[Ferbose]

After doing some reading on how recording engineers place microphones and how mastering engineers manipulate depth and spatiality, and reading about Haas effect, and some experimentation of my own, I realize that reproducing ambience maybe the holy grail of music playback, at least for acoustic music.

It seems to me that stereo speakers can never reproduce the actual ambience of a concert hall. Headphones, when playing recordings made for speakers, only make the matter worse. However, binaural recording on headphones appear to be an ideal way of capturing and reproducing ambience information. I would like to hear Rickcr24's take on the subject of binuaral recording...

 

[rickcr42]

Quote:

I would like to hear Rickcr24's take on the subject of binuaral recording...

I have posted extensively on Binaural here (a search should turn up many hits)

My take is Stereo recordings work well for loudspeakers but are not optimal for headphones where the image meant to be left/right forward is now left/right big "hole in the middle" sideways

Binaural recordings can be scary realistic with headphones because they are recorded with a "head/torso" in the equation using omni mics to actually simulate human hearing at the ear but totally unnatural with loudspeakers which are meant to be "open air" reproducers that arrive at the ear.

Obviously the recording labels will never produce dual versions of every release so the binaural recordings non existing when it comes to popular or known music.Headphone use is growing by leaps but still in no way is it competitive with loudspeaker user numbers

 

[Edwood]

Quote:

Originally Posted by Zanth Regarding DVD vs. VHS, it was not the features that grabbed the public's attention, it was the convenience of the format. Smaller, more durable, no rewinding. It was the exact same paradigm shift from casette to cd or vinyl to cd. Convenience and form factor won out. The fact that DVD's have bonus features is well, a bonus! Nothing more. In fact, I know VERY few people that watch bonus features let alone rewatch them. I have more than a few videophiles, collections nearing 5000 dvds, and they simply don't do bonus features. Quality may have been a perceived benefit but it was not a driving factor, particularly given that most tv's don't have the resolution to take full advantage of DVD's. As for SACD and DVD-A, jpelg pegged it. Both factions dropped the ball. EVERY new player, be it DVD or cd player should have been equipped to playback one or both of those formats. Sneak it in, have hybrid discs EVERYWHERE, and then, one day, someone will actually take notice, and perhaps the better sound will be realized but at worst there will be market penetration nearly saturation. This didn't happen, at to their loss. The next format will work well enough because of the massive size differential, but there won't be a full paradigm shift away from an optical disc (particularly RBCD and DVD) until flash-like media is sold in stores and/or media is streamed. The general public is more than content with CD and DVD, as well they should be! Without good equipement, the benefits of the better formats are wasted on them.

You hit the nail on the head.

The reason why MP3's are so popular, is because of convenience and durability. Definitely not because of quality. For the mass consumers, "just enough" is good enough.

While we, as audiophiles, cringe when we hear the terms ,"Near CD quality", in the end, the mass consumers could care less.

Blu-Ray in it's current form will die. Requiring an internet connection to play a disc? They just eliminated a rather large group of consumers. Anything that makes a new format more difficult to use = someone not buying.

Even HD-DVD will not be as successful, even with Intel and Microsoft behind it.

The simple fact is that people will not appreciate the difference enough to rebuy their whole DVD collection. That is alot to ask for in a consumer. I'm not talking early adopters here.

Whichever format wins for High Def video, at best, it will become the next Laser Disc. At worst, it will become what SACD and DVD-A have become now.

Honestly, I hate to even think about it, but when Apple releases a Video iPod, whatever their new Quicktime format is, that would probably be the next gen Video format.

As in the audio format, step foward in convenience, but step backwards in quality.

-Ed

 

[Edwood]

Quote:

Originally Posted by rickcr42 I have posted extensively on Binaural here (a search should turn up many hits) My take is Stereo recordings work well for loudspeakers but are not optimal for headphones where the image meant to be left/right forward is now left/right big "hole in the middle" sideways Binaural recordings can be scary realistic with headphones because they are recorded with a "head/torso" in the equation using omni mics to actually simulate human hearing at the ear but totally unnatural with loudspeakers which are meant to be "open air" reproducers that arrive at the ear. Obviously the recording labels will never produce dual versions of every release so the binaural recordings non existing when it comes to popular or known music.Headphone use is growing by leaps but still in no way is it competitive with loudspeaker user numbers

Oh man. Binaural is amazing when recorded properly. IMO, it is THE true "surround" format for headphones. Some of the silliest implrmentations of surround sound headphones with multiple drivers ignore one fact.

We only have two ears.

Unfortunately, it seems the masses will not want dual formats between listening through speakers and then through headphones.
But I really wished there were dual "discs" in the future, where multichannel audio tracks for speakers, and then two channel binaural for headphones. Of course, that would require a standard in recording, let alone all the hardware manufacturers.

One could dream, right?

-Ed

 

[Gigabomber]

it's the same situation you run into when you run into a person that insists sound quality doesn't really improve with higher bitrates or a better dac - it's all a money placebo and may be controlled via his reciever. Most folks don't have the equipment or the ears to care and have never heard the difference, so why should they be forced to buy superior technology

Beta to VHS, ipod to Iaudio, German pens to pentel, mp3 vs whatever, et cetera.
Heck, I once used a german ice cream scoop that kicked all *** and heightened the overall ice cream experience.
I mean, who really cares anyway ?

 

[Garbz]

Indeed there are many problems with headphones. That said not a lot of speakers image very well either. Ferbose I must say I believe it's perfectly feasable to recreate perfect ambience given the right speaker and the right room. My speakers image extreemly well. Despite a bed, a desk, a computer speaker nearly blocking a speaker, a flat wall on one side and a perfectly flat rear wall the ambience comes through almost perfectly if a bit lopsided. Given the right recording it's possible to get virtual surround sound too.

I think the problem with biuraral recordings is that the head-fi market is even smaller then the hifi market. It makes little economical sense for companies to produce CDs which cater for speakers and for the 0.001% of headphiles in the world

What we need is headphones that have drivers in front of us and a tube going to our ears

 

[HiWire]

All it takes is for a few major pop/rock artists to be released on Hybrid SACD, and their label to market this as a great new feature for listeners. It wouldn't hurt if somebody younger than Neil Young spoke in favor of the high-res discs.

The whole of DualDisc and DVD Audio marketing has become a debacle.

 

[rickcr42]

Quote:

Oh man. Binaural is amazing when recorded properly. IMO, it is THE true "surround" format for headphones. Some of the silliest implrmentations of surround sound headphones with multiple drivers ignore one fact.

It is the only "true" surround period in many ways.

When a speaker surround recording is made the person mixing the disc really has no idea how the room it will be played back in is shaped ,how large it is,if it is reflective or acoustically dead,etc. so can only "approximate" according to what works best in most situations.A comprimise.

Binaural playback is a "known" and will be used with headphones,the type or brand not mattering,and with a big old head in the middle always !
this realxes the "guesswork" part of the recording and gets right to simulating the head/ears/torso and plugging in a set of outwardly directed omnis so this artifiacial person can record sounds the same way humans actually hear sound.

Done right it is startling in the "rightness" of the directional cues that so far in my life i have not heard bettered by any surround sound trickery.

BTW-Real cakewalk to make up a set of binaural mics in an old set of throwaway headphones (the ones that come with portable players),whip up a DIY battery box then plug into any type of portable recorder.Just walking down the street on "record" then playing back later over headphones will scare the crap out of you when you start reacting to events you recorded but seem to be live and right NOW in the realism.

Hint-don't record cabs beeping their horn or close by fast moving traffic unless you have a strong heart or play it back at seriously low levels

 

[Ferbose]

Quote:

Originally Posted by Garbz Indeed there are many problems with headphones. That said not a lot of speakers image very well either. Ferbose I must say I believe it's perfectly feasable to recreate perfect ambience given the right speaker and the right room. My speakers image extreemly well. Despite a bed, a desk, a computer speaker nearly blocking a speaker, a flat wall on one side and a perfectly flat rear wall the ambience comes through almost perfectly if a bit lopsided. Given the right recording it's possible to get virtual surround sound too.

The perfect way to capture ambience: biaural recording played on two speakers in a big anechoic room. This is in fact how acousticians compare the sonic character of acoustic halls.

Next best thing: biaural recording with headphones for playback--much more feasible, but has seen basically zero coomercial support.

Stereo speakers: the engineer is forced to capture on microphone much less ambience than what the real ear would hear, because too much recorded ambience will blur the direct sound. The reason is simple: real ambience comes from different directions from the direct sound, recorded ambience comes from the speakers drivers just like direct sound. The listener's room adds more ambience that is very different from recorded ambience. Hardly a natural way to reproduce ambience, but remains the standard. Remedies: add more speakers to reproduce multichannel recording, or extracted ambience from stereo recording. As Rick has pointed out, these are band-aid measures and will hardly ever become mainstream, and cause a lot of confusion, too.

Headphones: when playing stereo recordings made for speakers, headphones suffer from two big shortcomings: lack of proper pinnae interaction and interaural crossfeed, two most important things in binaural hearing. Headphones are even worse than speakers for reproducing ambience, although they may excel in other apsects. Remedies: crossfeed circuit, angled drivers or something like K1000.

Some people may think ambience is no big deal, until they realize this: in a real concert only about 30% of the sound pressure reaching the ear is direct sound. The rest 70% is all ambience, or more precisely, early reflections and reverberations. Even in minimalistic techniques the microphone captures about 70% direct sound. This means 55% of the sound reaching the ear is not captured by stereo microphones. The reason we don't realize there is so much ambience is mainly due to precedence (Haas) effec--early reflections in the first 60 ms or so is integrated with direct sound in auditory perception. Ever realize violin's timbre is never natural on a speaker or any audio system? The missing ambience is affecting the timbre. Play even the cheapest violin beside your speakers and listen--and be amazed at how stereo speakers are never going to get it right.

I am experimenting on an ambience recovery system for stereo recordings using K1000 and speakers. So far things sound very promising to my ears. I have listened to a $15,000 violin played in my room.

(The speakers are playing simultaneously--the reason speaker sound blends perfectly into K1000 sound is also due to Haas effect just mentioned.)

This is my friend, an amateur composer and player of 5 instruments, with his $15,000 violin. To his musically trained ears, and to mine, the timbre of the recorded Guaneiri violin blends well with his Stradivari-copy violin from 1920's. But the transparency and vibrancy of a real violin sound in a room can't be matched with any playback system, not even close...

 

[Edwood]

Quote:

Originally Posted by rickcr42 It is the only "true" surround period in many ways. When a speaker surround recording is made the person mixing the disc really has no idea how the room it will be played back in is shaped ,how large it is,if it is reflective or acoustically dead,etc. so can only "approximate" according to what works best in most situations.A comprimise. Binaural playback is a "known" and will be used with headphones,the type or brand not mattering,and with a big old head in the middle always ! this realxes the "guesswork" part of the recording and gets right to simulating the head/ears/torso and plugging in a set of outwardly directed omnis so this artifiacial person can record sounds the same way humans actually hear sound. Done right it is startling in the "rightness" of the directional cues that so far in my life i have not heard bettered by any surround sound trickery. BTW-Real cakewalk to make up a set of binaural mics in an old set of throwaway headphones (the ones that come with portable players),whip up a DIY battery box then plug into any type of portable recorder.Just walking down the street on "record" then playing back later over headphones will scare the crap out of you when you start reacting to events you recorded but seem to be live and right NOW in the realism. Hint-don't record cabs beeping their horn or close by fast moving traffic unless you have a strong heart or play it back at seriously low levels

With the proliferation of iPods, (even though we don't count those stock iBuds as "real" headphones) it could be a potential market for binaural recordings with mainstream music. I wonder what the speakers vs. headphones ratio is with iPod users thrown into the mix?

Of course, this would assume the recording industry really cared about the quality of it's recordings, let alone back a different recording format. Even though binaural recording technology is very old, the challenge is to introduce it into a hybrid format where it would work well on both speakers and headphones.

