[71 dB]

Maybe you overlooked it but @bigshot - although it took some convincing and some time - seems to have accepted that with proper personal hrtf based binaural audio signals it is possible to have a realistic out-of-head experience, and speaker-like soundstage with headphones. But you are right that he can be a bit stubborn sometimes .

Maybe I was too harsh here and he can actually change his position. For me a well-executed stereo recording with good spatial information + cross-feed at proper level is enough to have realistic out-of-head experience, but it is not speaker-like soundstage, but a miniature soundstage.

I think for me the absence of excessive spatiality is more important than how realistic or correct the spatiality actually is. My spatial hearing wants the spatial cues to be within the range of accepted values and if this is satisfied, it doesn't matter how correct or incorrect the values actually are. As simple as default crossfeed-feed is it maps wild spatial cues within limited range making them more acceptable for my spatial hearing. This is probably the explanation why cross-feed works so well for me.

 

[chesebert]

I'm s relative newbie to hifi. Main music interest is classical. (Listen mainly to Flacs via usb to denefrips ares 2 to schiit asgaard to lcd2 or 6xx)
Question: when using speakers, both ears hear the sound from each speaker, but with a delay. Of course, this doesn't happen with headphones, unless one utilizes dsp of some sort on the player to mimic this effect. (As a newbie, im not certain what that type of dsp is called, but I'm pretty sure it exists in some of the players). I try to listen bit perfect. But what I'm wondering is, if most classical recordings were mastered using monitor speakers in listening rooms, then is listening through headphones never going to replicate what the engineers wanted it to sound like, unless I use dsp to mimic that effect? In other words, by listening through headphones without dsp, am I by definition NOT going to get a realistic image of the music?

If you can afford a good speaker setup use speakers rather than headphones. The different is stark with complex acoustically recorded music and headphone falls behind in all aspects regardless of price.

 

[bigshot]

What cheesebert said. Unless you’ve got something like a Smyth Realiser. Soundstage requires distance. Headstage is what headphones produce. It’s inside your head and doesn’t involve distance.

 

[chesebert]

Head stage is around your head (and not inside our head) and the head stage can get pretty far out but it is NOT soundstage. Head stage is not how the recording was intended to be heard by the artist/mastering engineer.

 

[bigshot]

Soundstage is a clear physical distance in front of you. Around your head, inside your head, that’s all the same. It isn’t like sitting in an audience with the performers on stage in front of you.

Secondary depth cues baked into a mix can never be the same as physical distance.

 

[chesebert]

Right; I think we are saying the same thing then.

 

[bigshot]

The size of soundstage depends on the dimensions of the triangle between speakers and listener. The further apart the distances get, the larger the soundstage. Nearfield monitors create a tiny soundstage. A system with a center channel can widen the distance to 16 feet between the mains and create a soundstage that is human scale. The size of the soundstage is directly related to distances.

 

[JefferyK]

To me, a recording that illustrates the difference between speaker soundstage and headphone presentation is the Karajan "Aida" on Decca/London with Tebaldi and Bergonzi, produced by John Culshaw. There is a crowd scene in Act I. With properly set up speakers--the "triangle" Big Shot described--you will "see" the singers in front of you, lined up, left to right, front to back. Aida/Tebaldi is at the far back; when she starts "Ritornia vincintor," you will be able to "see" her move to the front of the stage as she sings. You don't get much if any of this movement on headphones or poorly set up speakers, which is why you see so many reviews of this recording complain that the singers are too far back to be heard--the reviewers are listening to it on systems that don't reproduce the soundstage. It is difficult to describe what a visual soundstage is if you haven't experienced one, and you haven't experienced one if you don't have a proper speaker setup or a recording that utilizes a soundstage (like Big Shot said, not all do--I mean, there are Deutsche Grammophon multi-miked recordings that present a ton of detail but will never create an orchestra in front of you, e.g., the Bohm Beethoven symphonies cycle from the late 1960s/early 1970s). Proper speaker set up requires space, power, and no neighbors. Since I live in an apartment in an urban environment, I choose headphones. My two cents.

 

[bigshot]

Culshaw was a genius at creating a vivid soundstage.

 

[chesebert]

To me, a recording that illustrates the difference between speaker soundstage and headphone presentation is the Karajan "Aida" on Decca/London with Tebaldi and Bergonzi, produced by John Culshaw. There is a crowd scene in Act I. With properly set up speakers--the "triangle" Big Shot described--you will "see" the singers in front of you, lined up, left to right, front to back. Aida/Tebaldi is at the far back; when she starts "Ritornia vincintor," you will be able to "see" her move to the front of the stage as she sings. You don't get much if any of this movement on headphones or poorly set up speakers, which is why you see so many reviews of this recording complain that the singers are too far back to be heard--the reviewers are listening to it on systems that don't reproduce the soundstage. It is difficult to describe what a visual soundstage is if you haven't experienced one, and you haven't experienced one if you don't have a proper speaker setup or a recording that utilizes a soundstage (like Big Shot said, not all do--I mean, there are Deutsche Grammophon multi-miked recordings that present a ton of detail but will never create an orchestra in front of you, e.g., the Bohm Beethoven symphonies cycle from the late 1960s/early 1970s). Proper speaker set up requires space, power, and no neighbors. Since I live in an apartment in an urban environment, I choose headphones. My two cents.

That soundstage "magic" only happens when you have a big place that's not weirdly shaped and without any reflective stuff around (e.g., like windows). I have only heard such soundstage a handful of times and it's absolutely magic when it happens. It's actually very weird feeling when you first hear it because the soundstage is actually behind the speakers and not in front.

 

[bigshot]

It’s a blend of primary and secondary depth cues. 5.1 and Atmos is even better. Home theater embraced speakers more than home audio has. There are a lot of really good home theater installations that work great for multichannel music too.

 

[chesebert]

It’s a blend of primary and secondary depth cues. 5.1 and Atmos is even better. Home theater embraced speakers more than home audio has. There are a lot of really good home theater installations that work great for multichannel music too.

I am skeptical that Atmos can make 2ch sound like having an actual soundstage in a non-ideal room. My mind can be changed obviously but I will believe it when I hear it.

 

[bigshot]

I didn't mean upmixing. I meant native recordings in Atmos and 5.1. There are a lot of them. They not only have the forward soundstage that is perfectly presented because of the center channel, but the fronts link with the rears and overheads to place objects in the room. There is a place in the 5.1 mix of Sgt Pepper where the Beatles are playing in a natural spread across the front of the room, while a fox hunt crosses from front right to rear left. And a guitar solo on a 5.1 Elton John album where the piano and vocals are placed front to the left and a guitar solo starts in the front center speaker and pushes out into the middle of the room. This takes soundstage to the next level... a sound field.

There are 5.1 DSPs that maintain the stereo soundstage up front, channeling the phantom center to the center speaker and then a natural room acoustic in the rear. That actually does improve stereo soundstage. It doesn't take it to the level of multichannel, but it definitely makes Culshaw operas even more vivid.

Nothing sounds good in a bad room. The room is half the sound in a speaker system.

 

[chesebert]

I didn't mean upmixing. I meant native recordings in Atmos and 5.1. There are a lot of them. They not only have the forward soundstage that is perfectly presented because of the center channel, but the fronts link with the rears and overheads to place objects in the room. There is a place in the 5.1 mix of Sgt Pepper where the Beatles are playing in a natural spread across the front of the room, while a fox hunt crosses from front right to rear left. And a guitar solo on a 5.1 Elton John album where the piano and vocals are placed front to the left and a guitar solo starts in the front center speaker and pushes out into the middle of the room. This takes soundstage to the next level... a sound field.

There are 5.1 DSPs that maintain the stereo soundstage up front, channeling the phantom center to the center speaker and then a natural room acoustic in the rear. That actually does improve stereo soundstage. It doesn't take it to the level of multichannel, but it definitely makes Culshaw operas even more vivid.

Nothing sounds good in a bad room. The room is half the sound in a speaker system.

Okay, I understand now. I don't think I will like Atmos for music. The soundstage magic happens behind the speakers and extend forever behind and around you - like you are there. The Atmos experience you are describing is bring the event to your room.

It's really hard to explain, you better experience it yourself.

 

[bigshot]

Atmos is good for filling in a room. It can be hard to get the fronts and rears to mesh into a phantom middle. Atmos solves that problem. It also improves the forward/rear depth. It isn't just about putting something over your head, any more than stereo is about placing everything on the left or right.

I don't have an Atmos system myself, but I'm told it takes 5.1 up a notch in the precision of placement of sound sources. The 5.1 fold down from Atmos can sound incredible.