Define it for me... Openess, Expansiveness & Depth

[SimplySound]

Well this has been interesting! What I learned from the discussions on "Slam, Ring & Dynamics" is that there are some really well established principles in play. I think my take away is that different speaker designs play in different ways.

You have devotes on this board of Acoustic Suspension (i.e.; fully enclosed cabinets), Ported (i.e. Transmission Lines), Dipoles & Planers (i.e. Stats & Maggies) and even Baffle-less designs. I guess what I am exploring here is the subtle difference between them and how we perceive them. One is not necessarily better than another, just different.

The discussions we had on "Ring" got me thinking that there is something about cabinet interactions that maybe could be qualified as "resonance". How that impacts the Dynamics (response of the drivers to changes) is something to ponder. Obviously any motion has an opposite an equal reaction so damping is in play. And there is that whole physio-acoustic dimension that comes from being able to reproduce "true" SPL that can't be ignored!

With Planers and Baffle-less designs we get the "speed" and response but perhaps at the loss of some level of Resonance or Ring. But they do excel in that realm of Openess and Expansiveness... but what are these concepts and what do they mean?

Is it just that the speaker "disappears"? Is it all about Soundstage or placement therein? And what is Depth?

Define it for me oh wise AK'ers!

 

[Blue Shadow]

Depth, when you are listening and you close your eyes and see an image in front of you from side to side, that is good. Depth is the ability of the system to make that image deep, putting the stand up bass behind the other instruments, making the drums come in from behind the other players as is typical. Height helps make depth easier to hear on some speakers. Magneplanars with their large sound can show the jazz band each instrument in its place (Mike says the instruments are too large to be real but he likes the speakers) and you can see the bass player is over on the right and he is wearing a blue ascot.

 

[sheltie dave]

Sound stage is side to side, depth is caused by delay as the instruments/musicians were recorded.

The old RCA three mic array was a true workhorse in how to record a symphony. Read up on the Living Stereo and Living Presence recordings, and you will get a tremendous education on how to record music. Then go to the Yamaha guide to live music sound, and you will learn how to do the basics of mixing and live sound. These are the easiest ways to learn about stereo reproduction, because you understand the front end of what you hear at your house, and a lot of the physics behind it.

 

[JoeESP9]

From the Stereophile Audio Glossary:
imaging The measure of a system's ability to float stable and specific phantom images, reproducing the original sizes and locations of the instruments across the soundstage. See "stereo imaging."

soundstaging, soundstage presentation The accuracy with which a reproducing system conveys audible information about the size, shape, and acoustical characteristics of the original recording space and the placement of the performers within it.

Read more at http://www.stereophile.com/content/sounds-audio-glossary-glossary-r-s#G85CIMyQGGFaUPS6.99

 

[tomlinmgt]

I see you've listened to Kef 107's and big Dunlavys. Both of those designs should have demonstrated all the things you're asking about...and rather vividly, at that. If they didn't, then the gear, speaker location, listening spot location or the room (or any combination of those) wasn't allowing the spatial cues in the recording (which facilitate the perception of sound stage/imaging/depth/dimension) to be detectable by the listener. And those four aforementioned variables are like the four keys to opening the door to the magic of multi-dimensional, highly resolved sound stage and imaging with an open, deep, expansive (and even tall) presentation of the sonic content in the recording. And I've heard all the different types of speakers you mentioned do an exceptional job or fail miserably at depth, openness and expansiveness. The outcome depended on whether or not those four variables were optimized.

 

[SimplySound]

I see you've listened to Kef 107's and big Dunlavys. Both of those designs should have demonstrated all the things you're asking about...and rather vividly, at that...

Yep Tom, you and I have been on similar quests... you know I know you know!

So, I think of "expansiveness" as the proverbial "soundstage" we all know and love. The three dimensional aspect of the music projection allows for the feeling of being in the studio or at the theater listening to the performance. Instruments are positioned within that stage and are present across and from front to back. The detail of where those instruments lie within the soundstage and how well they are separated I consider to be "openness". Once the speaker itself disappears you begin to get that separation within the expanse of the stage.

But what is "depth"? I know some have commented that they interpret this as the front to back element of the soundstage. But, could it have something to do with how well the details of the sounds are presented in the soundstage? Think perhaps in terms of separation & "definition" (i.e. Clarity)?

Then again, perhaps BlueShadow is right and I have it backwards. Depth is placement and Openness is detail?

 

[tomlinmgt]

Yep Tom, you and I have been on similar quests... you know I know you know!

The detail of where those instruments lie within the soundstage and how well they are separated I consider to be "openness". Once the speaker itself disappears you begin to get that separation within the expanse of the stage.

What you call "openness" is what I, and others, call "resolution" ...like the resolution of a video monitor dictates how well defined the video content is. Image resolution is how well defined and localized the sonic content (that is depicting an instrument/vocal) is in free air. Sound stage resolution is how well defined each image is in a three dimensional plane that occupies the space in front of the listening position. I see this also referred to as "separation". Resolution and/or separation is enhanced when there is a clearly perceptible absence of sonic content between the sonic images...which is generally referred to as a "dark background" or "black background" (I've also seen these terms used to describe lack of hiss or noise when there's no music playing or during quiet passages). When this resolution is compromised it's generally referred to as "smearing" or "blurring". And you can have high image resolution without high sound stage resolution...but not visa versa. As a matter of fact, I experienced this just recently. My Klipsch Chorus II's, when about a foot and a half from the front wall, have great image resolution. You can clearly "see" the lead vocals coming from a spot in free air dead center between the speakers and guitars/drums coming from various locations in the space between the speakers, but it's hard to perceive that any of it is layered fore to aft. However, move the speakers out from the front wall about three to four feet and all of a sudden you "see" the sonic picture go from looking at a picture in a magazine to looking at a picture through one of those "ViewMasters" we had when we were kids that makes the picture vivid and three-dimensional. And it becomes much harder, if not impossible, to detect that music is actually coming out of the speakers as it all seems to come from the space in between, behind, above and outboard of their physical location.

But what is "depth"? I know some have commented that they interpret this as the front to back element of the soundstage. But, could it have something to do with how well the details of the sounds are presented in the soundstage? Think perhaps in terms of separation & "definition" (i.e. Clarity)?

Then again, perhaps BlueShadow is right and I have it backwards. Depth is placement and Openness is detail?

Depth is being able to clearly perceive sonic images beyond (behind) the sonic images that occupy the front of the sound stage...such as lead vocal and other instruments that are typically at the front of the performance stage/orchestral pit. So drums, percussion, backing vocals, etc. seem to be further away from the listening position than the sonic images that reside at the front, giving the perception of depth to the sound stage. Again, image resolution dictates how well defined, or detailed, the sonic image is. Sound stage resolution and separation dictate how well defined/detailed the sonic image is in three dimensional space in front of the listening position.

All these definitions start to make perfect sense once you experience and are able to spend some time with a rig that has a high degree of resolution to both images and the sound stage. When I got the acoustics in my room under control and started messing with upstream electronics and speakers that were moving away from mid-fi, I began to experience all this stuff and heard....or shoudl I say "saw".... music like I'd never heard it before.

Classic "epiphany" moments courtesy of Magnepan, Vandersteen and Owens Corning. Lol

- Michael