“SOUNDSTAGE” is a LIE?! Well, it’s complicated…

Audiophiles, myself included tend to believe or hope everything they playback is going to give a lifelike, 3 dimensional recording but the reality is that sometimes, soundstage is a lie.
SWAG: new-record-day...
💎💎💎 Speakers reviewed and recommend! 💎💎💎
Bookshelf:
Elac Unifi 2.0: amzn.to/2OrL5RW
Elac UB5: amzn.to/3qo2msU
Elac Debut 2.0: amzn.to/3uVfWar
Elac Debut Reference: amzn.to/2OnQU2W
SVS Ultra: amzn.to/3uXIkZJ
JBL Studio 530: amzn.to/3uVagNL
Floorstanding:
Q Acoustics Concept 500: amzn.to/3ddGkEx
SVS Ultra: amzn.to/3qo2msU
SVS Prime Pinnacle: amzn.to/2MMYt2J
Elac Debut 2.0: amzn.to/3ruZRX7
Elac Unifi 2.0 UF52: amzn.to/3uXJa8P
Elac UF5: amzn.to/3e9ri4F
Triangle Borea Bro 8: adorama.rfvk.n...
PSB Alpha T20: amzn.to/3uS2swa
⭐️ Follow NRD ⭐️
/ ​
/ ​
/ nrdreviews​
💪🏻 Support NRD 💪🏻
/ newrecordday​
Donate via Paypal: [e-mail]
Disclaimer: The links provided are amazon affiliate links: I earn a small commission on purchases at no additional cost to you! I use the funds to help grow the channel, investing in better equipment for the reviews and video production! Thank you!

[@SteveGuttenbergAudiophiliac]

Ron, you nailed it!

[@tomehCanada]

So Steve you attended Chesky recordings many times. Can you comment on their attempts to capture a true stereo recording with actual width, timing and dynamics?

[@rosswarren436]

@@tomehCanada he has mentioned it a few times on his channel. Chesky started out with a high quality stereo mic, (sorry, I don't recall the model), but eventually moved to using the even higher end "dummy head". Finding the optimum placement of those stereo mics relative to the musicians (or rather, positioning the musicians and vocalist relative to the mics) would have been a matter of a lot of trial and error in getting the "mix" to sound balanced in volumes while capturing that realistic soundstage. And then the pressure on the musicians and vocalist to get it all "right" in one continuous take would be far different than how it is done in most studios. Hats off to those who can accomplish that and do it well.

[@tomehCanada]

@@rosswarren436 Thanks for your insights Ross. I was trying to get Steve to indicate that the world of "true stereo" is there if you do a little searching. I was also trying to get his opinion on the results since I know he was present for many of recordings and heard the live music. I also record with stereo pairs to capture stereo images. I run SIlk Purse Recording in Elora Ontario. Taking care and a little time allows me to capture live concerts. The result is that the people who enjoyed it live have listened to the recording on my mastering system and commented "that's just like it was at the concert." That is "music to my ears." And those people who comment in the studio are also musicians without technical recording knowledge but musicians ears. Stay well.

[@scottbayne5710]

Steve Guttenberg - I know he throws things like this out there just to get clicks but you agree with his statement rock and pop music say is "90% of the music" audiophiles listen to and simply recorded (non multi-tracked) jazz, blues, acoustic, choral and symphonic music is "BORING"??? Everyone knows rock and pop are multi-tracked when recorded that is not some great insight. They also rely on electronic instruments, guitar amps and PA systems so there is no way to record it without mixing because everything would sound worse than it already does. Maybe the solution is to NOT say there is no soundstage but listen to simply recorded music other than rock and pop that actually has a TRUE soundstage!

[@rosswarren436]

@@tomehCanada interesting. I will look up Silk Purse Recordings. Thanks!

[@mladenbasic1]

As a former recording engineer I love the fact that you brought this up! This information just isn’t talked about enough. The artificial soundscapes are an art form unto themselves. I love both types of recording methods by the way.

[@oysteinsoreide4323]

Most recording is done dry with close miking in mono. But that also gives more freedom to the one that is mixing the track. Adding abbreviation, and panning etc. A recording is mostly fixed by an engineer in most cases, even for acoustic music, because of the limitations of the microphones. They are not behaving the same as our ears.

[@6StringPassion.]

Yep. Seems obvious to me. Some of the best recordings I've heard are classical, jazz and blues recordings from the early 60's when stereo was in its infancy and the entire recording was done as a live performance using a couple of mics in locations that captured what a listener in the audience would perceive.

[@jamiesmith6838]

Yes. LP's do it best without a lot of electronic augmentation of today's digital recording & processing.

[@JonAnderhub]

Well, the problem with your illusion is it's just that... an illusion. Multiple microphones and close micing instruments were being done in the 50s and 60's and original "stereo" recordings were done with the band mixed to one track and the vocalist mixed to the other track with no thought given to producing a "soundstage". Reference Lawrance Welk and other live music shows from that era and you will find microphones all over the place. Listen to early Welk records and you will find the band playing on one channel of the stereo and the vocalists singing on the other channel.

[@6StringPassion.]

​@@JonAnderhub There were plenty of terrible studio recordings in that period. There were also recordings that weren't. Try listening to something along the lines of Muddy Waters Folk Singer, for example.

[@garysmith8455]

With you 100% !🙂

[@fonkenful]

@@6StringPassion.One of those truly spectacular recordings that I think succeeds exactly because of the very spare technique used. Always been at the top of my equipment assessment playlist.

[@lazzzzze1]

I don't know. Just because soundstage and sonic depth are artificial doesn't mean it doesn't exist. The problem may be there's overlapping terms we use, so when we say soundstage, we really mean timbre, or how realistic it sounds to us. The nicer the Hifi system, the more detail and nuance it can produce, translating to more SS, timbre, air, etc. With a Bluetooth speaker, even those 10% of genuine good recordings you mentioned will sound flat.

