Head-Fi.org › Forums › Equipment Forums › Sound Science › Virtual Stage
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

Virtual Stage - Page 3

post #31 of 69
Quote:
Originally Posted by Shike View Post

 

In all fairness, if someone is close to the generic HRTF that Dolby uses DH can offer a relatively impressive option for the price.  With DH it sounds like my headphones are actually 5.1 speakers themselves.  It's not of Realizer quality in that it is not a perfect match for my HRTF, can't mimic listening rooms/systems, and can't track my head.  However, for gaming and movie purposes with my HRTF, it's a stretch calling it "crapola".  Of course, I think the hardware based solutions are better than the software DSP versions I've tried.

 

For the cost it can be an interesting solution, as long as one realizes their mileage may vary - for those that twitch at $3K it may be at least worth trying.

The headphone might also play an important role. I have the Silent Cinema deal with my Yamaha receiver and with my good ol HD202's it didn't work very well. I think I got much better results with my KSC75s. Will give may HD558 a try...

post #32 of 69

I don't want to come off here as arrogant or elitist here but after reading this thread I must point out a couple points not mentioned.

 

I have purchased a Hughs Aircraft SRS Sound Retrieval System box , experimented with a large array of DSPs and at the end of the day I really feel a lot of DSPs somehow degrade the sound quality.  

 

I guess I now would call myself a purest of sorts. I really look at this process in a much more simple way now. 

 

1) Start with headphones which have an natural exceptional sound/head stage on their own. Take for example the AKG K701s, which now can be purchased for a little over $150.00 used now days.

It is much more easy to get sound-stage with just the qualities of the headphone before trying to signal in a style of reverb into non-sound-stage headphones.

 

2) Vinyl has a better sound-stage than CDs. 

 

3) Cables both interconnects and power-cables have changed my personal sound-stage more than any one factor.

 

Instead of trying to gold plate a turd.............................start at the beginning.

post #33 of 69
Quote:
Originally Posted by Redcarmoose View Post

 

1) Start with headphones which have an natural exceptional sound/head stage on their own. Take for example the AKG K701s, which now can be purchased for a little over $150.00 used now days.

It is much more easy to get sound-stage with just the qualities of the headphone before trying to signal in a style of reverb into non-sound-stage headphones.

 

This isn't going to work with what we're discussing for all intents and purposes.  You're not going to get surround sound just based on picking a headphone, equally sound stage in regards to headphones is laughable at best (coming from a K702 owner).

 

 

Quote:
2) Vinyl has a better sound-stage than CDs.

 

I doubt it, vinyl has substantially higher crosstalk which will crush L/R imaging.

 

 

Quote:
3) Cables both interconnects and power-cables have changed my personal sound-stage more than any one factor.

 

And snake oil.

post #34 of 69
Quote:
Originally Posted by ultrabike View Post

The headphone might also play an important role. I have the Silent Cinema deal with my Yamaha receiver and with my good ol HD202's it didn't work very well. I think I got much better results with my KSC75s. Will give may HD558 a try...

 

Headphones definitely play a role.  From what I understand Dolby depends on headphones to be as flat as possible in relation to a DF based FR - not sure what Yamaha's DSP expects.  This is another advantage of the Realizer I guess, in that it can calibrate to the ear and headphones as a system.

 

I've had great luck with:
 

ATH-AD700

AKG K601/K702

ATH-M40FS

 

I've had bad luck with:

 

Pioneer Monitor 10's

Various IEMs (seems obvious why)

 

Haven't tried:

 

Senny 428S

Grado SR60

Philips Downtown

post #35 of 69
Quote:
Originally Posted by Shike View Post

 

Headphones definitely play a role.  From what I understand Dolby depends on headphones to be as flat as possible in relation to a DF based FR - not sure what Yamaha's DSP expects.  This is another advantage of the Realizer I guess, in that it can calibrate to the ear and headphones as a system.

 

 

 

 

I heard some very good sound stage at a meet with the K1000s out of a tube amp. It was nice but I was also looking for other qualities. Purely sound-stage alone I have also heard with the Stax line also.

 

 

400

 

I may be jaded from attempting a ton of DSP systems. There are really a lot to try in computer audio! I just found that better quality gave me sound-stage in a more old fashioned way.

 

I did have a great Yamaha Silent Cinema amp with headphone out. Yamaha DSPs are great making less than adequate amp/speaker systems sound good. Bad at headphones. Again here we have crappy digital adding the gold paint it seems.

post #36 of 69
Quote:
Originally Posted by Redcarmoose View Post

 

 

I heard some very good sound stage at a meet with the K1000s out of a tube amp. It was nice but I was also looking for other qualities. Purely sound-stage alone I have also heard with the Stax line also.

