The Headcase Stax thread

[deepak]

I'll have to look that up and read it later.

http://home.comcast.net/~drnath/random/darthnut.pdf

[Dusty Chalk]

I almost asked, but I'm trying to be less lazy. Thanks.

[jgazal]

Imaging doesn't exist with studio rock. Even on speakers you are only hearing the isolated differences in the mix, it's not really imaging.

On the one hand, I believe that mixing isolated tracks with large consoles would give lateral head-stage, usually called stereo-effect (or focus, or imaging or instrument cutout), a simple delay between right and left channels. Those isolated track are usually recorded with microphones sitting very close to the instrument.

On the other hand, I believe that a distant microphone pattern (i.e, XY arrangement) would capture all instruments together with room reverberations. That would give you much more than lateral head-stage. It gives you depth (i.e. guitar and bass on the front and drum back).

I agree that rock is frequently recorded on studios.

But also a lot of classical seems to be recorded with microphones sitting very close to the instruments.

I tend to believe that the difference lays on the fact that classical recording engineers are used to add a track from distant microphones in order to add some ambience (i.e. reverberations). They usually do that with two microphones on the ceiling of the concert hall or with a dummy head (typically Neumann KU100).

I do not see that on rock concerts.

It is impossible to "capture" head-stage or sound-stage in studios?

Although each instrument is recorded in isolated rooms (each of one tuned for capturing a certain instrument), some ambience could be captured within that room with other microphones patterns. It would not have total coherence, but you could image the drum on back of the stage or a voice far away (i.e. in a large hall).

Or record all members of the band at the same room.

It seems to me that producers and engineers are also playing music with musicians. And head-stage or sound-stage can be artificially constructed. It will sound faithfully? I prefer recordings with XY direct to recorder tracks with no mixing consoles in the audio chain. But that’s just me and a minority of recordings.

[deepak]

On the one hand, I believe that mixing isolated tracks with large consoles would give lateral head-stage, usually called stereo-effect (or focus, or imaging or instrument cutout), a simple delay between right and left channels. Those isolated track are usually recorded with microphones sitting very close to the instrument.

On the other hand, I believe that a distant microphone pattern (i.e, XY arrangement) would capture all instruments together with room reverberations. That would give you much more than lateral head-stage. It gives you depth (i.e. guitar and bass on the front and drum back).

I agree that rock is frequently recorded on studios.

But also a lot of classical seems to be recorded with microphones sitting very close to the instruments.

I tend to believe that the difference lays on the fact that classical recording engineers are used to add a track from distant microphones in order to add some ambience (i.e. reverberations). They usually do that with two microphones on the ceiling of the concert hall or with a dummy head (typically Neumann KU100).

I do not see that on rock concerts.

It is impossible to "capture" head-stage or sound-stage in studios?

Although each instrument is recorded in isolated rooms (each of one tuned for capturing a certain instrument), some ambience could be captured within that room with other microphones patterns. It would not have total coherence, but you could image the drum on back of the stage or a voice far away (i.e. in a large hall).

Or record all members of the band at the same room.

It seems to me that producers and engineers are also playing music with musicians. And head-stage or sound-stage can be artificially constructed. It will sound faithfully? I prefer recordings with XY direct to recorder tracks with no mixing consoles in the audio chain. But that’s just me and a minority of recordings.

No I don't think it is impossible to capture soundstage in studios. A lot of jazz is recorded with closed micing that can still image well. The difference is it is recorded live with all musicians in the same room, whereas most rock instruments are recorded separately, layered and mixed together. There are exceptions to both.

[Dusty Chalk]

...head-stage or sound-stage can be artificially constructed. It will sound faithfully?

The thing is, no-one cares. Most producers/mixers/engineers/musicians tend to listen to the end product in a variety of environments to make sure it is at least listenable on most stereos, including a cheap car speaker with extremely limited frequency bandwidth.

It's actually very possible to get very accurate sound-/head-stage with electronics (look up 'convolution reverb')...but most just shrug and say, "who cares?" It's more important to get it to sound nice in other areas -- for example, that 'wall of sound', or a nice separation of voice from the rest of the mix.

[jgazal]

The thing is, no-one cares.

(...)

It's more important to get it to sound nice in other areas -- for example, that 'wall of sound', or a nice separation of voice from the rest of the mix.

I could not agree more with you. There are pros and cons. Separation of voice is certainly a must when recording female jazz vocalists.

I could not say the same thing with Rod Stewart. Just kidding…

I think I should look the music genres I like and virtuosi musicians instead of caring about recordings...