[@NickP333]

The engineers who produce an artificial soundstage in the studio well should absolutely be applauded. That’s not any easy job, but you explained it wonderfully, Ron. I’ve recorded in studios my fair share of times, and a good mixing engineer is a must. When just a couple of mics are set up for an orchestra, if they’re close enough, it’ll come out as stereo and produce a soundstage, but the further away the more it becomes a mono recording that will still have a soundstage. Rudy Van Gelder was masterful at taking a small amount of instruments and recreating a soundstage. So many of those old jazz recordings sound so fantastic. Soundstage doesn’t tell you if the music is good and if you enjoy it though… Great vid, Ron. Thanks

[@Newrecordday2013]

Completely agree with you

[@powerguymark]

@@Newrecordday2013 I can't thank you enough for posting this video. I'm an old two channel guy from way back when quadraphonics was an actual thing. In fact the first receiver I wanted to buy as a kid was a Marantz 4 channel that my older brother talked me out of buying. Now after 40 years I have completely drank the multi-channel Kool-Aid because of the very things you talk about in this video. Big changes in multi-channel are going to make it even more of a Stark contrast compared to what I used to pretend I was satisfied with with 2.1 channel audio. Switching from channels to object-based and now this is getting ready to happen. kzbin.info/www/bejne/oYmTnqamiNaFpqM

[@adamjj85]

Spot on Ron. I didn't think this would be news to audio enthusiasts. Soundstage for most recordings is created by the mixing engineer through panning and other processing like reverb and delay.

[@pauldias234]

Thank you Ron! I've been having these same thoughts these last two years since I went down the audiophile rabbit hole. My sanity is returning and I'm getting back to enjoying music again.

[@yanivshef]

Same here

[@yanivshef]

And what about the speakers disappearance act every one talking about, is it not also part of the sound stage act? I’m also on the quest of making my speakers disappear and in most cases the sax and other instruments just come from the left of right speaker. Only the vocals float around in the middle . Should other instrument float around like the lead vocals ? I just don’t know anymore…..

[@Newrecordday2013]

Paul, you just perfectly summarized my entire goal in making this video.

[@josaphcj7199]

Same bro. Same . I feel you

[@josaphcj7199]

​@@yanivshefu learnt anything about this bro?

[@YAMAHA808]

I thankfully figured this out a long time ago and it let me enjoy the music instead of searching for something that's not there. It may hurt some people's feelings but it's a healthy dose of reality. It's not so much a lie as it is a construct.

[@TriAmpHiFi]

Quite correct.

[@E4xtream]

I'm so glad I came across this video. I watch a few channels here on KZbin and they are always talking about soundstage width, depth, location of origin (soundstage begins behind the front baffle of the speakers...whatever that means). They're always on about how you can tell that the guitarist was exactly 27 degrees and 2.8m behind the lead vocalist and all that. And I'm always thinking to myself...where are these magical recordings? Glad I can finally shove this in the "oh I'm not crazy basket". I decided long ago that speaker reviews rely heavily on this beautiful word poetry. "soundstage". "Depth". "Soul". "Body". "Full". And so on. I wish reviewers would be forced to assign a technical meaning behind each of the adjectives used so that there could be a universal standard.

[@E4xtream]

@Douglas Blake thank you for the response. I think the standard for me is to buy speakers I like and then to avoid actively searching for reasons not to like them any longer.

[@josaphcj7199]

Exactly bro. I was so scratching my head after hearing words like soundstage, timbre etc...

[@mdocod]

Glad someone is finally addressing this honestly. I've heard "soundstage" and "imaging" mischaracterized for years by speaker reviewers. It has nothing to do with planting a band in front of the listener, and everything to do with getting the speaker to behave like a point source while having reasonably flat on-axis and in-room response. A lot of this has to do with making sure the listener is far enough away from the speaker so that it can behave as a point source from the listening position. Your recommendations to pull speakers way out from walls can have counter-productive impacts with speakers that have a lot of drivers or driver separation. Placing some sound absorbing material behind the speaker, and getting them closer to the wall (further from the listener) may actually be much better in many rooms. Furthermore, many speakers are expecting the low frequency boundary reinforcement for frequencies below ~500hz. Pulling them out into the middle of the room will tilt the response down on the bottom end, making speakers sound "thin."

[@Satch_4_Hogs]

I REJECT YOUR REALITY AND REPLACE IT WITH MY OWN !

[@Newrecordday2013]

Loud noises!

[@dmcbain44]

It’s like a magic show. You know the magician doesn’t saw the person in half, but if it’s executed well, you are still wildly entertained. It sort of blows the whole “how the artist intended it” argument. I think the artist would prefer that you actually pay for the music and listen to it however you want to. I heard an interview with Billy Gibbons from ZZ Top about when he was growing up in Texas, at night on his AM radio, he could listen to the blues on WLS out of Chicago. I’m sure Billy’s listening experience didn’t have a soundstage or wasn’t audiophile, but it didn’t inspire him any less.

[@TriAmpHiFi]

Cool

[@br1878]

Yes, it’s manufactured. But it’s still a part of the art. Just as my photography isn’t complete without the post processing. If there’s a takeaway for me here it’s that engineers deserve more credit for albums.

[@Newrecordday2013]

100% agree

[@gelderlandproduction]

40+ years of recording in studios... THIS has to be the BEST explanation to novices. Well Done.... VERY well done.

[@JonAnderhub]

In your 40 years of recording in studios did you do your mixes to specifically sound good on i-phones or earbuds? Or did you do your mixes to sound good even on audiophile systems?

[@gelderlandproduction]

@@JonAnderhub the translations have expanded over the years. But mostly stayed "mid-centric" in the mix and master. The super highs and sub lows are there. It all depends on what te speakers will reveal. Creating dynamics and keeping noise floors low has become easier in the digital recording realms. Although this truly depends on genre specific music. Classical to death metal. A matter of taste.

[@836dmar]

As I expected. How can artist’s individual parts be recorded separately and be “real” in space when they are sent across the world and remixed back into a “session”? So glad you brought this up. I knew I wasn’t alone! Crazy, yes, but not alone.

[@slabjellyhed8]

Honestly, it seems to me that anyone who's into audio enough to watch your channel would surely understand that the vast majority of popular music is made with multi-tracking and that the whole sound stage part of it is an artificial construct (which makes this video and particularly the shocked sort of tone to it, kind of silly and unnecessary). I know that many years before I really got into audio. The whole thing with bands like the Beatles, with how they experimented with the stereo image and how so much of that was so artificial sounding showed pretty obviously how that music and pretty much everything after wasn't made by recording the natural sound of live instruments in a room. There's a ton of rock recordings that I grew up with that have instruments panned back and fourth between the channels as an effect... and you obviously don't get any of that if you're recording the natural sound of instruments in a room. I would argue though that the whole "fake sound stage" that is used with multi track recording isn't necessarily a stand in for the reality of the sound of live instruments in a room (though it can be) but has become it's own sort of thing, where artists, producers and engineers are striving less for realism and more for creating their own unique acoustical world... much the same way that art directors for science fiction movies create worlds that exist in imaginary realms for the characters to inhabit. Either way though, the whole "sound stage" properties that an audio system is able to do adds something to the music because it's really all about creating a feeling of space that the music inhabits, whether or not the original space in the recording was created by musicians playing together in an actual room, or is pieced together from separate performances...

[@asotomayor]

I always had a feeling that what I perceived as “soundstage” was all trickery / part of the magic of mixing / music production, specially with more modern music, I just didn’t know why or how to explain it. You nailed the explanation!

[@n.o.b.s.8458]

I wasn't sure how this was going to go, but I think you did a great job of breaking this topic down. I have some light experience with production, and I'm not even what I would consider intermediate. But, I started thinking about these things after a few tracks and it really changed my understanding of how music is put together. I also totally understand naming the video like this, but I would say that a truer statement is that soundstage is a choice. It's an art within itself, and it's not organic. There's a parallel here to photography. Basically any professional photograph you've seen has been edited heavily for color, exposure, preserving or exaggerating highlights and shadows, etc. When we look at those images in high-end prints or on a fantastic screen, it feels very real. The same basic thing happens with a great set of speakers. A dull, flat image won't look amazing on a remarkable screen, and a recording with no attention paid to sound staging will never sound like it's being played right in front of you. Conclusion: gear can't fix a low quality source. It can only make a great source sound even better.

[@gbrm6077]

This was a tremendous eye-opener for me. I've been blaming my system and room treatment for drums and other instruments that didn't sound right in placement in the soundstage. I'm so glad that I subscribed. I've been into stereo since the 60s, but I learn more each time I watch your videos. You are a tremendous resource....and I take back all those nasty things I've been saying about your beard!

[@Newrecordday2013]

Awesome! The video was totally worth it then!!

[@claudiomartinez7188]

He didn’t say you shouldn’t get a soundstage in your system, he explained how the soundstage can be a recreation invented by the mixing engineer. 👺

[@mtkreger]

Music is so much more enjoyable when the listener doesn't overanalyze in search of buzzwords.

[@jamiesmith6838]

Binaural Recording? But that doesn't capture reflected sound quite like natural hearing either. Not to mention scale. A singer needs a microphone in most to all bands. A choir? Multi-mikes or just 2? Once altogether, levels & placements of singers will be rearranged. Now the organ? Top? Middle? Side? Reverberations? I'll conclude, every recording is a facsimile of a music recording with the producer deciding finale "print". Which brings up "remasters"! Or variations of a song after the original edit. Some have zero sound stage? Often the best sounding sous stage can be enjoyed from vinyl. Must be something with the cross bleeding of channels? I'll say sound stage is no more psychoacoustics than a Yamaha DSP manipulation. They're pretty convincing. My first experience with depth & instrument placement aka ( sound stage) were from a pair of Quad SLS-63..or was it 57? Either way? It took DSP without signal delay in crossovers to satisfy the illusion pretty well.

[@davep2945]

Thanks for the dose of reality Ron. Coming from someone known and respected among a large group of audiophiles makes this more acceptable than coming from someone they don't know who says the same thing. They think someone like me is attacking their hobby and beliefs. But I love great sound too and have looked into it extensively over the years and, all too often, people drive themselves crazy and spend untold amounts of money looking for something that isn't there to begin with. Step one is enjoy the music for what it is and then when you do come across a recording that you both love AND has those exceptional recorded qualities it's like discovering an extra present for yourself on Christmas day.

[@TT-eo2is]

Ron, To Audiophiles (and most avid listeners), Not a Lie...just understood as an "Engineered ILLUSION" (which can be very pleasing)! As per your comments (and also IMHO), playback of a well recorded "Live Acoustical Performance" can re-create (still fake) a mind-blowing, realistic 3D soundstage that is palatable and illusive (like the real thing), especially with a well tuned, synergistic system/room setup!! ;)

[@pablohrrg8677]

Finally someone saying some truth. To add to panning and EQ, in mixing they use phase shifts and delay to create a fake positioning and room. The worst example being electronic music where everything is artificial, there a band in a stage doesn't exist at all. I would say the only instance of 'stage' is a binaural recording of purely acoustic instruments playing together in a room. And we would be listening on our 'headphones from the distance' that are every speaker. Our brain-ears combos have years of training and centuries of evolution to individualize sounds from our environment, and are very very difficult to fool. Many 'audiophiles' start by deceiving their brains into hearing what they want to. Oh, and now we have 5.1, 7.1 surround sound and Atmos, etcetera, to try to fake even more a soundstage. In many cases we end being surrounded by the band...