-Ed

 

[rickcr42]

Quote:

Of course, this would assume the recording industry really cared about the quality of it's recordings, let alone back a different recording format. Even though binaural recording technology is very old, the challenge is to introduce it into a hybrid format where it would work well on both speakers and headphones.

considering how long Dolby Headphone has been around yet for some reason not encoded directly to all DVDs for movie playback,common sense to me instead of a software or hardware decoder,I won't be holding my breath.By the time the mainstream catches on to consumer "trends" we have already moved on to the next thing.
Huge and slow moving industries usually means too many thinking instead of taking a chance and axcting.The old "CYA" (cover your a*s

) and let someone else take a chance yet once someone does and it is succsessful they step on each others backs scrambling to be the first one to imitate what sells.That is why the "tiny" market/niche market manufacturers have always served customers better.They see a demand and fill it immediately

 

[maf_au]

Quote:

Originally Posted by Ferbose Stereo speakers: the engineer is forced to capture on microphone much less ambience than what the real ear would hear, because too much recorded ambience will blur the direct sound. The reason is simple: real ambience comes from different directions from the direct sound, recorded ambience comes from the speakers drivers just like direct sound. The listener's room adds more ambience that is very different from recorded ambience. Hardly a natural way to reproduce ambience, but remains the standard. Remedies: add more speakers to reproduce multichannel recording, or extracted ambience from stereo recording. As Rick has pointed out, these are band-aid measures and will hardly ever become mainstream, and cause a lot of confusion, too.

Taking a theoretical approach to this problem is one path to madness...

If the goal is to reproduce the exact acoustic and ambience of a live performance, then recording it (even perfectly) is an abomination. It implies that there is a perfect performance, ambience and acoustic, which arguably do not exist. There are too many variables. Of course, once this recording is replayed, large parts of the acoustic and ambience are lost or distorted via the mixing desk and/or users equipment and room.

The best pathway we have to satisfactory reproduction of musical performance is via the best available recordings and the best sounding equipment, set up to the best of our ability in a reasonable room (if our reproduction involves speakers).

We do this because our desire to surround ourselves with music exceeds the accessibility and practicality of live music, but I doubt (m)any of us consider what we experience at home as superior to our live musical experiences.

We need to be clear about what we are trying to achieve with our home equipment. Albert Hall is not realistic in a living room, but we can have a reasonably convincing and enjoyable reproduction of our favorite music with relatively little effort.

Personally, I find that a few closely miked acoustic instruments and voice are hard to beat on a good system. Never really had much joy with massed instruments or anything heavily amplified, even though the rendition can still be enjoyable.

Michael

 

[rickcr42]

Quote:

We need to be clear about what we are trying to achieve with our home equipment. Albert Hall is not realistic in a living room,

That is just not true.It has been demonstrated over and over for thirty years or better than it can be done realistically.That any space can be recreated once you get past the visual cues your brain sends out telling you "you are NOT in a bigger space".

It just is not done because there is no consumer demand for it

 

[maf_au]

Quote:

Originally Posted by rickcr42 That is just not true.It has been demonstrated over and over for thirty years or better than it can be done realistically.That any space can be recreated once you get past the visual cues your brain sends out telling you "you are NOT in a bigger space". It just is not done because there is no consumer demand for it

Define realistic.

Explain how this can be done in any reasonable way in a domestic building where there is no uniformity to room sizes, materials or furnishings.

Consumers will never demand something they don't know about, but if they find something that scratches their itch, you have a market.

30 years... 1975. You're not talking about quadrophonic are you?

 

[rickcr42]

Quote:

Define realistic.

recreating the actual time and space of the event in a tonally accurate manner

Quote:

Explain how this can be done in any reasonable way in a domestic building where there is no uniformity to room sizes, materials or furnishings.

you can do a search here where I have extensively posted on the topic includng this thread .Not real hard but does mean additional channels at both ends of the recording to do it right

Quote:

Consumers will never demand something they don't know about, but if they find something that scratches their itch, you have a market.

Not in a world where most are happy with 128 bps MP3 recordings.Lowest common denominator rules the day and WE are not it.

Quote:

30 years... 1975. You're not talking about quadrophonic are you?

Nope.

But Quad IS part of the overall pool of knowledge and in fact the very base of modern day surround sound which is no more than :

1-3-CH Theater Sound of the thirties combined with
2-the quad matrix of the seventies and
3-the rear channel time delay experiments of the eighties
4-reintroduced for movies and not music