Sound All Around vs Upfront staging

[Bassick]

First I would like to explain what I mean about "Sound All Around". "Sound All Around" means, experiencing music from the artist or vocalist point of view performing with a live band. When a live band is performing all the instruments are either to the side of or behind the vocalist. I know everyone is going to ring in and say, "that is so that the listeners can hear the stage imaging". But what if you are the vocalist? The center stage or placement of the vocalist is the perfect spot to hear all the instruments without one or the other being to dominant so that the vocalist can feel the instruments, thus better acoustic cues. "Stage imaging" is a by-product of this configuration (some may disagree). Stage imaging (when all the music content seem to be centered in the front of the listener) is, "a traditionally preferred listening choice", it is not a requirement.

When a person hears a song that they really enjoy, what ever that song may be, it makes them feel good. Regardless if the person can hear the song more to the right, more to the left, coming from behind, or coming from the front. But what really gets the attention and impacts the listener is when the song is coming from every direction, 360 degrees everywhere. This type of sound is what makes the listener visualize and appreciate what the song is conveying. Traditional Stage Imaging does this in part. Not saying that TSI does not sound appealing to the ear, but I think (just my opinion), that music playing all around you gives a better immersive experience.

Therefore, I would like to address the "elusive front staging in car audio". I say the hell with front staging, and go with Sound All Around. I say, make your front door speakers or kick panels air tight as possible. Mount tweeters either on A pilers or B. Install rear door speakers. DIY some mid bass drivers in the rear deck. And add Subwoofers. There is a lot of technical stuff that has to be done with this set-up, but thats beyond the scope of this topic. Point is, Highs coming from the side or front or both. Mid range band coming from the side and from behind. Mid bass, perceptually coming from the sides and behind. And sub bass would seem to come from everywhere (omni directional). Woooooooow, isn't this close to what a vocalist may hear performing with a live band.

Of course this setup is a theory and would take a lot of tuning to get right, but tuned it can be. So for those of you who read this thread. Please give thoughts.

All replies are welcomed.

Click to read more...

 

[trumpet 5,000+ posts]

You're forgetting or ignoring the way music is produced. There's a reason sound quality competition has judging the way they do to score staging and imaging. The perceived center for imaging is in line with the center of the vehicle and the vocal image should be above the center of the dash. The goal of a properly staging and imaging car is for you to close your eyes and be able to imagine you're standing in front of the stage watching a live band perform, picking out locations of individual instruments and singers. The same thing applies to home audio or head-fi audio. Any other way of setting up your sound system is your preference, and that's not wrong but it's different.

 

[gckless 5,000+ posts]

Actually, separation on stage is horrible a lot of times. Guitar amps are too close or too far apart, drums may be overbearing, and a vocalist moves. Beyond that, all instruments are mic'd on any decent stage, and then you are hearing everything from either in-ear monitors or multiple monitors on stage.

Also, why highs from the front? The most highs you're gonna find on stage are from the drums, which are behind you. There's a lot of issues with your theory.

Only way to do this properly would be to mix it that way at the source (during recording), not try to correct it in your car. Would not work.

Also, I would be interested to see how many people actually know what it sounds like on a stage. To include yourself. I've been in multiple bands.

 

[Bassick]

Thoughts after replies, Thinking it through some more, to you gckless, I know all those different sounds clashing together on stage from one particular instrument's spot is not so melodic, but from the vocalist point of view a bit more pleasing. My theory is not to make corrections to the music. I'm simply saying that I don't think music heard just in the front of you (I agree, it will be perceived to be centered on the listener) gives the listener that feeling of being inside the music. I've done front stage imaging with a pass system of mine, and I have to admit, didn't win a SQ contest, but sounded pretty **** good. But when I integrated more specific drivers (but I didn't have the right cross over to do further tuning) to the system, I notice that it sounded better to my ears. Now this may be subjectional and bias on my part, but the music felt right. I am also a very strong believer in letting the ear decide what sounds good. I'm not trying to say that front staging is not the way to go. I'm just saying people should realize that front staging is "front staging", and that other types of staging can be accomplished, sometimes easier.

 

[trumpet 5,000+ posts]

Thoughts after replies, Thinking it through some more, to you gckless, I know all those different sounds clashing together on stage from one particular instrument's spot is not so melodic, but from the vocalist point of view a bit more pleasing. My theory is not to make corrections to the music. I'm simply saying that I don't think music heard just in the front of you (I agree, it will be perceived to be centered on the listener) gives the listener that feeling of being inside the music. I've done front stage imaging with a pass system of mine, and I have to admit, didn't win a SQ contest, but sounded pretty **** good. But when I integrated more specific drivers (but I didn't have the right cross over to do further tuning) to the system, I notice that it sounded better to my ears. Now this may be subjectional and bias on my part, but the music felt right. I am also a very strong believer in letting the ear decide what sounds good. I'm not trying to say that front staging is not the way to go. I'm just saying people should realize that front staging is "front staging", and that other types of staging can be accomplished, sometimes easier.

I'm not really following you. You're trying to "invent" a new kind of staging when there is 1 accepted standard to staging in all forms of audio, which is established in the mastering process of music production.

You may want to listen to some competition quality vehicles and further develop your opinion on correct staging and imaging in a car. You admit you've tried what I see as the traditional approach to system design and tuning, yet you didn't have full control over the crossovers. If you didn't have the control with the equipment to properly set up the system then you didn't take it far enough. Set up the system so it stages and images on the dash and add rear fill if you want sound coming from all directions.

 

[T3mpest 10+ year member]

Thoughts after replies, Thinking it through some more, to you gckless, I know all those different sounds clashing together on stage from one particular instrument's spot is not so melodic, but from the vocalist point of view a bit more pleasing. My theory is not to make corrections to the music. I'm simply saying that I don't think music heard just in the front of you (I agree, it will be perceived to be centered on the listener) gives the listener that feeling of being inside the music. I've done front stage imaging with a pass system of mine, and I have to admit, didn't win a SQ contest, but sounded pretty **** good. But when I integrated more specific drivers (but I didn't have the right cross over to do further tuning) to the system, I notice that it sounded better to my ears. Now this may be subjectional and bias on my part, but the music felt right. I am also a very strong believer in letting the ear decide what sounds good. I'm not trying to say that front staging is not the way to go. I'm just saying people should realize that front staging is "front staging", and that other types of staging can be accomplished, sometimes easier.

Things that are louder always tend to sound "better" at first that's why you can't always trust that. There is no other type of "staging". Throwing speakers all over the car is definetly easier, but it does not create any staging. That's not how stereo was EVER intended to be used. (stereo requires 70 degrees of seperation to be true stereo) Stereo is only recorded with 2 channels a left and a right. You only need one of each playing fullrange, down low you can get away with mono. Putting more speakers behind you playing the same frequencies as everything else isnt' realistic. When you do that, your creating 2 seperate sound sources. Now instead of hearing one singer, your hearing 2 singers one behind you, one in front, the one in front singing slighty sooner than the one in back (time delay because rear speakers are further away). Adding additional drivers not only destroys staging, but the drives also aren't in acoustic phase at certain frequencies which makes the frequency response more ragged, albiet louder since you have more speakers. (hence the "it sounds better if you don't know what it supposed to sound like)

In my last car my favorite demo was Alice in Chain's unplugged. When Layne comes out in the beginning of nutshell you can literally hear pull his chair out and it has a slight depth cue as he pulls it up. You can also tell the depth of each person on stage, drums directly behind the singer (just onto my hood) Layne is right at the winshield glass. Jerry on Guitar to the right, right by the pillar, Bass on the left, just short of the left pillar. I've ran it off my computer with video at the same time, it's a neat effect. I have one SQ track with a gospel choir, you can literally count how many people are doing finger snaps by their locations. Instead of just hearing the snaps, you "see" them. Your not going to get that kind of realism by putting speakers all over your car. No it's not like being a band member, but it's alot closer than your idea. Again, your creating too many sound sources for ANYTHING to soudn "real" Your just destroying the original recording. A band plays in front of you, yes you can hear sounds from all sides, but that's reflections that are also being picked up by the mic and fed back into the mix, and a car has more natural reflections than just about any venue.

Most of the time people find rear fill sounds better because it gives them extra midbass or sub bass. They have little 6.5's in the doors trying to run them to 60hz or lower and yes, when you add a 6x9 or other speaker, you can help fill in gaps that exist. Regardless it's still a bandaid to help frequency response and when you hear a car that's setup properly because it didn't need a bandaid, it changes peoples mind real quick. I never had anyone set in my car and say it needed "more speakers". Heck most people didnt' believe I wasn't running a speaker in the dash, or even a speaker above knee level, let alone just 1 set.

Lastly, staging is NOT centered in front of the listener, a bit of ignorance on your part. Proper staging is center of the car is center stage. Only way the stage can be the same size on the left and right, again, if you've never heard a car that does it, kind of a foreign idea, but it's correct. A car with proper staging will sound more real than you'd imagine, especially if you have dynamics to back it up a live performance (even less cars can do this than can get staging right). I didn't mention, but the snares on the AIC recordings would make you blink and you can feel the midbass in your chest, and it plays it without audible distortion.

 

[hispls 5,000+ posts]

This strikes me as copping out on the work and expense of a proper front stage. The biggest problem with this new "theory" is that it would require your music to be recorded in surround sound format and your "position" within the recording has to be determined in the recording process.

You can't just take a traditional stereo recording, put speakers all around you and have it sound natural. That's not how it is recorded and not how it is meant to be accurately reproduced.

IMO you shouldn't even consider rear speakers unless you're using material recorded in surround-sound.

 

[bbeljefe]

This is obviously a matter of preference but let's look at why staging in the front is the accepted norm. For one thing, most people aren't vocalists and thus, don't know what live music sounds like from the vocalist's perspective. Second, most music is not live and is listened to with a pair of loudspeakers in front of you... as when we are kids in our bedrooms listening, most of us long before we have our own vehicles to drive. And when it is live, most of us hear it in front of us because we're not on the stage, we're in the audience.

So for setting up a proper sound stage, front imaging is the most realistic for a plurality of listeners and that's why front staging is the accepted norm. That's not to say your idea is necessarily wrong, because it's all a matter of perspective. So anyone who tells you you're wrong might as well also say that having chocolate as your favorite ice cream is wrong.

With that caveat mentioned, I'll share my subjective opinion on the matter. What you're proposing has already been done in the home audio world with an amazing amount of success. Mostly, I think, because of the flock mentality people tend to have but, that's another discussion.

What I mean is that Amar Bose became a gazillionaire by telling people music should be artificially delayed and bounced off every wall in the house before it reached their ears. It all started (I think) with the 901 and it's 8 rear facing full range drivers and one front facing full range driver. While his intention was honorable and his knowledge of acoustics admirable, I think he made a critical error in that he attempted to create the feel of a symphony hall in spaces that aren't symphony halls.

The error is this... when you are sitting in a symphony hall listening to music, the different instruments' sound waves hit your ears at different times. Part of the sounds go directly to your ears while some of them reflect off the side and back walls and arrive at your ears slightly delayed. And to be sure, the distance from one instrument to the next on stage has less of an impact on those delays than the listening position you have in the audience. After all, if you're stage center, fifteen rows back and the hall has 60 rows, the distance between instruments on stage is minimal compared to the distance the sound travels to the back of the hall and then back to your ears. For sure, you'll get some left right imaging but that's minimal, relative to echoic delays.

Now consider this.... A properly arranged high quality stereo mic setup used to record a symphony is placed stage center in the audience and thus, hears the same diffractions and delays that your ears do. So when you take that recording and play it on your home hi fi loudspeakers or, on your headphones, the imaging is reproduced pretty accurately, since the delays are recorded in the media and the left/right arrangement of the mics (and your ears) in the symphony hall is mimicked by your loudspeakers. If, that is, your loudspeakers are properly set up in your listening room. i.e... usually about 8 feet apart in an average room at ear level to the listening position and equidistant from the listener. This arrangement is called the "sweet spot" for that reason.... because it best reproduces the sound as experienced live.

Thus, what Bose does with his "bounce sound off every wall in the house before it reaches the listener's ears" approach to music reproduction is create a bunch of artificial delays and refractions to media that already has those delays and diffractions accurately recorded as they were heard in the concert hall. And I posit that what you're proposing is the same thing. And again, that's no insult, it's just preference.

He gets away with this (and with using cheap, full range drivers) because most people have no benchmark by which to judge sound quality. Given that I spent some years selling and installing hi end home audio, I've had the opportunity to attend the CES show in Las Vegas and audition a good many such benchmark audio systems in near anechoic listening rooms and I can say without hesitation that nothing Bose makes has any appreciable sound quality. Now... I don't argue that people can only achieve good sound quality with a $50,000.00 two channel setup but I will say that after having listened to that sort of set up, Boses' approach is fundamentally flawed from the perspective of trying to accurately achieve what we hear in the concert hall. And, I'm far from alone in that opinion.

You should also consider that what you're proposing is not unlike what Dolby did with the creation of surround sound. The original surround sound technologies essentially just took the recorded media, summed it to mono and then time delayed it to a rear channel so it would be heard after the front stage. To be sure, it makes movies more realistic but to critical listeners (me, at least), music does not sound good when played through surround processing equipment. In my home theater setup, if I plan to listen to music, surround mode gets turned off and I go right back to good old two channel, front imaged mode.

And speaking of processing equipment, that's why we purists spend hundreds and even thousands of dollars on car audio processors... so that we can bring the sound stage up to our ears and to the front. We use time delays so that the farther away right speaker sounds in the car reach the driver at the same time the closer, left speaker sounds do. Because again, the delays we hear in the concert hall are already recorded in the media and adding to them does not increase the realism of the music.

In the end, I'm not telling you you're doing something wrong with your setup. I'm just saying you're not accurately reproducing what is heard by the mics that record the music... whether they be in a hall during a live performance or in a studio. But if that's what sounds best to you, then by all means go for it!

 

[Bassick]

bbeljefe, thanx for the reply, you really put it in plain English. Don't get me wrong, I understand the surround sound effect, and how it double dips into a music track. What I mean by that is because time delays, refractions, reflections & deflections are already recorded into the music and a surround sound equipment attempts to recreate what is already created. But, what I'm saying is when done the right way, placing speakers (without time delay equipment) all around you, gives you the sensation of being inside the music. Of course, keeping the front staging as accurate as possible. When front staging is at its optimum, adding to it to produce that sensation.

Let me explain, like I said above, "keeping the front staging as accurate as possible", then I would add mid-range drivers to the rear deck playing at a lower level than the front staging but with heavy emphasis on the lower mid-range only (300 Hz-1000 Hz). The rear deck drivers would only compliment the staging. Then going with some mid-bass drivers I would install, depending on vehicle, some 8" or 10" drivers into rear door, also playing at lower levels (complimenting the front staging as well as the rear deck) with emphasis on the mid-bass(75 Hz-300 Hz). And then let the sub-woofers do their job with the Sub-bass at a high level (30 Hz -75 Hz).

I think I was kinda of misleading when I first posted this thread, cause I did say, "the hell with front staging". What I meant was that, when I added more drivers to my system, The music sounded right to my ears, I can't actually put it into words.

What I'm saying is that I'm not trying to recreate the Home Theater affect. Plain and simple, car audio. Car audio is not the same as Home Theater. Not to sound as if I'm putting down HT. But for years and years and years, car audiophiles have been chasing after the HT affect (SQ anyway). Realistic, the inside of a car cannot compete, but will get close. I think and feel that car audiophiles should rethink the approach, instead of chasing the norm, create a norm. We should start taking advantage of the way a vehical's interior is made. Approach our setups in a different way. Look, I'm not saying load your car with as many drivers as you can, and that will give you the sensation of being inside the music. It will actually take some work to get this right. But we as car audiophiles wouldn't be if we didn't do the work ourselves. And, what I'm going with this is that everyone has a different ear, so there will be so many variants of this. But the end result is an inside the music sensation.

Yeah, I know this is going against the grain for some, but if you are reading this post, I say just try to grasp the gist of what I'm saying. Your car your rules.

And by the way, It just accord to me if you time delay your front drivers (remember the rear drivers are playing at a lower level) so that the rear drivers hit your ears at the same time as the front drivers, how would that sound, just a thought. But thats the type of stuff that we do as car audiophiles.

 

[T3mpest 10+ year member]

All the stuff your supposing has been done and tried and can work, but it's alot more complicated than your making it out to be. Even when you time align rear fill the speakers are nearly directly behind you head in the rear deck and they will collapse your stage width. Just time aligning them doesn't enhance anything, again your just creating multiple point sources, even turned down, since you've removed the time difference, you've effectlvely removed the ambience of the speakers. (which is captured in the recording anyway)

If you want to do rear fill effectively, there are a few options. The JBL ms-8 does a logic 7 processing and it's rears only play info that is out of phase in the recording. They are also massively time delayed. The out of phase stuff in the recording is the natural echos that the mic picked up, by only playing the actual echoes and playing it delayed in time, you can add extra ambience to the track that otherwise wouldn't exist. It does add to some live recordings, but again, it's not really more "accurate" per say, on some tracks it fails, let my beat pound by TI is one of them. In the intro, the strange blip noises only play in the rear... This is just about the only way to get ambience with rear fill and without a ms-8 your not getting that, your just making a mess.

Now if you want to use the rear fill for extra midbass, that too can be done, but again it takes ALOT of processing. First you have to be able to use very steep slopes, generally 24db/octave or even much higher, honestly 48db slopes are preferred, you want NO midrange leakage if possible. Your looking for a real 80-200, maybe 300hz tops. Second, you have to stop the rear speakers from collapsing your stage. Best way to do that is to NOT put them in the rear deck, that helps alot, but not practical in 90% of cars. Second, rear deck or not you need to add processing and filter L-R for the left channel and R-L for right channel. Off the top of my head I only know one processor that does this and it was custom build for this exact application. The car was built for pure loud dynamics with good SQ and even the owner admitted this is still a small tradeoff, but it does work. What this does, using the left channel for example it looks at all the information that is recorded onto the stereo track in the left channel and the gets rid of everything that is also equal in the right channel. What you end up with for you left channel is JUST the sound that would only normally be playing in the left speaker. Anything that was supposed to be anywhere but the far left side of the soudstage won't be present in that speaker. Right side is just the opposite. The MS-8 CANNOT do this. However, the MS-8 does the opposite process to make a center channel. It decodes the stereo to get just the sounds that come from both channels equally and sends just that sound to the center.

From someone who has heard many cars, know a decent amount about SQ I can tell you your mostly off base here. 99% of the time if you want good SQ it's best to stick with a simple front stage only and pay careful attention to driver placement, output/distortion ability, and getting the frequency response as close a you can once your done. KISS really does go along way and the half *** attempts your listing really won't help. Rear fill can work, but it's a lot more involved than your making it. For all the extra money your spending to "compliment" your front drivers, it'd be better to spend them on better speakers or more amplication, better enclosures, etc. For 200 extra in speakers for the rear doors and rear deck (assuming cheap speakers) you can easily build your own kickpanels with change left over or pay someone to do it for you for around that price. Then you've improved PLD and given them a solid enclosure. You could have also bought better drivers or bought a bigger amp.

It can be your car your rules all you want, doesn't mean it doesn't sound wrong even if you like it. Some people think their stock systems treble cranked up sounds amazing, some like Bose setups. Your not thinking too far outside the box here, it's ALL been done.

 

[calebkhill 10+ year member]

Listen to them man.

This is the real deal here.

This is probably the best thrash I've seen that sums up what a front stage is.

All those speakers are only going to cancel or multiply in some way or fashion, and diminish the source signal...

What i just said was explained in detail above....

Take all this to heart.

It takes a great deal of time to set up a sq vehicle the traditional way.

 

[keep_hope_alive Premium Member]

cool thread. i recently placed a 4 channel recorder on a stage behind the vocalist but in front of the drums. the recorder (Zoom H2) has front and rear stereo mics. i can hear each channel separately. what a vocalist hears is chaotic. you get original, direct sound of the drums behind you. you will get original, direct sound of a bass head/cab on one side and original, direct sound of guitarists on one or either side. then you get a monitor mix from the front that will vary based on location, FOH console capabilities, sound engineer experience/knowledge/personal tastes (and the monitor mix may be custom for that listener or whatever the listeners need to hear), the vocalist hears reverb from the room, and sound off the rear of the PA's. it's impossible to decode that for a car, not even Dolby attempts to do that. you don't want to hear what a vocalist hears.

but the original post makes a leap that isn't necessary - having sound all around you isn't the same as what a vocalist hears, but that's not to say it isn't enjoyable. i know a lot of people who just simply prefer lots of full range speakers playing at different distances in a closed environment. they think sitting in a front stage car is weird, humans are used to reverb from the room. we are used to getting information from behind us and the initial time-delay gap is one of our cues on room size. in many ways, front and rear full range speakers can seem just fine.

now, to the counter points above, i agree that once you get a great sound stage with proper placement, depth, and width, it is addictive being able to visualize the recording. i love being able to isolate each instrument and source across the sound stage in both depth and horizontal position.

in my opinion, rear fill is important and should be approach as a simulation of room reflections. it will be filtered, delayed, and mixed such that it doesn't distract from the front stage but instead gives an illusion of a larger space. i've only had sufficient processing to pull this off a few times, and properly done it will take any system to the next level of realism. besides, the point of car audio is to make it sound like we aren't in a car at all!

 

[hispls 5,000+ posts]

This thread actually has some useful and well thought out information in it. I'm really shocked.