[@isaacsykes3]

Hey Ron, if you really want to get some of the best recordings in music, where Soundstage isn't a lie, I would suggest musical scores from various movies or Original Soundtrack Recordings. Often these recordings are actually recorded using Blumeline microphones and in the same studio the movie is mastered in. Also, adding to the quality is a way, is that these albums are already budgeted for, so they are less inclined to tale shortcuts during the recordings.

[@josaphcj7199]

Hey can u pls suggest me some music like that . Pls include the music name. New to the audiphile journry and want to test my new headphone.

[@MagnumOpus007]

I hope somebody posts this video on Head-Fi so we can watch everyone erupt like Mt. Vesuvius! Great video and appreciate the explanation!

[@markielinhart]

Soundstage isn’t a lie Ron, it’s a misnomer. As long as you can’t literally hear the left or right speakers it’s a good stereo image. The rest in your head, surely ✌️🌻

[@andrewforsythe7240]

Well said.

[@andrewforsythe7240]

I must say I have very good imaging. A guest walked up to my center speaker, put their ear against it and said, "I thought this speaker was on", it was off. Was good validation for my ears.

[@dermasder5362]

Put on your best Headphones....... Insert "Macy Gray, Stripped"....... And enjoy! In my opinion, the best Soundstage ever recorded! Love the Music and the Sound!

[@JonAnderhub]

Thank you, thank you, thank you!!! I have been trying to figure out how to explain this whole process to "audiophiles" so that they could understand this. BUT! You are mistaken in the idea that professional mixing and mastering engineers are targeting their mixes to i-phones, or earbuds. Audio engineers have no idea where or when you are going to listen to their mix. You might listen to it on your iPhone one moment then hear it on your satellite radio in your car the next moment, and then stream it to your system at home all in the same day. Audio engineers mix to neutrality, which means they mix to the music, not the environment. Professional mix and mastering studios go to great lengths to take the room or the environment out of the equation. It is up to the listener to compensate for their listening environment, so the "mix" should sound great on an audiophile system that is set up properly, and good on a set of in-ear buds Bluetoothed to an iPhone. Now lots of "audiophiles" like to complain about most music being too compressed, or lacking dynamics, or not sounding good on their systems. That is because "audiophiles" primary goals are to focus on the performance of the various components of their system and therefore have little to no understanding or care for what the artist(s) are trying to achieve with their particular style of music.

[@azonialaplamis4290]

Awesome video, Ron! Been almost two years since I bought my hi-fi gear and I came to conclude that some music have wide "soundstage" while some have "narrow soundstage". Now I don't care about soundstage - as long as I like the music, I just enjoy it. Thanks for this video, it affirms my conclusion. Being able to listen to that 3-D soundstage in some music is I consider a bonus. What matters to me now is the refinement of music reproduction of my gear. Cheers!

[@oysteinsoreide4323]

Of course it is fake. But it is made so to make it sound pleasing. Because if everything sounds like it comes from the same place, it will sound very awkward. More like a actual live concert, because they are often mono.

[@bryfar6178]

My take, music like pre 80s ZZ Top or jazz like Julie Loundon isnt going to have sounds way beyond the speakers which is fine. However, Allen Parsons, Kraftwerk, Radiohead can have huge soundstage which really enhances the prog music even if it is a result of mixing. Let us enjoy what we like however it was made.

[@thewoofer7955]

In this case, I don't really care how the sausage is made. All I know is that a lot of recordings I buy do indeed have a soundstage. Voices and instruments that seem to hang in different spaces in front of me. Did it really sound like that when it was recorded in a studio? I'm sure not. But what does that matter? What matters is that it sounds great in my listening room and gives me the impression that the band is in front of me. Could it be even better if the engineer catered to audiophiles instead of phone listeners? Sure. But that's another topic.

[@CristhianSerrano]

Man I loved that u made this video, someone had to say it, apart from the vocals most recordings are not trying to create a 3d soundstage, specially because that may not be the aesthetic the artist wants to go for, most artists or producers are thinking of their recordings as sonic paintings that are not necessarily trying to be realistic

[@JonAnderhub]

Thank you for making the point that how mixes are done is the aesthetic of the artist and that may not be to create a realistic "soundscape".

[@GTGrabber]

I really enjoyed this video. This video had me rolling. Thanks for spelling it out for us. Now for an idea for future content... Find and review media that DOES properly recreate soundstage or at least presents a believable soundstage... I imagine most of which would be live recordings.

[@josaphcj7199]

Did u find any. If so pls recommend some

[@ProjectOverseer]

As a retired studio sound engineer, you did a pretty good job explaining the illusion created. Its a little like me watching you on my large TV. You're very much in the room with your HD video. But you're not there. Its an illusion. Audio is more complicated as panning isn't the only thing that creates positions within a stereo image. We have various effects that help create depth and space too. If it works, GREAT!

[@lsucet]

And what if it is a lie? We all know that. Thanks to that lie is why we are able to enjoy music and let our minds fly away, relax and enjoy the hobby. Thanks to some good engineers that make it possible. I know many audiophiles and never they mentioned that soundstage is a reality because in the first place we know how recording is done for the most part. We are not five years old. They are more into good equipment, setup, room acoustics for more accurate reproduction of what engineers did with the recording and listen to it as it was intended. What is wrong with that? You mentioned you are or were an audiophile person. You should understand and know better what the point of it is. It is simple, it sounds good, it is relaxing and lets you live the moment. If we are goin to talk about what is real or not , sh*** don't get me started. 😀👍

[@stopthefomo]

Yep, and this is why my gear is always DSP with room correction (whether Dirac, Genelec or Trinnov) tuned to my listening preferences so I can hear everything I like about the music without worrying that my room is detrimentally affecting an already complex soundscape

[@Newrecordday2013]

Very cool man.

[@garysmith8455]

My BIGGEST issue has always been, MULTI MIKING of symphony orchestras !! So many beautiful concert halls turned into huge studios!! I have known for years that engineers won't take the time to get a stereo pair in the right spot to give us a performance from the audience perspective. Same with pipe organ recordings. They always want to 'sensationalize' the orchestra or pipe organ, make it BIGGER then it is ! I also don't go for 'piecing' symphonic takes either. Why oh why can't they just do a live take ? The Berlin Philharmonic did this with Simon Rattle conducting a complete Beethoven symphony cycle DIRECT TO DISC!!, in a TRUE STEREOPHONIC CAPTURE! Yes, they went out on a limb with NO safety net !! We need more of this.

[@DismasM]

Funny, I've always thought of 'soundstage' as something synthetic that was produced to sound more realistic, not as something that was captured and translated by the magic of mics, electronics and speakers. I'm okay with it.

[@bocrux]

Appreciate the points brought up here but the title is misleading. What he's actually saying is that soundstage is mixed artificially in most recordings. But even then, you can still experience different magnitudes and shapes of soundstage based on your listening setup. It's a stretch to say soundstage is a lie, because then you might as well say all music production is a lie.

[@scslite5206]

Love this post! I've often wondered about this as I progress into my audiophile journey. The more revealing my system has become the more disappointment I get with most music I grew up listening to is just not mastered very well. And as stated even more so in today's music. Overly boosted bass and cluttered mess. I guess the saving grace is that I primarily listen to Jazz and there are more to be had with great mastered recordings in this genre as the engineers and artists prioritize and value the quality and the art of mixing as oppose to a blender approach. So thank you for putting this out as most audio reviewers always boast about a particular equipment's soundstage ignoring this fact and disclaimer.

[@Newrecordday2013]

Absolutely!

[@scslite5206]

@@jnagarya519 Where did I state that they we're the same? Maybe you should try to read better. Anyway, you knew what I meant so that's all that matters. Not getting into semantics.

[@scslite5206]

@@jnagarya519 🥱

[@mhines191]

Sometimes, ignorance is audiophile bliss!

[@MidFiMan]

About the drum kit: you really nailed that. Great video.

[@robh9079]

Classical music is more likely to be recorded 'naturally' and not geared to earbud listening. Drum kita are more likely to have some sort of stereo overhead mic, mostly in jazz setting where live takes are more likely. Solo piano is more of a sure deal for a natural recording. Components of a recording panned through a single reverb device at mix stage make the SS a bit more believable.

[@scottkasper6378]

I’ve been a musician recording in studios for thirty years. I’m also an audiophile. I’ve always wondered wtf the magazines were talking about with soundstage

[@FOH3663]

Soundstage is the dimensionality... L-to-R placement, and placement front to back. Soundstage is that perceived dimensionality, all elements relative to other elements. A square grid; L-to-R, ... Front-to-Back.

[@scottkasper6378]

@@FOH3663 I know what the definition is. But when you actually make multitrack recordings you realize that “soundstage isn’t at all what an engineer is mixing for

[@cabronesse386]

Artificial and imaginary soundstage is what we have been enjoying so far.

[@karasuofficial16]

As a new artist and old audiophile that just uploaded his first song I can confirm what he's saying in this video. I wanted to cut the highs of the vocals to get rid of semblance in my master. My 2 friends working with me on it are not audiophiles and refused to agree to make the changes. You can make a mix sound great on audiophile headphones. Sound good in FLAC. Sound good on tidal. But getting them to sound good on a majority of listeners speakers/cars and sadly Spotify requires the vocals to be boosted and cause semblance on purpose. I didn't cut the highs and after uploading. it sound decent on my audiophile speakers but cleaner around the board elsewhere. I am however telling them to shove it next time just for testing purposes

[@r-ratedstudios3847]

as an audio engineer i always try to shut up next to audiophiles arguing ... thank you so much for bringing that up, we try our best to replicate the real live music experience, but it's pure replication, example reverb gives you depth and space as audiophiles say, a stereo guitar effect is achieved by delaying the left signal like 16ms from the same right signal, boom you hear two guitars playing with depth and stereophony one one mono track, and those are little examples to explain that we dont record music as a whole band playing at once, we wish that mics works that way lol, the only exception is live orchestra, and even there there's live mixing and panning.

[@FOH3663]

It's art. Leo da Vinci's Mona Lisa ... is flat and dull when compared to Kincade's 90's art displayed in malls, ... with vivid color, texture, perfectly displayed and illuminated, thry are stunning. Texture, depth, the punchy, vivid color ... is yours for under $100. Ffffnnn Mona Lisa, is $100 for admission to simply view it!!! It's art... As much as I salivate over a killer soundstage, that's not the material that I most often turn to. Is Thomas Kincade a one trick pony? Is David Chesky? Tiësto's The Business, created "in the box", it's tremendous, mammothly popular on a global scale, and it sounds stunning. It's synthetic top-to-bottom. Essentially created on a laptop. All the best Ron ... excited over your new audio barn!

[@andrewpienaar4522]

I would like to add that panning alone cannot give the full effect. There will be a time delay between LH and RH. There will also the effects of room echo that won't be on the record. Sound stage is most causes is indeed an illusion and depends as much (or more) on the listening room and setup, as the equipment.

[@mrfrosty3]

Glad you made this video. So many people new to audio have watched or read reviews of headphones or IEMs that give them very unrealistic impressions of what they can expect.

[@aceofspades6667]

stage height, stage width, stage depth, imaging, separation, and timbre are all key parts of the sound presentation that some people refer to or boil down as sound stage. For example the maggie lrs that I used to own through up a huge stage that was 100% fake but I love it... the sound height and width were far bigger than life than any live recording would be.

[@c_o_l_m]

Also had the lrs and still have open baffle speakers; Yes I absolutely want to create the illusion of depth. I don't care if it's real, it's engaging and helps me be more emotionally invovled in my music. If I've learned anything about my audio taste in 7 years it's that I like being lied to. (by single ended tube amps and open baffle speakers)

[@mikehuntington4440]

Ron….this video was amazing. I sent it to a bunch of audiophile buddies I have. Excellent work….as usual.

[@hauxon]

I often see similar discussion about camera lenses where people like to simplify everything into measurable quantities. A photo is of course two dimensional in it's nature but some lenses seem to have abilities to make the subject pop and some say "3D pop". Many like to do the same as you and just call it a lie, an imaginary thing. A camera lens might for example render the focus transition slightly differently or contrast depending on luminosity, not only depth of field and sharpness. The same goes for audio, soundstage is a mix of what the sound engineer did and how your equipment projects the sound. A 3D soundstage would mean to me that and instrument or a singer "pops" (like a camera subject). It "pops" from where the sound engineer put the instrument in the mix. A photo is not 3D in reality and there is no real "live" stage with actual people. ...it still pops.

[@Plastpackad]

Growing up with a lot live music (mostly non amplified) I think I have a harder time swallowing those sound stage lies. Having a system that creates a wide sound stage and pinpoint imaging is sometimes annoying when you "see" the drummer having 2 meters long arms and legs or a guitarist being in two places at once. If done right it could be magical but more often it is just strange and unnatural to me. Worse is when the singer suddenly gets 2 meters tall and have a 0.5 meter wide mouth (pointing at you electrostats...) but that is mostly done by the listers system. Knowing what real music sounds like also makes me notice when tone and timbre is a bit off. I know what a violin, a piano or a guitar sounds like and when that is lost in the recording and or in my system I tend to notice. Even pretty expensive systems can go wrong on this matter. Perhaps these things are the reason way so few musicians are audiophiles?

[@forty5cal1911]

This is why the Blue Coast material sounds so good. Mostly One take live sessions properly mic’d to 2” analog then DSD transferred. Cookie believes a lot of questionable “voodoo” but IMO you can’t deny the sound.

[@MyFatherLoves]

And this is why in theory, Atmos music should be the perfect means to experience music. But it doesn't usually work that way because it all comes down to the engineer's ability to EQ and pan to create that soundstage. Most engineers are using it as a gimmick and it's not great. Some engineers are using it to recreate an experience of the band being there in room. Fewer still are faithfully recreating entire performance halls for orchestra and other live performances. It all comes down to the skill and commitment of the engineer.

[@gregorycollins3096]

I have privately created recordings of live, acoustic only performances, where two microphones were used. The sound stage is definitely captured and listening to the recording brings me back into tfw room where it was recorded. I love soundstage.

[@garysmith8455]

No Greg, that is NOT a sound stage, that is a TRUE STEREO IMAGE! Can only be achieved with 2 mikes for our two ears, no mixing needed. Hope that clarifies that for you.

[@josaphcj7199]

Can u tell me the name of such recordings or if u have a playlist , can u share it. ? Thanks in advance

[@hannah5zack2]

Very interesting video of what appears to be a complex situation. As an "audiophile" for over 50 years (a person who was convinced that separate components sounded more life-like) I've never really thought about the engineer having to worry about bandwidth on recordings. On records, I mean the black discs with grooves, I realized that full bass info on them might exceed the space allowed between grooves and the ability of the needle to track them and the high notes at the same time but the MP3 generation hasn't had to think about that. Personally, I've discovered that "soundstage" was just the right speaker for my listening room pointed just right toward my listening position and that the most important component was probably my brain.

[@kewlbug]

It should be noted, panning and placement isn't always just a volume knob. Phasing/timing and effects are also used to "move" things around. Or even just a pair of microphones placed or timed strategically.

[@CreativeEngineeringChannel]

This topic just gets more and more relevant each day we step into the future of music audience listening :)

[@willywillhite361]

One thing I don't think was mentioned here is that most modern drum recording do use a stereo pair of overhead and/or room mics that are often mixed in with the close mics to give us some of the room (or soundstage). This also sometime done with guitars, pianos, etc. While this may not be the same as a true stereo pair recording of all the musicians in one room it does give us a nice soundstage ambience to enjoy.

[@billd9667]

Yah, you could get soundstage (depth) back in the mono days with uno speaker if it was recorded properly. This is why older recordings are shockingly good over stereo.

[@LorDarkGoose]

Ah, going by the title of the Video I thought you were going to say there is no real depth, width or height presented by equipment, which is offcourse untrue. Saying that the recording does not contain a realistic soundstage due to mic placement and track layering is another matter and something I can wholeheartedly agree on! I feel some classical music may be the exception here.

[@medonk12rs]

My soundstage just imploded.

[@louiesipes2257]

Mono can be amazing

[@analogkid4557]

I am glad somebody said it. Most people don't understand this. You just got a new subscriber.

[@Newrecordday2013]

Welcome to the cool kids club

[@mikepeters5732]

Yep. I’ve never heard a ‘soundstage’ at any live performance.

[@pauldias234]

Yup, if you're talking about concerts that are miked...absolutely. I don't get all this fetishization of "live" sounding soundstage when live performances modern music are pumped through a P.A.

[@darrenweight5972]

The "microphone - 2 inches from a cabinet" - only applies if that mic isn't fed into a mixer and then into a PA. If there is a PA and you're out in the audience then yes - it starts to apply. But yes, for sure, if we are sitting in a room without a PA etc - yes the soundstage is questionable.

[@FrankySilverFace]

I don't know man. I just enjoy music mostly from the 70s 80s and 90s played on my mid fi gear none of which any component is worth more than $1000 new. I consider myself lucky to enjoy what I have and I'm untortured by topics like this. Ignorance is bliss!! And a shout out to those who make the recordings I enjoy SO MUCH!!

[@TriAmpHiFi]

I agree. And may I add, that at about $1000 per component is a sweet spot. I shop high quality circuitry that deletes unnecessary options or jewelry. One piece, to do one job very well.

[@dipanjanbiswas6580]

Thank you for the honest disclosure Ron; I'm sure other KZbinrs doing audio-related videos are aware of this technique - yet everyone waxes eloquent about how a piece of gear does "amazing" soundstage and, as you rightly mention, makes it appear that the band is "in the room". Sadly - some of the most respected print and digital critics continue to play this game.

[@jonesvox1]

“Soundstage” differs greatly (aside from the mix) varies greatly based on the listening room. Early and late reflections from the sound waves produced by speakers and their various arrival times back to the listener will change from room to room. I remember listening to albums that sounded great at my house sound awful at a friends house, even with a very comparable system….ultimately the room had a huge influence on the sound.

[@oysteinsoreide4323]

Even if the sound stage was not there when it was recorded. Then sound stage is made by the audio engineer for you to listen to. So the stage is in the imagination of the sound engineer and transferred to our homes.

[@romankoschar9041]

Yes, soundstage is manufactured. It is the product of information management in the mix. I find it hard that that would come as a surprise to many. It is the same with paintings in a museum.What they depict is manufactured and only an interpretation of the original motive. But that is what makes them interesting as a work of art. I would argue that this also applies to recorded music. In fact I would even go so far as to argue that multitrack recording in many ways is an improvement to the source material because the individual instruments are captured with higher fidelity as they are captured individually. As always and everywhere there can be too much of a good thing when it comes to production (see Top40s music), but multitrack can be used to capture great lively performances. Recent rock releases are a great example for that: Slash, RHCP etc. recorded their performance in a room live to tape and then had a good mix of it made. Those records sound amazing, don't they (apart from Slash, where I dont get the mix choices)? TLDR: Not a question of the tools, but how you use them.

[@hamidrezahabibi8111]

Thanks RON. Waiting for a long time for someone to bring it up and nail it for good.

[@hanneskluytenaar6908]

Very enlightening. And a joy to listen to.

[@Mr0Tubby]

i chased soundstage for headphones for years, and never got anywhere. its better to have headphones which are accurate to the stage rather than artificially inflating it.

[@Spud_E_Buddy]

To make matters worse, instruments in lots of modern music aren’t actual instruments being played & recorded into a mic. Rather, they are digital “instruments” being played via a keyboard 🎹 and a microphone doesn’t even come into play. Heck, the artists aren’t even in the same studio at the same time in many instances 😂

[@crumudgeon4102]

OK, my whole world has just collapsed! Could this news be the true 1st horse of the apocalypse? Mass hysteria, dogs and cats sleeping together, and now the demise of Soundstage! What shall I do? Will my secret fallout shelter be adequate to survive shock waves news like this will inevitably cause to ripple across the whole audiophile world? Just know that the wife and I took our little Philco radio and are moving to our bug-out shelter where we have food, propane and batteries for several years. Just know that I never had soundstages expectations for our little Philco radio. Run, everyone, run for your lives!

[@AmericanConstellation]

Stereo equipment is all about your taste and ears. It's very subjective, just like me an my guitars. I have a guitar that cost me $600.00 and I love it better than some of my $3000.00 guitars. If you like the sound, enjoy.

[@christopherdoolan925]

Virtual soundstage. This will complicate your future reviews! I have a bunch of single microphone audiophile albums but 99% of what I actually listen to is recorded and engineered like you say.

[@MikaelKaivooja]

Well, none of the single mic recordings will have sound stage, single mic is a mono recording.

[@christopherdoolan925]

@@MikaelKaivooja I meant a single microphone position with a Blumlein omnidirectional set-up (so typically two microphones close together in essentially one position). Result is stereo with excellent sound stage.

[@gutterg0d]

@@jnagarya519 Good luck with that, it's like saying you can be a crowd on your own.

[@nicholassmerk]

You didn't mention phasing.

[@martinchan71]

For electric guitar, the sound actually comes from the guitar amp, which may be placed at the back of the stage. So the sound of the guitar is way off from the actual player.

[@fonkenful]

As an example of an outlier of a live recording made with a single microphone that has real imaging, staging and ambience that is probably still envied by multitrack ProTools users, I’d suggest you (re)listen to Peter Moore’s masterpiece work done for the Cowboy Junkies 1988 “Trinity Session”. A single Calrec sound field mike, very early Sony PCM F1 A/D converter and SL2000 Betamax.

[@davidfromamerica1871]

“Albums and songs are studio mixed for Android and iPhone’s” There is going to be a spike in prescription Pharmaceutical drug sales.

[@charliehustle5312]

LOL Let's burn it all down Ron! Good perspective, while audiophiles obsess over linear power supplies powering their network switches in the hopes of gaining some three dimensionality from flat, compressed recordings. Good stuff, sir.

[@67spankadelik]

Logically makes sense. The recording engineer is the Sound Stage. I still enjoy the lie..😉

[@anthonyroubound1692]

You are correct. Sound stage is a lie for the reasons you note. There is also another way to see this issue. Any good concert hall is an example. Unless one is sitting in the first few rows the majority of the hall only hears a large diffuse sound field. That is real life. Even the first few rows don't necessarily get the type of sound stage developed for recordings. Sound stage on recordings is not reality.

[@TheFrugalAudiophile]

I’ve had these thoughts from time to time myself as well, but was not able to articulate them as well as you did. Great video

[@robertbenton2804]

First of all great video, and explanation. All recordings are artificial, even so called audiophile recordings. For example, when is a vocal louder than the crack of a snare drum at over 100db? Most mixes are made to hopefully make the song sound more interesting.

[@PH-gm2qe]

this is the reason why I always ask what is a reality, when somebody tell me he want to achieve sound as close tor eality as possible. But what is reality in music recording? In fact, reality is created in studio behind the mix...

