| HOW IMPORTANT IS SOUNDSTAGING? by Laurence A. Borden February 4, 2004 |
When I first became interested in this hobby I was, like most aspiring
audiophiles, quite enamored of soundstaging and imaging. In a scenario that
will probably resonate with many readers, over the ensuing years I spent
countless hours positioning and re-positioning speakers, an inch here, a
millimeter there, all in the hope of widening and deepening the stage,
tightening the image focus, increasing the sense of air around the
instruments… you know the routine.
Unexpectedly, two independent and in fact, contradictory circumstances lead
me to question the importance of these phenomena. The first took place
shortly after my introduction to high-end audio. While becoming acquainted
with other audiophiles, I encountered a few individuals who opined that
soundstaging was little more than audiophile nonsense, and had little to do
with music. In my infinite wisdom (isn’t it funny that the less experienced we
are, the more we think we know?) I was sure that they were at best misguided
and at worst, completely delusional. After all, how could something that
sounded so darn good, and which brought me so much pleasure, not be
important? And yet, while I outwardly rejected their point of view, the seed
had been planted. Try as I might to clear my mind of these heretical thoughts, I
secretly wondered if they weren’t really on to something.
While these doubts were simmering, it seemed as if all around me,
soundstaging and imaging were garnering ever-increasing importance. One
particularly significant event took place about two years ago at the Stereophile-
sponsored Home Entertainment Show in New York City. I was speaking with
the sales manager for a well known manufacturer of tube equipment. When I
asked him how his company’s new linestage would compare to the unit I was
currently (at the time) using, he replied (with appropriate hand gestures) that
my soundstage would go from “this” to “THIS.” Curiously, no mention was
made of midrange purity, bass tightness, crystalline highs, or dynamics - - -
only soundstage width. Odd, to say the least.
Around the same time, I began to realize just how much time I was spending
focusing on my system’s soundstage. And it wasn’t just me - - my friends
were all doing the same thing. Whereas our discussions used to be about
music, or about how a system sounded, it seemed as if the focus had shifted
to soundstage depth, layering of instruments, and the perceived distances
between the musicians. To my amazement, one friend recently admitted that
soundstage was more important to him than tonal accuracy or dynamics.
What the heck was going on?
I thus found myself in something of a quandary. On the one hand, I wondered if
the rebels were correct - - that soundstage was of no importance. On the
other, I was surrounded by those for whom soundstage was of paramount
importance. Truth be told, I wasn’t really sure where I stood on the subject, a
predicament I was neither used to (being rather opinionated), nor one I
particularly cared for. Desperately needing to sort this out I decided it was
time for some “agonizing reappraisal” (with apologies to one of my favorite
commercials). As will become clear, I have reached the conclusion that while
enjoyable, soundstaging and imaging are not critically important to the
enjoyment of music, and are the focus of far too much attention. My reasoning
is as follows:
Many live concerts have minimal soundstaging
Essentially all rock music concerts, and an increasing number of concerts of
other musical genres, use amplification. (Classical music remains an
important exception.) In such cases, soundstaging is non-existent since the
sound which reaches our ears arises not from the instruments (including
voices) themselves but rather, from speakers which are located at some
distance from the musicians. Accordingly, there is no depth to the
soundstage, the width is artificial, and there is virtually no sense of “air” or
space around the instruments. Importantly however, rock concerts...rock!
They titillate the senses, get the juices flowing, the legs tapping, and the body
gyrating; all without a semblance of soundstage.
It is also worth considering Broadway shows, in which the musicians are often
located in a pit. While one certainly has a sense of the general area from
which the music emanates, it is not possible to ascertain (except visually) the
relative placement of the instruments, their expanse, nor the distance between
them. And yet, remarkably, the music at such shows is often fantastic.
Even at concerts or shows in which the musicians are on the stage, and in
which amplification is not employed, if one turns one’s head sideways the
ability to localize the sounds is severely diminished. And yet, the enjoyment of
the music continues unabated.
Based on these observations, it appears that the enjoyment of music is not
dependent on soundstaging and imaging.
