Soundstage

Early B.

What aspect of the speaker design contributes most to the breadth of the soundstage? I heard it's the tweeter, but I ain't sure.

madmax

I could only guess. Same quickness of the drivers? Shape of the front and how the drivers are set into the cabinent? Equal push and pull from the magnet and voice coil structure? Great question, hopefully we get some great answers!
madmax

cmy330go

This is a good question. I have heard some rather cheap crappy speakers that produced an impressive soundstage. It has always puzzled me what contributes most to that.

VR3

Ive always been under the impression it has alot to do with delays in the recording (for depth) and reflections.

ND13

I think it's the combination of the tweeters, mids, and type of array they are set in that contributes to the ss.

BUT, the recording and components have to have something to do with it also or we'd all have the same soundstage if we had the same speakers. :rolleyes:

The room probably has a bit to do with it, too.

heiney9

cmy330go wrote:

This is a good question. I have heard some rather cheap crappy speakers that produced an impressive soundstage. It has always puzzled me what contributes most to that.

Not meaning to jump on ya cmy330go, but I have hard time understanding what you mean. How can a crappy speaker produce a good soundstage?

First of all the soundstage characteristics have almost everything (atleast to start with) to do with the recording/mixing engineer. It has to be addressed during the recording process and then has to be addressed at the mixing stage. So I think we all agree the recording is absolutely the first step.

For me imaging and soundstage (audio terms) are very similiar in my audio vocab. To me soundstaging is the ability of a rig to reproduce a 3-d like presentation of the recording. It should have both depth and width. You should be able to pinpoint instruments, vocals, etc. as they were presented in the real performance. If the vocalist is far infront of the drum kit, that should very noticeable and the drum sounds should be recessed. Cymbals including ride, crash, etc should be very discernable and you should be able to tell what side of the drum kit they are miked on. Same goes for rack toms and floor toms you should even be able to tell how they are tuned and waht side of the kit they are on (left or right).

What I'm getting at is everything should be layered fore and aft on stage as well as left to right based on the original presentation. I have some recordings where I just close my eyes and listen (without visual distractions of physical speaker placement) and just go on a journey. As I sit and listen I can hear all the vocals and instruments in delicate layers, different timbres and decays and it makes for quite an exciting experience.

We all know what/how recording engineers can fake and screw stuff up. So hunting for a great recording that has a great soundstage is a fun challenge as well.

Getting back on track to the original question. Just from the speakers POV I'd say the design of the driver array, the baffle, most definetly the x-over design and components. The driver freq intergration top to bottom. There are many many different design theories so I can't just pick one and say that's it. But I do believe that the narrower the designed sweet spot the better soundstage you will get. A speaker that is designed to sound good all over the room will never have the absolute best soundstaging characteristics.

As an example my brother owns Mirage OM-7's. These are omni-polar speakers and while they sound very good, they are much different than typical point source speakers. While they fill the room up with excellent sound they do lack in a specific center image and thus the overall soundstage presentation suffers. But off-axis they sound almost as good as on-axis. So in that design you give up something to gain something else. I really like a true D'appolito array for reproducing a soundstage. It's biggets drawback is a very narrow sweet spot, but man when you're in the zone it sounds excellent.

So short answer is design, tweeter, x-over, baffle, driver array. That's why I ask how can crappy speaks have a good soundstage, from my POV they cannot! Also associated source equipment has to be really really good. One major thing you gain moving up the audio chain is much better soundstaging characteristics across the board.

Thanks if you are still reading

H9

Early B.

Not sure if I agree with your "narrower sweet spot = better soundstage" theory, H9. There are lots of great speakers out there with wonderful soundstages that would not be considered as having narrow sweet spots, and vice versa.

VR3

Your brothers speakers are setup wrong.

I dont like narrow sweet spots at all - although I think there is always going to be that one spot where it sounds the best, it cant fall apart when you move away from it.

ND13

I don't know....the best speakers I've ever owned for ss reproduction are my SDAs and they tend to have a fairly narrow sweet spot. But that doesn't mean that a speaker with a wider sweet spot will/does not have a decent ss.

Brock,

We seem to have said the same thing for the most part, I just said it in 100 words or less

dorokusai

Time alignment....whether electronic or passive have always been the best performers for me.

heiney9

dorokusai wrote:

Time alignment....whether electronic or passive have always been the best performers for me.

Definetly makes sense to me, as time arrival charateristics are very important to proper presentation.

EarlyB wrote:

Not sure if I agree with your "narrower sweet spot = better soundstage" theory, H9. There are lots of great speakers out there with wonderful soundstages that would not be considered as having narrow sweet spots, and vice versa.

