thank you.