One rarely focuses on soundstaging when listening to live music
Many of us experienced live music long before we heard high-quality audio
systems. Think back to those days: Do you recall ever focusing on the
soundstage? Admittedly, a large physical stage was (and still is) impressive,
but was it something with which you were preoccupied? Did you ever think to
yourself, “Wow, the musicians are spread across a stage that is 30 foot wide
and 20 feet deep”?; or “Gee, I can close my eyes and tell that the violin is three
feet behind the cello, and four feet to its right”?; or “Wow, the bass is seven
feet to the left of the piano”? I suspect not. In fact, I daresay that when you
were young(er) and closed your eyes at a concert, it was to let the music wash
over you and transport you, not to analyze the position of the musicians. I find
it interesting that, within my admittedly small sphere of friends and
acquaintances, the music lovers who are not audiophiles (that is, not involved
with high-end audio equipment) spend very little time (if any) focusing on the
spatial aspects of a performance. I will go out on a limb and suggest that if
you do so, it is only because of how much emphasis has been placed on such
factors vis-a-vis our high-end home systems.
These factors lead me to the following conclusion: One need not focus on
soundstaging and imaging, or even be particularly aware of their existence, to
enjoy music.
The soundstaging on many recordings is artificial
I have often heard the argument that soundstaging and imaging help
compensate for the properties of live music which are missing from our home
playback systems, things such as visual cues and physical size, and thereby
help with the illusion we attempt to create. While I consider these claims to be
valid and reasonable, I think the subject warrants closer scrutiny.
It should first be noted that the soundstage present in a sizeable fraction of the
recordings we listen to was created by the recording engineer, rather than
having been generated naturally. While this does not by necessity negate its
value, I feel that it does (or at least, should) temper the enthusiasm with which
it is greeted. Moreover, and perhaps of greater importance, is the fact that all
too frequently the soundstage is artificial sounding. We’ve all experienced far
too many recordings in which the drums are on one side of the stage while the
cymbals are on the other; or in which the piano magically spans the entire
stage; or in which the singer seems to be ten feet tall. Is this really what we
want to focus on?
In addition to the size of their soundstage, many listeners tout the pinpoint
imaging which their systems produce. While admittedly an amusing parlor
trick, I personally have never experienced a similar phenomenon when
listening to live music. (Perhaps other, more experienced listeners have.) I
thus submit that irrespective of the extent to which some enjoy this
phenomenon, it has little relevance to music.
Focusing on soundstaging is an analytical endeavor which distracts
from the true essence of music
Thus far, I have tried to support the position that the soundstaging and imaging
associated with high-end audio systems are artifactual, and not critical to
musical enjoyment. But I’ve ignored the fact that many audiophiles enjoy these
properties. Surely there’s no harm in that, is there? Well, maybe.
I suspect many of us have at times fallen into the trap of “listening to the
equipment,” an analytical style of listening which most agree is generally
antithetical to the enjoyment of music. I believe that “listening to the
soundstage” can be equally insidious. While my own personal experiences
are far too limited to allow for any definitive conclusions, I get the impression
that individuals who focus heavily on soundstage have a tendency to be overly-
analytical listeners. I have heard acquaintances reject otherwise excellent-
sounding systems solely on the grounds that they didn’t image well, or didn’t
have a deep enough soundstage (the latter probably more a function of
speaker placement than design). While these listeners are as entitled to their
own likes and dislikes as I am to mine, it is my considered opinion that by
placing so much weight on soundstage, they are doing themselves a disfavor.
By analogy to missing the forest for the trees, they are missing the music for
the soundstage.
CONCLUDING REMARKS
I should end by making clear that I am not opposed to soundstaging and
imaging, nor do I think that they are some terrible evils to be avoided at all
costs. If the truth be told, I too enjoy a deep and wide soundstage, and the
ability to (at least roughly) determine the positions of the musicians within that
stage. However, I think that these properties receive too much attention in the
audiophile community, and that too many listeners are spending an inordinate
amount of time and energy focusing on them, with the unfortunate
consequence of overlooking other elements of the music which I believe are
far more important - - things such as tonal quality and dynamics. It took me
quite some time to reach this conclusion and having resisted it as best I could,
it came as something of a rude-awakening. But importantly, by changing my
priorities, I find that I enjoy listening to recorded music far more than I used to.
As Martha Stewart would say, that’s a good thing!
audiophiles, quite enamored of soundstaging and imaging. In a scenario that
will probably resonate with many readers, over the ensuing years I spent
countless hours positioning and re-positioning speakers, an inch here, a
millimeter there, all in the hope of widening and deepening the stage,
tightening the image focus, increasing the sense of air around the
instruments… you know the routine.
Unexpectedly, two independent and in fact, contradictory circumstances lead
me to question the importance of these phenomena. The first took place
shortly after my introduction to high-end audio. While becoming acquainted
with other audiophiles, I encountered a few individuals who opined that
soundstaging was little more than audiophile nonsense, and had little to do
with music. In my infinite wisdom (isn’t it funny that the less experienced we
are, the more we think we know?) I was sure that they were at best misguided
and at worst, completely delusional. After all, how could something that
sounded so darn good, and which brought me so much pleasure, not be
important? And yet, while I outwardly rejected their point of view, the seed
had been planted. Try as I might to clear my mind of these heretical thoughts, I
secretly wondered if they weren’t really on to something.
While these doubts were simmering, it seemed as if all around me,
soundstaging and imaging were garnering ever-increasing importance. One
particularly significant event took place about two years ago at the Stereophile-
sponsored Home Entertainment Show in New York City. I was speaking with
the sales manager for a well known manufacturer of tube equipment. When I
asked him how his company’s new linestage would compare to the unit I was
currently (at the time) using, he replied (with appropriate hand gestures) that
my soundstage would go from “this” to “THIS.” Curiously, no mention was
made of midrange purity, bass tightness, crystalline highs, or dynamics - - -
only soundstage width. Odd, to say the least.
Around the same time, I began to realize just how much time I was spending
focusing on my system’s soundstage. And it wasn’t just me - - my friends
were all doing the same thing. Whereas our discussions used to be about
music, or about how a system sounded, it seemed as if the focus had shifted
to soundstage depth, layering of instruments, and the perceived distances
between the musicians. To my amazement, one friend recently admitted that
soundstage was more important to him than tonal accuracy or dynamics.
What the heck was going on?
I thus found myself in something of a quandary. On the one hand, I wondered if
the rebels were correct - - that soundstage was of no importance. On the
other, I was surrounded by those for whom soundstage was of paramount
importance. Truth be told, I wasn’t really sure where I stood on the subject, a
predicament I was neither used to (being rather opinionated), nor one I
particularly cared for. Desperately needing to sort this out I decided it was
time for some “agonizing reappraisal” (with apologies to one of my favorite
commercials). As will become clear, I have reached the conclusion that while
enjoyable, soundstaging and imaging are not critically important to the
enjoyment of music, and are the focus of far too much attention. My reasoning
is as follows:
Many live concerts have minimal soundstaging
Essentially all rock music concerts, and an increasing number of concerts of
other musical genres, use amplification. (Classical music remains an
important exception.) In such cases, soundstaging is non-existent since the
sound which reaches our ears arises not from the instruments (including
voices) themselves but rather, from speakers which are located at some
distance from the musicians. Accordingly, there is no depth to the
soundstage, the width is artificial, and there is virtually no sense of “air” or
space around the instruments. Importantly however, rock concerts...rock!
They titillate the senses, get the juices flowing, the legs tapping, and the body
gyrating; all without a semblance of soundstage.
It is also worth considering Broadway shows, in which the musicians are often
located in a pit. While one certainly has a sense of the general area from
which the music emanates, it is not possible to ascertain (except visually) the
relative placement of the instruments, their expanse, nor the distance between
them. And yet, remarkably, the music at such shows is often fantastic.
Even at concerts or shows in which the musicians are on the stage, and in
which amplification is not employed, if one turns one’s head sideways the
ability to localize the sounds is severely diminished. And yet, the enjoyment of
the music continues unabated.
Based on these observations, it appears that the enjoyment of music is not
dependent on soundstaging and imaging.
One rarely focuses on soundstaging when listening to live music
Many of us experienced live music long before we heard high-quality audio
systems. Think back to those days: Do you recall ever focusing on the
soundstage? Admittedly, a large physical stage was (and still is) impressive,
but was it something with which you were preoccupied? Did you ever think to
yourself, “Wow, the musicians are spread across a stage that is 30 foot wide
and 20 feet deep”?; or “Gee, I can close my eyes and tell that the violin is three
feet behind the cello, and four feet to its right”?; or “Wow, the bass is seven
feet to the left of the piano”? I suspect not. In fact, I daresay that when you
were young(er) and closed your eyes at a concert, it was to let the music wash
over you and transport you, not to analyze the position of the musicians. I find
it interesting that, within my admittedly small sphere of friends and
acquaintances, the music lovers who are not audiophiles (that is, not involved
with high-end audio equipment) spend very little time (if any) focusing on the
spatial aspects of a performance. I will go out on a limb and suggest that if
you do so, it is only because of how much emphasis has been placed on such
factors vis-a-vis our high-end home systems.
These factors lead me to the following conclusion: One need not focus on
soundstaging and imaging, or even be particularly aware of their existence, to
enjoy music.
The soundstaging on many recordings is artificial
I have often heard the argument that soundstaging and imaging help
compensate for the properties of live music which are missing from our home
playback systems, things such as visual cues and physical size, and thereby
help with the illusion we attempt to create. While I consider these claims to be
valid and reasonable, I think the subject warrants closer scrutiny.
It should first be noted that the soundstage present in a sizeable fraction of the
recordings we listen to was created by the recording engineer, rather than
having been generated naturally. While this does not by necessity negate its
value, I feel that it does (or at least, should) temper the enthusiasm with which
it is greeted. Moreover, and perhaps of greater importance, is the fact that all
too frequently the soundstage is artificial sounding. We’ve all experienced far
too many recordings in which the drums are on one side of the stage while the
cymbals are on the other; or in which the piano magically spans the entire
stage; or in which the singer seems to be ten feet tall. Is this really what we
want to focus on?
In addition to the size of their soundstage, many listeners tout the pinpoint
imaging which their systems produce. While admittedly an amusing parlor
trick, I personally have never experienced a similar phenomenon when
listening to live music. (Perhaps other, more experienced listeners have.) I
thus submit that irrespective of the extent to which some enjoy this
phenomenon, it has little relevance to music.
Focusing on soundstaging is an analytical endeavor which distracts
from the true essence of music
Thus far, I have tried to support the position that the soundstaging and imaging
associated with high-end audio systems are artifactual, and not critical to
musical enjoyment. But I’ve ignored the fact that many audiophiles enjoy these
properties. Surely there’s no harm in that, is there? Well, maybe.
I suspect many of us have at times fallen into the trap of “listening to the
equipment,” an analytical style of listening which most agree is generally
antithetical to the enjoyment of music. I believe that “listening to the
soundstage” can be equally insidious. While my own personal experiences
are far too limited to allow for any definitive conclusions, I get the impression
that individuals who focus heavily on soundstage have a tendency to be overly-
analytical listeners. I have heard acquaintances reject otherwise excellent-
sounding systems solely on the grounds that they didn’t image well, or didn’t
have a deep enough soundstage (the latter probably more a function of
speaker placement than design). While these listeners are as entitled to their
own likes and dislikes as I am to mine, it is my considered opinion that by
placing so much weight on soundstage, they are doing themselves a disfavor.
By analogy to missing the forest for the trees, they are missing the music for
the soundstage.
CONCLUDING REMARKS
I should end by making clear that I am not opposed to soundstaging and
imaging, nor do I think that they are some terrible evils to be avoided at all
costs. If the truth be told, I too enjoy a deep and wide soundstage, and the
ability to (at least roughly) determine the positions of the musicians within that
stage. However, I think that these properties receive too much attention in the
audiophile community, and that too many listeners are spending an inordinate
amount of time and energy focusing on them, with the unfortunate
consequence of overlooking other elements of the music which I believe are
far more important - - things such as tonal quality and dynamics. It took me
quite some time to reach this conclusion and having resisted it as best I could,
it came as something of a rude-awakening. But importantly, by changing my
priorities, I find that I enjoy listening to recorded music far more than I used to.
As Martha Stewart would say, that’s a good thing!
| Reader's Feedback |
| March 10, 2004 |
| Larry Borden's Response |
| May 15, 2004 |
Mr. Marz states that I am not quite correct “because the purpose of the audio
system is NOT to reproduce a live performance” but rather, “to create a memorable
experience in the listener.”
I will begin by mentioning that I feel this is not a case of either party being correct or
not; rather, it is simply one of differing opinions.
That said, I respectfully disagree with Mr. Marz’s explanation. While it is often
stated that the purpose of a home system is not the reproduction of the live event,
considerable evidence seems to point to the contrary. For example, if we do not
wish to reproduce the semblance of a live event, why do recording engineers
introduce artificial spatial information, thus emulating the sound of an actual
performance? Similarly, why do so many audiophiles enjoy systems (especially
those that are horn-based) with “life-like” dynamics? And why do we seek tonal
accuracy in our gear, if not to make the reproduced music seem like the real thing?
And why are live recordings, especially those with considerable natural room
ambiance, so cherished? I could provide additional examples, but I trust I’ve made
my point.
It is a sad truth that even the best audio systems fall short of sounding like a live
event. However, it is my belief that such should be, and is the goal of all High-
Fidelity systems.
I will close by thanking Mr. Marz for his support of DAGOGO, and for sharing his
insights.
Larry Borden
system is NOT to reproduce a live performance” but rather, “to create a memorable
experience in the listener.”
I will begin by mentioning that I feel this is not a case of either party being correct or
not; rather, it is simply one of differing opinions.
That said, I respectfully disagree with Mr. Marz’s explanation. While it is often
stated that the purpose of a home system is not the reproduction of the live event,
considerable evidence seems to point to the contrary. For example, if we do not
wish to reproduce the semblance of a live event, why do recording engineers
introduce artificial spatial information, thus emulating the sound of an actual
performance? Similarly, why do so many audiophiles enjoy systems (especially
those that are horn-based) with “life-like” dynamics? And why do we seek tonal
accuracy in our gear, if not to make the reproduced music seem like the real thing?
And why are live recordings, especially those with considerable natural room
ambiance, so cherished? I could provide additional examples, but I trust I’ve made
my point.
It is a sad truth that even the best audio systems fall short of sounding like a live
event. However, it is my belief that such should be, and is the goal of all High-
Fidelity systems.
I will close by thanking Mr. Marz for his support of DAGOGO, and for sharing his
insights.
Larry Borden
Above exchange extracted from LETTERS
Hi Constantine,
I enjoyed reading the article "HOW IMPORTANT IS SOUNDSTAGING?", although I
think that Dr. Borden is not quite correct.
You cannot compare live performances to recordings because the purpose of the
audio system is NOT to reproduce a live performance. It real function is to create a
memorable experience in the listener. The main reason why it is NOT possible to
reproduce a live recording is that there is a synergy between the players and the
audience that cannot exist in a reproduction system.
Your site is very good and informative, keep up the good work.
FYI, please check the review on the STR201 at :
http://www.positive-feedback.com/Issue12/redplanet.htm
Best regards,
Daniel Marz
Red Planet Labs, Inc.
858-395-2286
www.rplonline.com
I enjoyed reading the article "HOW IMPORTANT IS SOUNDSTAGING?", although I
think that Dr. Borden is not quite correct.
You cannot compare live performances to recordings because the purpose of the
audio system is NOT to reproduce a live performance. It real function is to create a
memorable experience in the listener. The main reason why it is NOT possible to
reproduce a live recording is that there is a synergy between the players and the
audience that cannot exist in a reproduction system.
Your site is very good and informative, keep up the good work.
FYI, please check the review on the STR201 at :
http://www.positive-feedback.com/Issue12/redplanet.htm
Best regards,
Daniel Marz
Red Planet Labs, Inc.
858-395-2286
www.rplonline.com
