@Tks, thanks for your in-depth response.
If I understand correctly, you consider the word "soundstage" to describe an attribute of a recording, not an attribute of a speaker. Is that correct?
If so, what wording would you use to describe the ability of speakers (or speakers + room, or the entire playback system) to convey the soundstage on a recording?
If we're talking about loudspeakers, seems to me we ought to leave the designer's choices alone if we want to compare abilities to convey the soundstage on a recording. For example, equalizing the on-axis responses to be the same is going to also change the off-axis response of at least one of them, and the designer(s) may intend a particular off-axis response for good reasons.
So, something where you can do a quick A/B comparison? Like the Harman Speaker Shuffler system, or the Bang & Olufsen speaker which can switch between different radiation patterns?
Seems to me this requirement greatly limits what you would be willing to have demonstrated.
Good point. Do you have one?
Maybe we should be calling it "spatial quality". Maybe I have been careless to use the word "soundstage" instead of "spatial quality". Here are aspects of "spatial quality" as found in Figure 7.13, page 178 of Toole's book, third edition:
- Definition of sound images
- Continuity of the sound stage
- Width of the sound stage
- Impression of distance/depth
- Abnormal effects
- Reproduction of ambience, spaciousness, and reverberation
- Perspective (artificial or contrived; they are here; outside looking in; close but still looking in; you are there; other)
If I understand correctly, you consider the word "soundstage" to describe an attribute of a recording, not an attribute of a speaker. Is that correct?
If so, what wording would you use to describe the ability of speakers (or speakers + room, or the entire playback system) to convey the soundstage on a recording?
If we're comparing soundstage between two devices, all other factors must be made equal as much as possible, so we can't have things like different frequency response, that must be equalized before such comparisons are allowed to proceed if one is to demonstrate soundstage as a distinct concept.
If we're talking about loudspeakers, seems to me we ought to leave the designer's choices alone if we want to compare abilities to convey the soundstage on a recording. For example, equalizing the on-axis responses to be the same is going to also change the off-axis response of at least one of them, and the designer(s) may intend a particular off-axis response for good reasons.
So when you ask for clarification of what sort of demonstration of soundstage I'm asking for. I'm asking for things that can be toggled or put on a slider that increase or decrease soundstage...
So, something where you can do a quick A/B comparison? Like the Harman Speaker Shuffler system, or the Bang & Olufsen speaker which can switch between different radiation patterns?
... using a concept or concepts that are as distinct as possible from already existing concepts.
Seems to me this requirement greatly limits what you would be willing to have demonstrated.
But before demonstrations of soundstage are made, I'd more than anything would like an actual definition.
Good point. Do you have one?
Maybe we should be calling it "spatial quality". Maybe I have been careless to use the word "soundstage" instead of "spatial quality". Here are aspects of "spatial quality" as found in Figure 7.13, page 178 of Toole's book, third edition:
- Definition of sound images
- Continuity of the sound stage
- Width of the sound stage
- Impression of distance/depth
- Abnormal effects
- Reproduction of ambience, spaciousness, and reverberation
- Perspective (artificial or contrived; they are here; outside looking in; close but still looking in; you are there; other)
Last edited: