Walk-in soundstage

 @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 tried to paraphrase the host's description on ESL 57.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=reF1l84UdbM&t=1427s

"The music feels completely detached from the speakers and floats in the middle. Unfortunately, the soundstage isn’t extremely wide, and when I tried placing the speakers farther apart, something changed — I had to adjust my listening position to recapture the effect. In the end, I decided not to overdo it. This is why some people stack them to increase sound pressure, allowing for a slightly wider placement. As it stands, the presentation is a bit compressed toward the center, but what’s there is absolutely incredible. You wouldn’t believe it until you try." 

When I added DSP, but not with every recording 

@helomech  Yes, a walk-in soundstage is indeed >/= 90% room and speakers. The majority of the remaining 10% or so is the amplification. I’ve heard enough $60K+ digital front ends paired with six figure speakers in enough rooms to know that the front end accounts for nearly zero of the effect, because many of those systems failed to produce said effect. Money ≠ equal performance when it comes to digital components.

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:

1. “Zulu Voodoo” – Kalya Scintilla, Illusions

2. “Flamenco’s On Fire” – Kalya Scintilla, Illusions

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.

It all matters. You have to have a source that can reproduce the spatial cues inherent in the recording, amplification that maintains or perhaps enhances the effect, speakers that do not diffract or otherwise distort the wave and a room that minimizes spurious reflections. 

Works for me.