bigshot
Headphoneus Supremus
Speakers just sound better than headphones, that's all. If you absolutely have to use headphones, do whatever you have to.
"You have no idea" means you have no scientific and statistical data to support your claim. You don't.1. I have some idea. If I hadn't I wouldn't be making claims here. Education/knowledge of spatial hearing + listening experiences give me an idea, just not verified scientifically. I have mentioned I have low self-esteem which means I keep my mouth shut about things I know/feel I don't know much. This is something I am very confident about so I make claims online.
That is impossible.2. Under any conditions and with any material/mix.
Audio science makes little sense if we keep insisting subjectivity. We should try to find objective truth. Having "larger than HRTF" ILD/ITD as your artistic intent is kind of a bad intent, because you can't have "larger than HRTF" values with speakers, only with headphones. So you are doing something that will sound "against your intent" on speakers. Such productions should have a sticker on them saying "For headphones only. Don't use crossfeed." The only recordings with such stickers are binaural recordings and they are especially free of any "larger than HRTF" values for ILD and ITD. Another point is that large ILD is related to sounds very near head/other ear and causes an annoying feeling so that we know to use our hands to swipe the damn bee before it flies into the ear canal! Smaller ILD is more comfortable to listen to.
So because your cross-feeder has an "OFF" setting, you can set it to "OFF" and still claim to use cross-feed?1. It's not "fail", because OFF is one of the crossfeed levels for situations when excessive channel difference doesn't exist such as binaural recordings.
Well, you're the only one claiming that figure, pretty much everyone else here claims something else. So I guess, it's been disputed, and adequately.2. The 2 % is not an indisputable fact. It is what seems to agree with my listening experiences.
3a. Thank you. I hope it stays that way, but confidence is low...3a. I take back the idiot part. 3b. I don't know why I ever wrote that! I still feel ignorance might play a part for some people.
You probably ruined Roach's intent completely using cross-feed. I'm well acquainted with Roach, from "Structures From Silence" (1984) on. Roach's work is "Space Music", which is based on a highly immersive, super-real experience (think of the vastness of space, only with actual sound). I've listened to some of that same recording with and without cross-feed. My opinion is that it's a perfect example of when not to use cross-feed. In fact, on speakers, a 5.1 or greater upmix would be great, as would acoustic crosstalk cancellation, if you had a system that worked.I listened to Steve Roach's 'Kiva" last night on Spotify with headphones. I used wide crossfeeder and the sound image was very immersive, almost binaural.
You probably ruined Roach's intent completely using cross-feed. I'm well acquainted with Roach, from "Structures From Silence" (1984) on. Roach's work is "Space Music", which is based on a highly immersive, super-real experience (think of the vastness of space, only with actual sound). I've listened to some of that same recording with and without cross-feed. My opinion is that it's a perfect example of when not to use cross-feed. In fact, on speakers, a 5.1 or greater upmix would be great, as would acoustic crosstalk cancellation, if you had a system that worked.
edit: This genre, the development of which hinged on the advent of non-artificial sounding digital reverb devices (Lexicon 224, etc.) that made artificial hyper reverberant sound fields practical, is rooted in hyper-dimensional, hyper-reality, and spaciousness that exceedes the bounds of physical acoustics. Prior to these tools, you had a handball court-sized physical reverb chamber, an huge EMT plate, or various less-applicable attempts at reverb using springs. None had infinitely variable decay, pre-delay, or reflection response shaping. That device, the digital reverb, made the Space Music genre bloom. They'd have done 5.1 or Atmos if it was accessible then, but many of these guys didn't make a living with their music, so the arrival of even the most basic tools like reverbs gave them a dimensional palette that was essential to their art form.
Cross-feed collapses their hyper-dimensional sound field, and kills the art.
You've missed the point entirely. The intent is hyper-dimensionality.I just love to ruin artist's intents!
Seriously, I disagree with what you say. Digital reverbs generate artificial reverberation, but it's not hyper-dimensional or hyper-reality! Nor does listeners have hyper-ears to listen such sounds even if they existed. Roach's "Kiva" took me to a soundworld of exceptional realism WITH crossfeed and you call that ruining intent. Well, in that case ruining intents really is my thing!