[@MrNeverlift]

Auratone 5C speakers have been used almost forever in studios. Back in the day it was so the Beatles would sound good on your pocket transistor radio. Apparently today it is so they sound good on your pocket phone. The pockets haven't changed.

[@fonkenful]

Let’s not overlook the ubiquitous Yammy NS10, renowned not so much for its accurate musicality, but as another one of those lowest common denominator benchmarks.

[@MikeGervasi]

I learned some things from you over the years that made bigger improvements than "throw more $ at it". However this truth I already knew. This is why Jazz records sound more "lifelike" than heavily produced ones. They were mostly recorded well, live, in position. You get out what was captured and nothing more.

[@aussierob7177]

The only way to achieve a three dimensional soundstage in a stereo recording is to use cross-talk cancellation.

[@falconquest2068]

You can only reproduce what the recording engineer laid down during the original mix.

[@linkeddevices]

It's not really. We try to d out best to take advantage of psycho acoustics just like photos or motion pictures aren't a "lie".... They're attempts to make up for the deficiencies and they really work since all you really want is suspension or disbelief.

[@johnhpalmer6098]

I had NO idea that the multi-track was developed in the late 40's, but knew that by the early to mid 60's, multi-tracking began to be available with the 4 track machines. Before then, all recordings were either on 2 track or 3 track machines and over dubbing was it. If done badly, it can sound quite bad, a good example of that was Gary US Bonds when he did the bulk of his recordings between 1960 and 63 or so, with the exception of "this little Girl of Mine" that was released in 1976, Frank Guido? was overdubbing Gary's voice to "fatten" it up and over did it and the result was many of his hits sounded awful, lost highs, tubby bass etc. This was due to the fact that you made one take, recorded that to another tape, then take both, play them back to yet another tape, while mixing them together, and you do this several times, adding layer upon layer. This had the nasty tendency to add ooise and a loss of detail due to analog's short comings. A good example of this was New Orleans, his biggest hit, while not as badly done as many of his other hits, it's raw and visceral like a good early rock and roll was and I enjoy it for that alone. It does not hurt at all that the song is fantastic, and well played to start with. As you say, multi-tracking is where each of the parts are isolated and mixed after the fact. It's like your shot in front of a blue, or green screen, and the backdrop is keyed behind you electronically in post, then other elements are added, again in post. Same thing with music. Rhythm tracks are typically laid first, then the rest get layered on top, with tracks bounced down as needed and many effects added in the studio that can't be done live and the end result is the record you listen to at home. That said, most jazz, blues and many country/honky tonk and classical music was done "live" to tape using multiple mics and mixed during performance to tape. Most rock/pop stuff was not, they were multi-tracked. The Beatles began with 2 track machines up to about 1965 when they had access to the 4 track machine, then multi tracking began and their creativity took off. Documentaries showing them recording, or modern artists recreating several of their albums did much the same thing, using restored original machines used at that time (Studers) it was interesting to see how many of the effects were just recording parts in a stairwell for that echo etc took place. I don't know about modern jazz if they are still recorded "live" to tape or multi-tracked but albums like Miles Davis' A Kind of Blue from 1959 was. Either way, trying to replicate your favorites "live" in your home is impossible as one, the recordings in the studio are NOT the same as it was when performed live to begin with.

[@1mctous]

Les Paul pioneered multi-tracking/overdubbing with 2 Cadillac flywheels as cutting lathe platters. Before magnetic tape he would dub back and forth until he captured all of the layers.

[@AbsoluteFidelity]

This is what John Siau, the designer of the Benchmark AHB2 amp, has to say about soundstage depth when it comes to amps. "Stereo depth is very dependent upon a precise phase matching between the right and left channels at all frequencies in the audio band. Differential (left/right) phase errors will blur the location left to right and especially front to back. Left to right positioning can be overridden by left to right amplitude differences. Depth can only be conveyed by accurately preserving the phase response in both channels all the way from a stereo microphone pair to the pair of loudspeakers. You also must be seated in the sweet spot to hear depth. Many very fine studio recordings have absolutely no depth because the left/right stereo image was entirely created with pan pots. The left/right positions of the musical voices are entirely determined by the left/right amplitude differences. Some fine examples are all of the tracks on Steely Dan's "Two Against Nature". This CD is a great recording but it has absolutely no stereo depth when played on a system with an accurate phase response. Systems with a poor phase response may give these tracks a false sense of depth. This false sense of depth is easily identifiable because each musical voice will fill the entire depth instead of locating to a specific distance behind the plane of the speakers. If you want a good explanation of depth and a good demonstration play tracks 4 and 5 of "The Ultimate Demonstration Disk" from Chesky Classics. In fact, the entire disk contains tracks that have wonderful stereo depth with pinpoint focus of location. These recordings were made with stereo microphone arrays and the stereo images were simply captured (not created with pan pots). It is now possible to artificially create stereo recordings that have depth. DSP techniques can be used to place a musical voice anywhere in a 3-D space. This 3-D space can then be rendered by a pair of stereo speakers or by an array of speakers (Atmos). 3-D position is determined by phase and amplitude. Left/right phase errors will expand the size of each musical voice (blurring its location). Whenever a musical voice is mixed to the phantom center of the stereo image, this image is easily blurred by differential phase errors. If the high frequencies seem to come from the speakers instead of from the phantom center image, this is an indication that there is a left/right differential phase error at high frequencies. I have some recordings that are essentially mono in stereo. In other words, the entire mix is dead center. Phase errors immediately destroy this phantom center image by moving some frequencies away from the center and toward the speakers. Some of the tracks on Eric Clapton's "Old Sock" CD are useful for this test." Interesting isnt it? Having 'depth' most of the time isnt really desirable if one is after accuracy.

[@robgallos4669]

Great video. I think I knew this all along, but could never admit it or come to terms with it. Oddly, I feel better after you exposed the big lie.