Is Sound Stage an artifact of recording?

@tomcarr  Good point and I actually mean both because how do you perceive a sound-stage without images of the players?

@lanx0003 An artifact as I am using it means something created by a process but not necessarily intended. A by-product. It is neither good nor bad

In the case I am talking about the music was all acoustic and the room's qualities were altered by the fact that it was filled with people seated in chairs. That is a lot of objects for sound to bounce off before reaching my ears. No doubt this contributed to the lack of localization. I just think it is interesting to re-consider our systems in light of the kind of music we listen to and also the venues we wish to reproduce. Some years back @ghdprentice  and I had a discussion where I took the position that it might work best if you built a system specific to the kind of music you listened to the most and he said no, a good system was a good system and that was all you needed.  I still maintain that depending on your musical tastes you might be able to build and acoustically excellent system for not very much money if it is tailored to certain types of music. Alternatively you can build a system and room that is breathtakingly good with all music but it will be rather expensive.

An effort to recreate a 'concert hall experience' is a great way to put it. So, whatever it takes. We don't want flat sound, that's for sure, we want it to be three dimensional.

Yes, I don't care much about too sharp imaging, it feels artificial, it's got to be balanced and somewhat diffused.

Ideally, one system for all kinds of music, in reality - no, too expensive, requires very big room and swapping in and out certain components.

My modest system tailored to reproducing vocal and acoustic guitar more or less realistically. Also for ambient and tribal ambient music. It is not bad for jazzrock but not good either. And for big orchestra performance - forget it, can't handle it.

Op ... I still maintain that depending on your musical tastes you might be able to build and acoustically excellent system for not very much money if it is tailored to certain types of music. Alternatively you can build a system and room that is breathtakingly good with all music but it will be rather expensive.

I will step back, listen, and learn what 'audiophiles' are going to say about genre-specific system building and its cost implications—specifically, which fundamental elements in music are required by certain genres but not others, and how these differences translate into cost differentials in room acoustics and audio components.

What a great opportunity to learn in this high-class forum!

Very interesting topic. Listen to mono jazz and classical recordings on “big” system, e.g., Western Electric 12A/13A or Altec VoT placed properly in a good room with proper amplification and it will sound close to live (very difficult to reproduce live dynamic transients). The body loves it, feels real.

Same recordings (good ones) in stereo on same system will give you spooky imagery, soundstage, and precision of spatial presence.  The brain loves it, feels dream like.

I am fortunate to know how these things work, any perceivable sounds take is simply down to Microphone placement and the type of Microphone employed. The worst recording I have heard was a CD of Beethoven's Moonlight Apassionata played by Ashkenazy. The Microphone positions include an Overhead which is so badly proportioned I had to turn it off and in the end took the item away. One of the best I have heard albeit not placement, but it does show what a Mic is capable of is Carl Orff Carmina Burana (Andre Previn). Unbelievable!!! this was in my research using a Zero Heat Class A. So what I have said may not be provided generally speaking.