Not many, of course. It's the usual rounds of straw men, pontification and imagination. It's puts a smile on my face, the usual suspects with the usual arguments - and some new ones to make it fresh.
The phenomenon is real, it's been tested and measured and verified. No amount of opinion will change that. It's audible, too. I've provided some test files in this thread to check the audibility.
Should we fix it? Hard to say. My goal was to have a consistent tonal balance across the front. Another goal is improved intelligibility, but that didn't bother me much. It could be worthwhile for dialog in the phantom center.
Do producers and mastering engineers fix the tonal balance problem in the mix? Not as far as I can hear, no. I doubt it comes up much in mastering sessions. On many recordings it doesn't much matter. On some it does.
Would the record producer care or be offended if we choose an even tonal balance across the front? Would he think we are getting an inferior version of his work No.
I've never met a producer, studio or mastering engineer who would not be happy to hear their work on a "Kick *** System." I haven't met any who suffer audiophile delusions. They just want it to sound great.The effect is real. You can test for its severity on your own system yourself. Then you can decide if you care or not, of if you like the results or not. No record producers will be defiled, no stereo gods will be offended. You might not even be embarrassed that you tried it.
One of the thing today's mastering guys do is that they M/S process the final mix to balance mid and side level and frequency balance. If they find that mid is quiet, loud, dark or bright compared to side, they just fix it with mid / side enabled EQ or dynamic processor, such as Weiss and Manley. Regardless of concerning comb filtering issue, they just try to make it sound like the producers' favorite comparable reference commercial records.
The problem is their reference records are different, and no absolute consensus how much brightness is adequate for the center vocal. Circle of confusion. The past research has found that many audiophiles are picky about the harshness, and somewhat generous to the darkness, but ordinary music listeners are opposite. So it is practically impossible that we will reach the absolute consensus of the right amount of brightness, unfortunately, and we will keep finding some of the recordings are too bright or dark.
In this thread we mainly focussed on the balance (from low frequencies to high, not a matter of level, the tonal balance) between that phantom centre and the side panned material. Separate from the fact a track can be bright or dark.
To even notice it you'd have to clean up all early reflections that can hit the listening position and have a good room balance, as all tonal changes after that first wave front can change the perception of this phenominon.
I recognised the case Pano presented. That's why I participated in the tests and ran numerous of my own. In the end I had to conclude that usually the tonal balance in the centre is taken care of in a mix. It was the different tonal balance of the side panned material that sounded overly bright in comparison to that centre.
To even notice it you'd have to clean up all early reflections that can hit the listening position and have a good room balance, as all tonal changes after that first wave front can change the perception of this phenominon.
I recognised the case Pano presented. That's why I participated in the tests and ran numerous of my own. In the end I had to conclude that usually the tonal balance in the centre is taken care of in a mix. It was the different tonal balance of the side panned material that sounded overly bright in comparison to that centre.
I was into HiFi in my early grown-up's years. Some day after listening to Seventeen Seconds I smashed our player and sold out my discs and loudspeakers. The sabbatical did not take too long, tho, and I was messing around again.
Studios are important, not so much for electrics but for acoustics. You can play almost anything at home rite, but you cannot record it there rite. If Beethoven's 7th needs a loud Oboe, get him closer to the one stereophonic microphone. I mean, how is it gonna be done live, they are not supposed to use a PA, rite?
I have seen Bilbo Baggins in stereo but am not impressed. To hear him in stereo were more to my linking.
Studios are important, not so much for electrics but for acoustics. You can play almost anything at home rite, but you cannot record it there rite. If Beethoven's 7th needs a loud Oboe, get him closer to the one stereophonic microphone. I mean, how is it gonna be done live, they are not supposed to use a PA, rite?
I have seen Bilbo Baggins in stereo but am not impressed. To hear him in stereo were more to my linking.
If there's any honesty behind these requests (and I suspect there is, but only a very small amount) then PM me. This thread wouldn't be the right place for those discussions anyway.
Is there another thread discussing the meaning of the word "accuracy" in regard to sound reproduction? That would be an interesting topic. If there is no other thread, perhaps you are I could create one.
Yes, it was an honest question, though it also had some provoking thoughts behind it, sorry
.I'll contact you trough PM, not today but I will. I enjoyed reading what you had to say on a previous thread where our paths crossed. So, yes. I'd like to read/hear about your experiences.
Most of my own journey has been covered in a huge thread with many measurements hidden in it: http://www.diyaudio.com/forums/full-range/242171-making-two-towers-25-driver-full-range-line-array.html
Our specific goals and expectations may be totally different. Yet if we are open to it we might learn from each other.
For me, personally, music has been the soundtrack of my life. Coupled to many memories and emotions and I was sold to music at a very early age. I could never build anything that wouldn't allow me to make use of my specific soundtrack. Sure I don't always agree with every mix or mastering. In fact I've found many differences in perception from mastering alone with my own personal favourite music. It's worth it to hunt down what you like, to see what's out there.
This personal audio journey or pursuit did make me appreciate more musical genres, not less. Measurements (picking them apart) and understanding what happens at our ears and how we interpret that as human beings (and the differences how people can listen or enjoy it) have helped me gain a better understanding of it all, just for myself. We all need to find our own way right?
Like I said before, I'm here to learn.
Exactly.
That's been said many times in this thread - if the center is right, as it usually is - then the sides will be brighter. This needs to be repeated again and again, because so many people seem to miss it.
Using the shuffler to kill the notches in the phantom center will not affect the sides. It will make the center brighter. That might not be a good thing. To return to a correct tonal balance, you'd need to do an overall EQ correction.
An M/S EQ is perhaps better in this regard, at least for music. I never found one that worked for me, Wesayso has found one that works for him.
