|
Audio Asylum Thread Printer Get a view of an entire thread on one page |
For Sale Ads |
76.219.188.187
In Reply to: RE: "precise" You're using the wrong word. posted by Tre' on April 22, 2016 at 21:00:43
"If the recording and playback had precise soundstage it would not be over exaggerated to make up for the lack of visual cues and in your opinion would not be as "good" as one that does."
Nope. aural "imaging" in real life is not as precise as what we get in audio recording and playback. But real life music is perceived to "image" better than it actually does due to the McGurk effect. If playback had the same imaging as real life concerts it would be perceived as inadequate because of the ambiguity of that imaging. Or lack of precision.
Follow Ups:
It is if you are sitting close to the musicians like the microphones usually are.
But you can see them. That affects what you think you hear when it comes to the directionality of sound.
Yes I got that, which is why you need a string quartet recording to have more accurate and precise sonic localization than the real thing might have so your perception is at least similar to close up at a sighted concert. However, that being said on can still close the eyes and have a clear mental image of where the sound is coming from. Recent Memory plays a role for sure but not entirely.
One effect that cannot be related to sight is the change in distance perception do to perceived loudness of an instrument. A note played soft vs. loud is not the same at a distance and many instruments breathe. Soft sounds at the instrument loud expands like a bubble away from the instrument. Horns really do this but so do violins. The makes localization easier as well.
Post a Followup:
FAQ |
Post a Message! |
Forgot Password? |
|
||||||||||||||
|
This post is made possible by the generous support of people like you and our sponsors: