Do your ML's portray musicians/voices in FRONT of, or BEHIND, the speaker plane?

[sleepysurf]

Paul McGowan has some excellent video's addressing various audiophile issues. In this one, from 2017, he states that, ideally, the musicians should image BEHIND the plane of the speakers...



Obviously, a lot depends on the recording, and room acoustics. However, I've had two kinds of dipole speakers that offered completely opposite imaging, yet both very "realistic."

Years ago, when I had Apogee Stages, the musician's/voices seemed to be ~1-2 ft in FRONT of the speakers, yielding an (almost startling) "in your face" sound stage. Subsequently, with all my Martin Logan setups (Aerius, Summits, and now Expressions), the sound stage has always been ~1-2 ft BEHIND the speakers.

To be honest, I actually preferred the FORWARD imaging of the Apogees, but have never been able to re-create that with ML's. According to Paul, the recessed presentation is the more accurate one.

I'm curious, do any of you have ML setups where the imaging is in FRONT of the speakers?

BTW, my Expressions are ~4 ft out from the wall.

 

[amey01]

BTW, my Expressions are ~4 ft out from the wall.

What do you mean by this ^^? Is 4ft the distance wall>panel; or wall>rear of speaker?

Mine are about 3ft wall>panel, however the wall is heavily treated.

For my setup, the image of forward voices is about in-line with the panels. The image of rear instruments and voices is behind the speakers.

Occasionally, on certain recordings, very forward voices will "pop" out in front of the speakers, but not by a lot. Never that "startling" effect of which you speak.

 

[JonFo]

On a well set up system, dependent on recording of course, the image should be more in-line with the speakers themselves IMHO.

This topic reflects the challenges of dipole radiator speakers (the Apogees are also dipoles), and is really about which sound is dominant: the reflected back-wave or the direct front wave of the speaker.

If the back-wave is dominant, then imaging can indeed sound recessed behind the speakers, because, well, that's where the dominant energy is coming from. It is delayed by 15 to 20ms relative to the front, and if the front is perceived as weaker, then the brain will 'hear' the delayed sound as the primary.
But reflection paths have a LOT to do with this, not just delay. So room layout, treatment (or lack thereof) and all that can make the identical speaker behave completely differently.

As most of you know, I now fall firmly in the 'manage the reflections' camp, and have my surround setup in a room that is heavily treated to minimize the back-wave impact, especially on the front. With this, the majority of recordings image in the plane of the speakers, or if in surround, within the surround field. But if the mixer so chooses, the sound can indeed apear to come from further away than the speaker plane. And on Atmos recordings, or using Dolby Upmixer (DSU) where the heights are also engaged, the soundfield can be huge and extends way beyond the room boundaries.

 

[sleepysurf]

4 ft is distance from wall to panels.

Of note, the bookshelves behind my speakers provide some degree of diffusion and absorption, so the front wave is dominant, yet the sound stage is definitely recessed (very deep). Next week, I'll experiment by placing reflective masonite panels in front of the bookshelves, and see what happens!

BTW, the particular track that always "startled" me with it's "forward projection" from my Apogee Stages was the opening vocals of Michael Jackson's Liberian Girl, which I still use as the reference track for this sort of thing.

 

[amey01]

4 ft is distance from wall to panels.

Of note, the bookshelves behind my speakers provide some degree of diffusion and absorption, so the front wave is dominant, yet the sound stage is definitely recessed (very deep). Next week, I'll experiment by placing reflective masonite panels in front of the bookshelves, and see what happens!

BTW, the particular track that always "startled" me with it's "forward projection" from my Apogee Stages was the opening vocals of Michael Jackson's Liberian Girl, which I still use as the reference track for this sort of thing.

I'll try that track and let you know what I think.

 

[JonFo]

Did some critical listening today on this topic. And first off, man, stereo can be pretty ‘flat’ compared to good surround content. By good I mean the recent Steven Wilson BluRays in DTS-HD-MA 5.1 High Rez. Even those same compositions in PCM 24/96 stereo don’t compare to the surround versions. Never mind the Dolby Surround Upmixed versions of the 5.1 high rez.

So how does ‘Liberian Girl’ by Michael Jackson sound on this setup in stereo as far as source location?
The percussive highs are very much ‘forward’ due to the recording processing applied to those tracks, but MJ’s voice is firmly in the plane of the speakers. The vocal harmonies are processed with phasing that places them towards the ‘outside’ of the speaker plane.
So my take is that yes, on most setups this track would wind up sounding a bit ‘forward’.

Replaying ‘Liberian Girl’ with the DSU engaged (therefore a 5.4.4 setup), MJ’s main vocals are firmly anchored in the center most of the time, the vocal harmonies are spread out around the soundfield, fully enveloping the listener. The percussive highlights that sounded ‘forward’ are now fully integrated into the front soundstage and less prominent. Tom-tom’s are slightly elevated, to the outside and above the tops of the fronts, so at 8’ up, add a nice highlight to the segments where they are featured. The entire soundfield is well within the perimeter of the speakers.

BTW- the ‘Bad’ track from this album is pretty cool. It had been many, many years since I heard it. And with the Mid Bass Modules adding tactile impact, it was pretty cool to experience it again. But compared to a modern recording, this was bass-shy.
I hope MJ’s estate decides to allow a major re-mix / HighRez multichannel re-release of his catalog.

Thanks Alan for bring up this topic.

 

[sleepysurf]

Interesting analysis Jon! I never thought about the possibility that the mastering engineer may have "tweaked" the phasing of MJ's voice, harmonies, and instruments. That's likely the case on many other "pop" recordings as well.

Any recommendations for a "pure" stereo recording where vocals and/or instruments are particularly "forward" sounding?

 

[amey01]

Interesting analysis Jon! I never thought about the possibility that the mastering engineer may have "tweaked" the phasing of MJ's voice, harmonies, and instruments. That's likely the case on many other "pop" recordings as well.

Any recommendations for a "pure" stereo recording where vocals and/or instruments are particularly "forward" sounding?

I will definitely try this "Liberian Girl" track and report back.

As for recommendations of forward recordings, I can't really think off hand.

For my system, there is a soundscape presented which is generally in-line with the panels, but obviously extends both ways (fore and aft) as placement in the recording dictates.

One "forward" recording I can think of is "Nils Lofgren - Acoustic Live" - funny because it is a live recording, albeit a close-miked one. From memory, his voice sits about 10cm forward of the panels on most tracks. So not forward by a lot (as I said earlier), but it does qualify for a "forward" recording in my listening room. Another recording which has amazing depth (well behind the speakers to in front of the plane) is Bluezeum - Portrait of a Groove.

For instrumental, try Jesse Cook - Montreal - opening track will give you some very forward percussives - to the point of quite unrealistic.

 

[amey01]

Oh, and back to Michael Jackson - hasn't some of his art mastered in QSound?

That will give you a very weird soundscape, and probably not something you should be using for critical analysis.

 

[JonFo]

Oh, and back to Michael Jackson - hasn't some of his art mastered in QSound?

That will give you a very weird soundscape, and probably not something you should be using for critical analysis.

Yes, much of modern highly produced pop music has a LOT of processing applied to various sub-tracks and to the master as a whole. Some did have Qsound and other phase/frequency/pan based enhancements that when processed via Dolby PLIIx or Dolby Surround Upmixer result in some nice surround effects. But. And on 2Ch setups, have a broader soundstage.

So yes, agree that a more neutral recording and mastering recording would be preferred for this test.

 

[sleepysurf]

...I'll experiment by placing reflective masonite panels in front of the bookshelves, and see what happens!...

Finally had a chance to experiment. Initially, I tried masonite panels. Overall imaging was smeared (as expected) due to reflections, with Michael's vocals still recessed. Next, I tried absorption (see pic) using acoustic panels and pillows.



Imaging better, but Michael's vocals still recessed (but not quite as far back).

Overall, I prefer the imaging and vocals of my Expressions without additional absorption (other than my "acoustic bookshelves").

Guess I'll never know if the forward vocals I heard with the Apogee's were unique to their design, or just a quirk of the different room/acoustics when I owned them.

If anybody knows of a track (without phase manipulation) where vocals and/or instruments are projected forward of the ML speaker plane, please advise!

 

[amey01]

If anybody knows of a track (without phase manipulation) where vocals and/or instruments are projected forward of the ML speaker plane, please advise!

As above!!!

 

[sleepysurf]

As above!!!

Oops! Missed that post!

I have the Nils Lofgren album. His voice (and guitar) are very crisp, and, I agree, more "forward" than most, but doesn't quite extend beyond the speaker plane in my setup.

The only Bluezeum album I could find on Tidal is Put Your Mind on Hold which clearly plays around with phase to generate 3D effects... expanding the sound stage beyond the speakers in all directions. The Jesse Cook album also appears to use some "phase" manipulation, but to a lesser degree.

Roger Waters Amused to Death is another classic pop album mixed in QSound to give 3D effects, but likewise "artificial."

I wonder if there are any jazz or classical recordings that achieve a forward presentation without resorting to engineering trickery?

 

[amey01]

I wonder if there are any jazz or classical recordings that achieve a forward presentation without resorting to engineering trickery?

Yep - plenty. I'll have a listen/think about it and let you know.

 

[amey01]

Off hand, I can think of the Cote D'Azur concerts. (Ella and Duke). Eight discs (so easy to remember) of forward-sounding glory.

 

[Bernard]

Yep - plenty. I'll have a listen/think about it and let you know.

Perhaps a Chesky recording?

 

[amey01]

I had a little listen last night, to recordings I remembered to bring the soundstage forward.

Not a lot of jazz/classical brings the soundstage forward (certainly not in a contrived or overt sort of way anyway).

Obviously most orchestral recordings will present wonderful depth. I have a recording of Brahms Symphony No 2 recorded live at the Sydney Opera House in 1973 which has amazing depth.

For Jazz, try James Morrison (Manner Dangerous).

Also Idea of North (Evidence) has some great depth, although not contrived or “faulty” in any way.

 

[Victor]

For me, lead vocals are generally just a whisker behind the speaker plane. I damp the back wave using lined curtains and vertical blinds immediately behind the panels (about 4-5ft away) but allow more reflection either side.
I know this wouldn’t give anything like full spectrum damping but it takes the edge off and keeps the WAF within reasonable bounds

 

[amey01]

I spent half the day in the listening room yesterday and had a good listen to Liberian Girl.

First of all, I don't like that recording at all. The imaging is very imprecise and inconsistent. That said, I agree with most of what Jon said - MJ's voice (at least) is dead in line with the panel plane. I did not however find the percussive highs forward in any way.

Overall, I thought the recording was flat and imprecise, a little bit harsh, and was not accurate across the frequency spectrum. The only time it steps away from that was the artificial processing which gives an extended L>R soundscape, adding quite a bit of height as well as width.