 

 

400

 

I may be jaded from attempting a ton of DSP systems. There are really a lot to try in computer audio! I just found that better quality gave me sound-stage in a more old fashioned way.

 

I did have a great Yamaha Silent Cinema amp with headphone out. Yamaha DSPs are great making less than adequate amp/speaker systems sound good. Bad at headphones. Again here we have crappy digital adding the gold paint it seems.

 

There's no such thing as a "great" Yamaha silent cinema receiver IMO.  As for their headphone technology, I haven't heard it but in discussions it tends to get bagged a lot compared to DH.  And both of them are no where near the quality of a Smyth Realizer - which is why I only use DH for games/movies.  Of course, I have other computer based stuff for simple stereo HRTF like various VST's from Toneboosters.

 

If Yamaha's solution is the most recent that comes to mind then you have been out of the picture too long, IMO, to adequately gauge the current quality of DSPs out there.

post #37 of 69

Never heard of the Hughes SRS box until now: http://www.ebay.com/itm/HUGHES-SRS-3D-SOUND-RETRIEVAL-SYSTEM-MODEL-AK-100-w-MANUALS-/321017517986?pt=US_Signal_Processors_Rack_Effects&hash=item4abe2297a2

 

It seems the technology may be available in some HDTV as SRS. From the little I've read about it so far, it does not work like DTS Neo 6 or Dolby Pro Logic, which extract several channels out of stereo matrix. I don't know for certain, but it may not even attempt to do so.

 

The SRS box seems to works with a stereo signals. In this regard, it seems to strongly differs from the Realizer, as the Realizer processes the decoded 5.1 and 7.1 independent channels. They are similar in the sense that they both seem to apply HRTFs to give a 3D surround sound presentation (what some seem to refer to as an "audio spatializer".)

 

Furthermore, it seems the SRS box works with speakers which may have a harder time with room interactions than headphones. Dunno if the SRS box can be calibrated the way the Realizer can. 

 

TBH I haven't heard the two boxes in action, but would be nice to give them a try. Most people that have tried the Realizer seem to like it...

 

Of course, I wished movies had a binaural track for headphones.


Edited by ultrabike - 11/4/12 at 9:50pm
post #38 of 69

Yes, I may have been out of the picture too long. I had an interest in what it could do and there was really an amazing era in the late 1990s when programable digital DSP chips first became widely implemented. It really did seem like they could do anything. I did my testing and research and it was fun. I would love to hear what improvements have taken place in today's arena.

 

I guess you could say I gave-up on the quest. Still though the new real-time programable cross-overs seem to be a cool way to adjust to room reflection effects with speakers. But is far as headphone systems go, I'm pretty happy with the path I ended up with.

 

 Everyone has their own way of hearing the way music is processed. It may be true that a lot of music recording and mixing is putting spacial allocations into the music itself which end up giving it improved sound-stage in the CDs you buy. So why not enable the technology to help create an improved sound-stage in playback mode?

 

The genius at Hughs Aircraft who invented the Sound Retrieval System was able to put together an analogue filter box that you could buy. At the time only the Europeans  had interest in implementing the SRS program in their TVs. It was really a very unheard of process in the audiophile community. With this box you could actually have speakers in front of you but hear the sound as if the speakers were on the side of you. I state this here as I have heard it work first hand with speakers, it seems it could be done in reverse on headphones?

 

SRS created a larger sound stage for stereos. It also worked in reverse to as if you made a recording you could record a stereo track mixed though the box and on playback only those stereo tracks would be heard from the side of the sound field. The rest of the song was heard in the normal stereo field.


Edited by Redcarmoose - 11/4/12 at 10:26pm
post #39 of 69

I'm also one of the first people here who would like to see a headphone system that could really do an amazing 5.1 replay. I would also really like to see hardware or software combined with a headphone system or not which could improve sound-stage dramatically either though DSP or multiple headphone speakers.

 

My only original reason for chiming in on this thread was to suggest my personal discovery into the fact that every piece of the headphone complete rig, has an indicator as to sound-stage, thus results come from the amp, the cables, the source including the music used and headphones maybe the most important factor. I started with a DSP rout then changed gears. That was my experience into the quest for sound-stage. 

 

It may be super source dependent too. A movie or classical music could be implemented into a great spacial display but it may not have the desired PRaT for rock or metal. That was the issue for me anyway. There is maybe always a give and take. I may be wrong but I still look at all spacial and EQ as a form of delay. The effect of these delays seem to get me farther from what sound I was looking for regardless of sound-stage.