Generally speaks that try to accomplish all over the room type soundstages are not able, by design, to produce the best most accurate soundstage. Certainly there are exceptions. I'm basically speaking of conventional driver speaks , not ribbon or electrostatic, etc.

Sid wrote:

Your brothers speakers are setup wrong.

Tried many different postions, really didn't matter all that much. They are an excellent speaker that sound good from almost any listening position, just different than typical line source (which I'm used to). I know your Def Techs are bi-polar and you prefer that. I prefer a more conventional type like the D'apolitto array.

H9

dorokusai

SDA is an "effect" and without it the soundstage on an SDA is not impressive.

heiney9

ND13 wrote:

Brock,

We seem to have said the same thing for the most part, I just said it in 100 words or less

I know....I got carried away :eek: . Just in one of those (expounding endlessly) moods today :cool: .

H9

heiney9

dorokusai wrote:

SDA is an "effect" and without it the soundstage on an SDA is not impressive.

I wonder what the SDA speaker would soundlike if it had a conventional x-over and driver array. Simply removing the cable wouldn't/doesn't show what the speaker might have been capable of if it was just a strictly conventional design. My guess is the wide baffle would really be a challenge to good presentation. . Maybe....maybe not????? Anyone care to comment?

ND13

heiney9 wrote:

I wonder what the SDA speaker would soundlike if it had a conventional x-over and driver array. Simply removing the cable wouldn't/doesn't show what the speaker might have been capable of if it was just a strictly conventional design. My guess is the wide baffle would really be a challenge to good presentation. . Maybe....maybe not????? Anyone care to comment?

It would probably sound alot like the Monitor 10s(as far as the 2A/2Bs go) with a smeared soundstage. The 7s seem to do much better than the 10s, imo. I prefer my 7As over my 10As. Don't get me wrong, the 10As are great for rocking out, but the 7As are much better for critical listening, ymmv.

heiney9

dorokusai wrote:

SDA is an "effect" and without it the soundstage on an SDA is not impressive.

I cringe when people say its an effect. Here on CP it's certainly not worth debating as we all are in the know as far as SDA. But I prefer to call it a theory in practice. Effect just sounds to gimmicky and personally I never thought of SDA's as gimmicky...anyways my .02c, FWIW

ND13 wrote:

It would probably sound alot like the Monitor 10s(as far as the 2A/2Bs go) with a smeared soundstage. The 7s seem to do much better than the 10s, imo. I prefer my 7As over my 10As.

That seems to be the general thought for those who have owned both. Side by side drivers working in unison just isn't a very good idea. Polk got away with it though, didn't they.

H9

dorokusai

It's an effect, just like Sonic Holgraphy. Please feel free to dress it up any way you want.

cmy330go

heiney9 wrote:

Not meaning to jump on ya cmy330go, but I have hard time understanding what you mean. How can a crappy speaker produce a good soundstage?

No offense taken....I should have further explained. For example I have an older JVC office stereo, one of those that had the fake wood or stone veneer on the speakers and the cool blue backlit volume knob. The speakers consisted of a single full range driver. Overall they really didn't sound very good. But in my office I was actually able to have them positioned at ear level about 5 feet from my chair. From there they were able to create a very convincing soundstage.

Another example is an old set of JBL bookshelf speakers I picked up at BB when I was a kid. They consist of a 4" woofer and a 1" "Pure Titanium" tweeter (yes it actually says that on the front of the speaker). Anyway they are not at all what I would consider a high quality speaker. But the imaging is quite good.

Hope that clears it up.

Dave

VR3

Unless Mirage does something very different (which it appears they do)... there shouldnt be any reason why there is a lack of center image...

My speakers put off a strong center image with alot of depth to it...

As for cheap speaks putting off an impressive stage, the Pioneers in the den have a decent image (wide) - but it dosnt have any depth...just really big with no focus...

F1nut

dorokusai wrote:

It's an effect, just like Sonic Holgraphy. Please feel free to dress it up any way you want.

I beg to differ with you, my esteemed colleague. I see an effect as a DSP setting where the sound is altered to sound like a jazz hall, stadium, etc. In effect adding something to the recording that wasn't present on the master. Neither SDA or SH add anything, they just present the recording in a more realistic way.

dorokusai

As I said before, call it whatever you want...if you need something else to make it work, ala SDA cable, it's an effect.

Remember that while it does achieve what it claims, to most if not all of us here, it's still a theory. If it was widely accepted, which it isn't and never was, you might see it somewhere else.

heiney9

Vr3MxStyler2k3 wrote:

Unless Mirage does something very different (which it appears they do)... there shouldnt be any reason why there is a lack of center image...

Maybe lack of center image is not quite correct. They have a center image it's not vey well defined (moves around a bit) and his speakers lack any kind of real soundstage depth. Depth that should be there. They are very open and airy (very boxless sounding) but lack the precise soundstage cues I've come to expect. Hope that clears it up as that is the best I can put into words.

H9

heiney9

Sid and those others possibly interested in the OM 7 here's a link to a pic and review discussing the properties of the speaker.

http://www.stereophile.com/loudspeakerreviews/949/

More specifically they are refered to as Omnipolar, so they may not be TRUE bi-polar speaks.

H9

ND13

heiney9 wrote:

Sid and those others possibly interested in the OM 7 here's a link to a pic and review discussing the properties of the speaker.

http://www.stereophile.com/loudspeakerreviews/949/

More specifically they are refered to as Omnipolar, so they may not be TRUE bi-polar speaks.

H9

I found this funny from that article:

Footnote 1: Something that the Ohm Walsh speakers have been doing for many years, and, more recently, certain models from mbl—both with designs very different from that used by Mirage. This is also something that Bose tried to achieve with the original 901.



With the emphasis on TRIED!!!!

SuperDave

I bought a Carver Sonic Hologram device from a friend some years ago. I sold it a few years later, but it did impart a widened sound stage that made the sound seem to come from a wider area using a 2 channel setup. This suggests the soundstage was setup with the electroncs or recording not the speakers. I know some speakers have a wider area of dispersion but think the electronics have a great deal to do with the soundstage. IMHO


SuperDave
Yamaha RX-V992
Panasonic DVD-A310
Sony XBR 27"
BrightHouse DVR
Polk LSi25 Fronts
Polk LSiC Center
Infinity RS1 Rears
Monster THX Cables

adam2434

This soundstage discussion is interesting.

I've wondered what gives certain speakers that "something special" that draws you in and makes the music more involving. I think a lot of this has to do with soundstage and imaging.

I've owned and heard lots of speakers that don't have major turn-offs and have an acceptable tonal balance, but don't have that "involving" characteristic. I've found that these speakers are OK for background, non critical listening, but just don't draw me into the music.

So yeah, there has to be something about the drivers radiation pattern, integration of the drivers, crossover, etc. that is critical to soundstage and imaging capabilities.

heiney9

adam2434 wrote:

This soundstage discussion is interesting.
So yeah, there has to be something about the drivers radiation pattern, integration of the drivers, crossover, etc. that is critical to soundstage and imaging capabilities.

I know the thread is about the speakers, but the quality of the source equipment is a very large part as well. The nicest speakers will still not perform to their best abilities if poor source equipment is used. It's that all elusive synergy. For the sake of this thread however, I'm assuming the source equipment and material are not an issue.

H9

amulford

I am no expert, by any stretch of the imagination. But here's my theory.

There is alot involved in the presentation of a good soundstage. It's not just the speakers, but they do have alot to do with it.

First it takes a good recording. And for that, you need a good recording engineer. If care is not taken during this process, such as carefull mike placement and level control during, say, an accoustic session, forget it. Let's not forget the mixing of the raw recording, for you can FUBAR it during this process, too. (such is the case w/ alot of newer recordings...)

Then we move on to source electronics. These need to be capable of reading the information on the chosen media and faithfully translating the recording over to clean analog electrical signal without imparting too much coloration.

Now we get into the hotly debated wire/cable thing. Interconnects, IMHO play a VERY important role. At the very least, good shielding is required so the signal is not polluted and degraded by EMI. It dosen't hurt to have a good systemic synergy with cables, either. Things such as impedance matching will have an impact on the reproduction and coloration of the transmission.

Good amplification is a must. A crappy job at this end will eff things up. If you are trying to drive good speakers with an under-powered or POS amp, you might as well hang it up, as your speakers CANNOT do the job you're asking of them. It's like trying to eat melting water ice with a fork...

Now we arrive to the speaker. I can't sit here and say I am some kind of guru. But I do know that there are many different designs and they all act differently to acheive the desired effect. And one of the bottom lines to them doing so is proper set up. You have to set the speakers up properly for them to perform their job. Calibration sometimes helps, but alot of folks don't think so. Some have to be so far from a wall (side and rear). Some require toe in, while others do not. How far the listener sit away from a back wall is also a part of this set up. The listener must understand these needs and do as much as they can to meet them, or they may not get the desired stage. Then you must play around with it, and hopefully you'll get it to your liking.

And lastly, and maybe most importantly, is room accoustics. This often overlooked aspect is very important. Unwanted reflections will smear and destroy a sound stage. Learning to "control" your room will probably be the hardest part. It will involve alot of paitience, experimentation and trial & error, too. I haven't been able to yet, due to WAF. I hope to be able to get my OWN room, so I can do as I wish.

For now, I have to make do, like the rest of us.

But I don't think it's just the speakers, but a combination. Hopefully you find what works for you.....


Just my .02...