[Dusty Chalk]

I find it impossible to do otherwise.

[faust3d]

Don't know what "imaging" is, but soundstage accuracy and realism is very important to me, at time even more so than bass response and dynamics. O2 creates very realistic replica of the sound space with correct instrument voice positioning on horizontal, vertical and depth planes. Focus (exact position of sounds is space and reverberations/reflations) sometimes is not as good as with speakers and the soundstage is not lifesize as with all headphones, it's a smaller version of the real thing like a diorama of the real place. Dyncamic headphones that I heard mostly fail at reproducing vertical positioning since drivers are smaller than ear they also tend to create a larger fake space, headphones like Sigma excel at placing the sound space in front of you and have very good 3D effect, but are even more diffused when it comes to focus and exact positioning.

Most of the rock, classical and jazz recordings do not have a realistic soundstage, but a lot of them do especially stuff done with "Kunstkopf" (aka "artificial head") recording system. You can find some info here. I also find that some of the artificial electronic recording with sound effects (lots of IDM bands) sound very cool on O2 with all of the effects sounding very engaging.

[jgazal]

Focus (exact position of sounds is space and reverberations/reflations) sometimes is not as good as with speakers (...)

Well, it might be the fact that left channel does not reach your right ear and vice-versa. Right?

Dyncamic headphones that I heard mostly fail at reproducing vertical positioning since drivers are smaller than ear they also tend to create a larger fake space (...)

I do not know if driver's size is the relevant parameter for vertical positioning. That (vertical orientation) is something I find really difficult to sense with headphones (or even with speakers).

I believe that vertical orientation is defined by your HRTF (Head Related Transfer Function) and that would be only possible to replicate with your very own binaural recordings.

[n3rdling]

I don't really hear what seems to be intended vertical positioning on normal recordings...if anything, it seems like the higher the frequency a sound is, the higher up vertically it sounds for some reason.

[faust3d]

I do not know if driver's size is the relevant parameter for vertical positioning. That (vertical orientation) is something I find really difficult to sense with headphones (or even with speakers).

I believe that vertical orientation is defined by your HRTF (Head Related Transfer Function) and that would be only possible to replicate with your very own binaural recordings.

As far as I know the pinna and external ear that large driver engages, give us a lot of that 3D perception that create soundstage.

[jgazal]

As far as I know the pinna and external ear that large driver engages, give us a lot of that 3D perception that create soundstage.

Agreed.

What I am still trying to figure out is the viable moment in the audio chain to make use of the pinna and external ear influence.

I will try to make my idea more clear.

If I record anything with a microphone sitting in the entrance of my ear channel, there will be no need for circumaural headphones. My pinna and external ear influence are fixed within the audio track. An in-ear headphone would reproduce those influences.

Problem is regular recordings do not have my HRTF. Some recordings have microphone arrangement in a way they try to mimic the tympanum. Them circumaural headphone during the reproduction could do the trick of adding the pinna and external ear influence. Does this chain work in the real word? The distance between left and right tympanum determines the inter-aural difference varies from person to person.

Elevation cues are mostly tonal differences. Here pinna and external ear makes a huge difference. If you record anything without your HRTF, I think there is no way of recover elevation cues. Then I think regular recordings always have a flat vertical axis. Lateral axis is easily achieved with a stereo-phantom effect (the delay between left and right channel). It is not the same with elevation.

Then suppose you have those regular tracks (with mixing consoles or XY pattern) and a processor that is able to impose your own HRTF to the audio track (I am not a shill, but please read this). The position of your speaker is the base for that convolution (similat to the one Dusty mentioned). You could change the vertical axis manipulating those elevation cues. What is the result? Instead of having the virtual speaker in front of you, they will be on the ceiling (just as equal as your preferred music store). Will voices sound in an upper position regarding a guitar? I do not think so. You are going to have a flat vertical axis on the recording and a true vertical axis reproducing the virtual speakers (this processor allows you to chance the vertical axis of the virtual speaker).

What can be done to solve that? I think the only way to reproduce that vertical axis without a personal recording would be to create phantom-stereo effect on the vertical axis also (and not only at the lateral axis – left and right). In theory, just 8 channels are needed (some would prefer 9 to separate non-directional bass signals). But then people would need to place speakers on the corners of a room, which is not the best place acoustically speaking. That is more and less what NHK has been testing: NHK develops 3D sound 22.2 multichannel headphone processor. Well, they are Japanese, which means perfection; and 22 + 2 channels and a lot of storage, computing power etc.

@ Dusty. Please forgive going further on this subject. I still agree with you that we should be concerned with people, with musicians. It is just that the way we hear with only to audio channels have been always very fascinating to me. I am still searching for answers.

@ faust3d. Please note that the mentioned processor measures the HRTF with speaker impulses within a certain room. If we were to use in-ear headphones no more filters would be necessary. But with cirumaural headphones, a second round of pinna and outer ear modifications takes place and a digital filter is needed. That’s why the processor measures impulse from headphones also. See that text for more details and relevant bibliographic references.

@ head-case moderators and experienced users. Forgive me for the long post and do not shoot me. I do not want to be banned...

[faust3d]

Agreed.

What I am still trying to figure out is the viable moment in the audio chain to make use of the pinna and external ear influence.

I will try to make my idea more clear.

If I record anything with a microphone sitting in the entrance of my ear channel, there will be no need for circumaural headphones. My pinna and external ear influence are fixed within the audio track. An in-ear headphone would reproduce those influences.

Problem is regular recordings do not have my HRTF. Some recordings have microphone arrangement in a way they try to mimic the tympanum. Them circumaural headphone during the reproduction could do the trick of adding the pinna and external ear influence. Does this chain work in the real word? The distance between left and right tympanum determines the inter-aural difference varies from person to person.

Elevation cues are mostly tonal differences. Here pinna and external ear makes a huge difference. If you record anything without your HRTF, I think there is no way of recover elevation cues. Then I think regular recordings always have a flat vertical axis. Lateral axis is easily achieved with a stereo-phantom effect (the delay between left and right channel). It is not the same with elevation.

I find that most recordings made with OSS (Optimal Stereo Signal), Jecklin Disk and "Kunstkopf" (aka "artificial head") recording systems provide a lot of vertical information and image outside of the speakers projecting sounds upwards giving me a very realistic 3D picture when electronics are up to the task. I am sure they are not as realistic as HRTF recorded stuff, but did you ever try some of the better Kunstkopf albums? To me they sound really good with spacial resolution and soundstage much better than traditional studio recordings.

[jgazal]

I find that most recordings made with OSS (Optimal Stereo Signal), Jecklin Disk and "Kunstkopf" (aka "artificial head") recording systems provide a lot of vertical information and image outside of the speakers projecting sounds upwards giving me a very realistic 3D picture when electronics are up to the task. I am sure they are not as realistic as HRTF recorded stuff, but did you ever try some of the better Kunstkopf albums? To me they sound really good with spacial resolution and soundstage much better than traditional studio recordings.

I have never heard OSS (Optimal Stereo Signal) or Jecklin Disk. I will try to find those from the link you posted.

[faust3d]

I have never heard OSS (Optimal Stereo Signal) or Jecklin Disk. I will try to find those from the link you posted.

Some info here that I managed to compile.

[Torpedo]

That Jecklin disk reminds me a lot of the Kimber's IsoMike system. I don't know if results are similar.

[faust3d]

That Jecklin disk reminds me a lot of the Kimber's IsoMike system. I don't know if results are similar.

To me IsoMike looks to be based on Jecklin disk ideas.

[Dusty Chalk]

@ Dusty. Please forgive going further on this subject. I still agree with you that we should be concerned with people, with musicians. It is just that the way we hear with only to audio channels have been always very fascinating to me. I am still searching for answers.

No worries, I actually find the topic that the conversation took quite interesting, myself. I'd post if I had more time/wherewithal...I think you're fine so far.

[Torpedo]

I don't know who had the idea first. I've listened to some of those IsoMike recordings, which while musically didn't do much for me, I must admit sounded very natural space-image wise, for dynamics and timbrically. However I listened to them on speakers, so can't say what's the system performance on phones.

[Mr.Sneis]

What's the verdict on o2 pads these days? With a mk1 is it a good idea to convert over to the black "leather" mk2 pads? Is there a place that is cheaper than eBay for them ($130)?

[spritzer]

I would never go back to the Mk1 pads but I haven't bought a set in a while so no idea on prices...

[manaox2]

Any down side to going with mk2 pads?

[spritzer]

Nope.

[The Monkey]

Any down side to going with mk2 pads?

Not that I have noticed with the possible exception the fact that they don't match the brown headband and arc assembly if that sort of thing bothers you.

[padam]

But you can buy an Mk2 arc assembly or get an SR-007BL as well to match the pads.