What happens on speakers...happens on speakers. His intent is realized to the extent it can be. On headphones without cross-feed, even more intent realized. If you reduce that, you've missed the point of the music.What happens to Roach's intent with speakers? Room acoustics get's added, HRTF reduces ILD/ITD and you are worried about my crossfeed?
I agree with that.It is frustrating to see how after hundreds of messages on here it seems people still have misconceptions about crossfeed.
You can't because you don't!I really don't know how to make people understand these things...
Yes, but which does the listener like, and which conveys the creator's intent better? You can't seem to grasp that.Speakers: Rooms acoustics gets added. HRTF. Reduced ILD/ITD.
Headphones: No room acoustics. No HRTF. ILD/ITD as they are.
Headphones with crossfeed: No room acoustics. No HRTF. Reduced ILD/ITD.
Actually missed it yet again! Let me give you an example: In my opinion, cross-feed can, sometimes, be used to reduce extreme separation to a subjective improvement, it usually reduces separation that flattens perspective and removes dimensionality, which is not a subjective improvement.On what logic speakers and heaphones without crossfeed are cool, but headphones + crossfeed "ruin" intent? The only logic is that speakers and headphones are the "default" and crossfeed is something extra.
I think the irony of the above is apparent to all. No doubt you want to make cross-feed "default" for the entire world. I have no issue with you listening to cross-feed and enjoying it. Making it mandatory for the world? Not going to fly.That's narrow-mindness and I want to make crossfeed "default."
You've missed the point entirely. The intent is hyper-dimensionality.
1. That's an honest answer. I give you that.1. What happens on speakers...happens on speakers. His intent is realized to the extent it can be.
2. On headphones without cross-feed, even more intent realized.
If you reduce that, you've missed the point of the music.
See what I mean? I even told you what the point was, you still don't get it.What's that? I'm educated only on three-dimensional reality-based acoustics…
…maybe you are begining to realize you aren't so strong in this* bedate you have believed. It's ok, I have thought about crossfeed a lot the last 5-6 years.
Uncalled for. Everyone reading this thread knows your opinion of me. Knock it off.* On many other things your knowledge can be superior to my knowledge, but crossfeed doesn't seem to be one of them.
Yes, I'm 1000% positive. No, he doesn't, and that's NOT the point!1. That's an honest answer. I give you that.
2. Are you sure? Does Steve Roach make music mainly for headphones? Hard to believe.
[1] Audio science makes little sense if we keep insisting subjectivity. [2] We should try to find objective truth.[3] Having "larger than HRTF" ILD/ITD as your artistic intent is kind of a bad intent, because [3a] you can't have "larger than HRTF" values with speakers, only with headphones. [3b] So you are doing something that will sound "against your intent" on speakers.
[4] Another point is that large ILD is related to sounds very near head/other ear and causes an annoying feeling so that we know to use our hands to swipe the damn bee before it flies into the ear canal! [4a] Smaller ILD is more comfortable to listen to.
[1] Seriously, I disagree with what you say. [2] Digital reverbs generate artificial reverberation, but it's not hyper-dimensional or hyper-reality! [2a] Nor does listeners have hyper-ears to listen such sounds even if they existed. [3] Roach's "Kiva" took me to a soundworld of exceptional reality WITH crossfeed and you call that ruining intent. [3a] Well, in that case ruining intents really is my thing!
What's that? I'm educated only on three-dimensional reality-based acoustics… [2] …maybe you are begining to realize you aren't so strong in this* bedate you have believed. [3] It's ok, I have thought about crossfeed a lot the last 5-6 years.
Yes, but which does the listener like, and which conveys the creator's intent better? You can't seem to grasp that.
Actually missed it yet again! Let me give you an example: In my opinion, cross-feed can, sometimes, be used to reduce extreme separation to a subjective improvement, it usually reduces separation that flattens perspective and removes dimensionality, which is not a subjective improvement.
I think the irony of the above is apparent to all. No doubt you want to make cross-feed "default" for the entire world. I have no issue with you listening to cross-feed and enjoying it. Making it mandatory for the world? Not going to fly.
You keep thinking you have something to "teach". I, for one, have learned it, absorbed, it, understand it AND disagree with the application of cross-feed. "Teaching" isn't the same as "convincing". Even teaching usually requires proof. You have no proof, you have preference only, but think of it as proof.
You know what else is OK? Go ahead and make it YOUR default! You've made your choice, stop deriding others for their choices. You aren't "right", you've just chosen differently. You can't justify your rightness because you have no statistics for the general preference of cross-feed. The math may seem definitive, but it's far too basic to be. As a result, the effect is subjective. You keep trying to justify your position by stating the math, the logic. You ignore perception (which I suggested a few posts back), and that's your blind spot. You've got some of the mechanics down, and have ignored the perception part completely. And because of that, you can't understand the intent of music, or the way its mixed. Instead, you apply YOUR intent, as a dominant superior purpose, and in the view that even the creator is wrong. And you apply YOUR intent to everyone else in the universe.
Cross-feed: You love it, I don't. Some others like it, some other's don't. Some don't care. You have not proven which is in the majority. And that's just considering your basic form of cross-feed, there are many others.
What I don't get is, why the fight? What is there for you to win? You're not selling anything, you have nothing to gain or loose regardless of how many people love, hate, or don't care about cross-feed. If Greg and I suddenly came over to your side would the world be a better place? We're two guys! What about everyone else, including all the other professionals that agree with our position? Would you then need to win them over too? The way to win over professionals is by publishing a paper that details the discovery, and validates it with testing, and subjecting that paper to peer review. Not going to do that? Then you have no hope of winning the argument!
What's to gain by winning? The only thing I can see here is the need for validation. If you must have validation by getting the agreement with everyone, you will be disappointed. Always, not just with cross-feed. It's just not possible to do.
Will the world at large end if we leave it that way? Will yours?
Of course, I have the opposite opinion, but would never presume to know how someone I've never met would feel about cross-feed on his own work.I'm sure Mr. Roach would be impressed with the spatiality of "Kiva" with my wide crossfeed.
Yes, we know.I don't experience flattened perspective or dimensionality with crossfeed unless I crossfeed too hard.
No, I actually tried your cross-feed on that recording and drew my conclusion.I
I think you only assume this happening, because you think smaller ILD must do such things.
Whatever. That's what I hear.I
No, that's not what happens.
That's not teaching, that's persuading and convincing. There's a big difference.I
I don't mean forcing people to use crossfeed against their will. I mean educating people to actually notice the benefits of crossfeed so they WANT to use it.
Ridiculous. Ignoring the elephant in the room. Literally.I
I also mean crossfeed to be "the third default" among speakers and headphones without crossfeed.
But what if they decide they don't like it? How do you view them?I
Yes, I feel I have something to teach on this issue. If I tell people why crossfeed is beneficial and what it does to the sound, people can test it themselves and possibly agree. If not, they can keep listening without crossfeed. They have nothing to lose, only to gain.
OMG! POINT MADE ALREADY!I
Regardless of what people, masses, think about crossfeed, I am totally convinced that crossfeed is the way to go with most recordings, be it 98 %, 80 % or just 50.01%.
I highlighted the only meaningful statement.I
I have chosen carefully and wisely based on scientific knowledge of human hearing. The result of this choice is I enjoy headphone listening much more than I used to do.
Crossfeed is mathematically simple, but that it a good thing. We are free of the problems we have with HRTF being too detailed so that things go easily wrong. Crossfeed limits ILD using the simplest possible algorithm agreeing with the principles of human spatial hearing and that's also why crossfeed doesn't "mess up" spatiality as some people claim. Crossfeed is too simple to mess up anything. All it does is fix the problem of excessive inter-aural-differences.
That would be "a fight".I
I did not come here to fight. I came here to tell about my experiences with crossfeed and possibly to educate people. Since then I have been defending my claims.