Edited by Redcarmoose - 11/4/12 at 10:30pm
post #40 of 69
Quote:
Originally Posted by Shike View Post

 

In all fairness, if someone is close to the generic HRTF that Dolby uses DH can offer a relatively impressive option for the price.  With DH it sounds like my headphones are actually 5.1 speakers themselves.  It's not of Realizer quality in that it is not a perfect match for my HRTF, can't mimic listening rooms/systems, and can't track my head.  However, for gaming and movie purposes with my HRTF, it's a stretch calling it "crapola".  Of course, I think the hardware based solutions are better than the software DSP versions I've tried.

 

For the cost it can be an interesting solution, as long as one realizes their mileage may vary - for those that twitch at $3K it may be at least worth trying.

 

No disagreement there. You have lots of cheap/free options that may or may not work to some degree. DSpeaker HeadSpeaker (~400€) actually has many dozens of HRTF profiles to choose from, so that could be your best bet (although it has some shortcomings - iffy internal amp and not even a line-out for the price??).

 

But unless you've tried Realiser to it's full potential, you won't know what you are missing.

 

Waiting for the day someone just sold "Realiser" software and mics and you would use your laptop to do the measurements..

post #41 of 69
Quote:
Originally Posted by hekeli View Post

 

No disagreement there. You have lots of cheap/free options that may or may not work to some degree. DSpeaker HeadSpeaker (~400€) actually has many dozens of HRTF profiles to choose from, so that could be your best bet (although it has some shortcomings - iffy internal amp and not even a line-out for the price??).

 

But unless you've tried Realiser to it's full potential, you won't know what you are missing.

 

Waiting for the day someone just sold "Realiser" software and mics and you would use your laptop to do the measurements..

 

True enough.  Still, the majority of people I've had try DH have freaked out.  I took it to a LAN party and a few "special" tracks with things mixed into the back channels.  Running them from DDL into the SU-DH1 produced interesting reactions from everyone that tried it.  Shame I lost my tracks though before I made a full backup :(

post #42 of 69

Actually it's a shame that there is lots of data and talk about HRTF, but no one has come up yet with even a remotely ready "software package" for novices? Atleast I haven't stumbled into one yet. People have talked about simulating speakers even ten years ago on hydrogenaudio and other forums, foobar has many convolver plugins etc..

 

Apparently you can get many cheap in-ear mics, so who's able to make us a simple measuring and playback guide? Ffdshow has HRTF plugin also, but I guess no one has made it so you can replace the profile with your own. I assume it would be simple to make the headphone correction measurement also.

 

Still, it would be probably hard to get the same results as Realiser, since everything seems to be extremely well thought out with the custom made mics and pages of optimization routines to get perfect results..


Edited by hekeli - 11/4/12 at 11:25pm
post #43 of 69
Quote:
Originally Posted by Shike View Post

If Yamaha's solution is the most recent that comes to mind then you have been out of the picture too long, IMO, to adequately gauge the current quality of DSPs out there.

Yamaha's DSPs are great for 5:1 speaker systems.
post #44 of 69
Quote:
Originally Posted by Redcarmoose View Post

My only original reason for chiming in on this thread was to suggest my personal discovery into the fact that every piece of the headphone complete rig, has an indicator as to sound-stage, thus results come from the amp, the cables, the source including the music used and headphones maybe the most important factor.

I haven't found any of that to be a factor. The main things I've found that affect soundstage are 1) the miking and mix of the recording and 2) speaker placement. I've never heard headphones have any sort of real soundstage at all, but this simulation technology is very interesting. I'd be interested in it if I wasn't so fine wth my speakers.
post #45 of 69
Quote:
Originally Posted by bigshot View Post

I've never heard headphones have any sort of real soundstage at all...

That's because you don't use the right cables wink.gif.

 

I'm with Redcarmoose on this one. When ALL the parts of of a headphone rig are singing together, the "headstage" can be magical. Very different to speakers of course, but in their own way, just as musically satisfying - to the point I can't be bothered to go back to all the faffing around with speaker placement, hot seats, room resonances etc - even though I have the opportunity to do so. And in the past I've lived with speakers longer than I've lived with headphones, so I don't think I'm being unfairly biased here.

 

The only times that speakers still win out for me is on large orchestral works and hard panned early stereo recordings.

 

I'd still like to demo a Realiser though - if only they were more available in the UK.

New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:
  Return Home
  Back to Forum: Sound Science
Head-Fi.org › Forums › Equipment Forums › Sound Science › Virtual Stage