This was the conclusion that I came to as well, very early on in this discussion. The mixing engineers that I know are very aware of things like this and would be negligent if they didn't deal with it. And if they did deal with it in the mix then correcting again at home would be absolutely the wrong thing to do. I rather have a well produced recording sound right by not correcting it again and accept the additional flaw in a poorly produced one.
Whole tonal balance is not unrelated to the center vocal level / tone, and vocal treatment is by far the most difficult task for any mixing engineers. It is so difficult that they are not even responsible for the final vocal level, so usually they make a few different mixes with different vocal levels, -0.5dB, 0dB, +0,5dB, etc, and hand them to the mastering engineer who has to make the final decision. Mastering engineers have a responsibility to make the music "mono compatible" and "headphone compatible". Mono or headphone playback is not suffered by this phantom center issue. They do concern so many different playback situations. They do not make side overly bright on purpose. It's not that simple.
So it's not a bad idea that a listener add some more M/S EQ based on his preference and listening environment, and what he is doing is private re-mastering for his specific need.
So it's not a bad idea that a listener add some more M/S EQ based on his preference and listening environment, and what he is doing is private re-mastering for his specific need.
I personally do not know any professional engineer who is very aware of this particular issue. This is not a popular topic as far as I know.
I have not read his whole book, and few studio engineers did, I guess. Mastering engineers, maybe, but I don't know many of them, and they usually do not want to talk about his job, as you know.
Who? Do you have citations of this or can you give names? Have they been aware of it since the beginnings of stereo, or is it a more recent awareness?
What is specifically done to get an even EQ across left, phantom center, right? Is there a standard processing chain, or is it done by ear?
How you want to listen to your music is a matter of taste. I have no problem with that. However, you will have to define "sound right" as that is a vague term. What is "sound right"?
As I've said before, this is NOT a huge change, it's subtle. It is possible to achieve the same overall tonal balance as the uncorrected version, but with the sides better matching the phantom center. If you've never even noticed the mismatch, or if it does not bother you - why use the correction? That would be silly.
I'm perfectly comfortable with the fact that I notice a difference and have to adjust accordingly while others may not experience that. All one has to do is listen.
But even that seems like a burden, why listen if you can just argue about it.
Seems simple enough to me. either you hear it and want to do something about that or you don't. How many of us have similar speakers, let alone similar rooms we listen in. I won't even start about similar taste in music.
I am convinced though that the real magic is in the music. The only job of your system (that's including room + speakers) is to get that out to shine.
But even that seems like a burden, why listen if you can just argue about it.
Seems simple enough to me. either you hear it and want to do something about that or you don't. How many of us have similar speakers, let alone similar rooms we listen in. I won't even start about similar taste in music.
I am convinced though that the real magic is in the music. The only job of your system (that's including room + speakers) is to get that out to shine.
Pano,
This is a very interesting subject, I'm going to go though the thread. One thing I was wondering before I start listening, were the recordings in the beginning done using a single mic then panned from left to right, or was it done using a dual mic setup. Was the panning done using both amplitude difference, time difference or both?
This is a very interesting subject, I'm going to go though the thread. One thing I was wondering before I start listening, were the recordings in the beginning done using a single mic then panned from left to right, or was it done using a dual mic setup. Was the panning done using both amplitude difference, time difference or both?
From a mixing and mastering perspective, I think if the person whose does mixing and mastering also performs, then they certainly have good ears. But experience plays an important role in identifying issues. Once they notice it, I'll bet you they will be able to catch it every time.
There was one time I asked a bassist Kenny D. James to tell me what he thought about my speakers, watching him adjust the EQs until he felt it was right amazed me that he adjusted the bands pretty much where I had some deviation from flat, and adjusted them in the right direction as well, not even seeing my measured data.
There was one time I asked a bassist Kenny D. James to tell me what he thought about my speakers, watching him adjust the EQs until he felt it was right amazed me that he adjusted the bands pretty much where I had some deviation from flat, and adjusted them in the right direction as well, not even seeing my measured data.
I am almost convinced that the fix need to be in the mix. This becomes a more complicated process because now whether the original recording method becomes critical, and the mix would be for a specific speaker to listening location relation. While using some echoing method might work, but will this take away from some other aspects of music needs to be tried.
Are there any recordings on the market already doing this?
That's a very good question that I'd like to know the answer to. I've asked about it, but so far not received any leads. Maybe a search thru Mix Magazine of similar sources would reveal something. If anyone has such info (as claimed) please post it hear, it would be very interesting to know.
My "problem" is that most music I listen to was recorded before 1985. That's typical taste influenced by age. There is a lot of good music around recorded after that, but so many of the recordings are so compressed, so bright, that I have a hard time listening to them. If the dullness of the phantom center has been fixed on these recording, it would be hard for me to know, there is such a Wall of Sound it's hard to get past it. Many of the older stereo recordings I listen to suffer the imbalance.
If someone has any examples where you find can hear a voice or instrument that moves from center to one side, and retains the same tonal balance, please let us know.
Can someone please summarize the proponent side of this discussion. I can't make sense of it from reading the OP's original cited article. I probably join many others in thinking the point raised in this thread is either very important to consider or basically artifactual.
(And that way I could tell if there is any relevance to my own observation: a dual-mono REW freq response trace falls neatly and uniformly above the individual L and R speaker traces across the band (allowing for small amounts of high-freq phase conflict sometimes). Is that relevant?)
B.
(And that way I could tell if there is any relevance to my own observation: a dual-mono REW freq response trace falls neatly and uniformly above the individual L and R speaker traces across the band (allowing for small amounts of high-freq phase conflict sometimes). Is that relevant?)
B.