I have just noticed something which has not occurred to me before. Perhaps we all have tracks to assess upgrades, in this instance, I refer to separation of instruments and their placement in the sound stage.
I use the first track of the Godlfather sound track, as the track begins with additional instruments added to the right, then left, then centre right. This has always got better as I have upgraded, but now I’ve realised a confounding variable…
The volume played back. Too loud and they all normalise towards the centre, two low and the vibrancy and realism of instruments becomes attenuated.
Anyone else noted this? What tracks do you use for assessing placement of instruments?
A good LP for me is Joe Jackson’s Body and Soul “Heart of Ice” track. The reason is that it’s a great recording and the instruments used on the track come in stages as the track builds with voices finally added at the end.
Hi Jon. I use metronomy ‘the look’ as a track to quickly check on soundstage and precision/placement in the mix.
I think it is best to evaluate at your ‘normal’ listening levels. Remember your iphone, iwatch or ipad is a reasonably accurate db monitor. I always quickly double check my watch when I am listening because I am paranoid about damage to my hearing (I wear EGGZ discreet ear plugs at loud events like football matches* or gigs). I personally aim for between 75 and just under 80 db when listening. Also useful if you are a/b testing components to avoid accidentally being swayed by a volume change. Hope that helps.
I have not encountered that. One of the things that drew me to my active ATCs was the precision and stability of the stereo image. A change in volume has no effect on placement (though at low volumes they do lose some realism). I think this is one of the advantages of active operation at least according to my reading of what ATC say about it.
I have not noticed any difference of the placement with volume changes. The album I use that really highlights placement in the soundstage is Branford Marsalis …Trio Jeepy
Excellent album, and it pans from left right and center throughout.
I was using size more in a metaphorical rather than strictly dimensional sense.
Anyway, last evening I listened carefully to a couple of tracks, in each case at several different volume settings. One was a recording of a professional choir, small enough to be able to clearly distinguish individual voices. At lower volumes the balance shifted: basses were less prominent and sopranos less insistent. The other was a jazz group with a double bass in the middle and as the volume reduced its contribution faded away, at least to some extent. But through all the variations in volume, the musicians remained locked in their positions in the left-right spread between the speakers. Certainly no clustering in the centre.
Whether that’s a function of my particular setup, I don’t know. Perhaps I’ll repeat the exercise with the Atom in my office, but that’s somewhat acoustically compromised by the limitations of the small room it’s in.
I do find psycho-acoustics a fascinating and not fully understood topic, so the experiment was definitely worth an hour of my time.
It sounds to me you are describing the effect of volume and the way the human ear works.
Try a search for Fletcher Munsen curve. I found a reasonable on line article from Unison Audio.
Absolutely. I tried not to think about Fletcher Munson curves and more recent variations thereof whilst listening, as I thought the results might be affected by my expectations.
The real point of the test, though, was to hear if volume affected positioning which it did not at least with my setup.
Great test Roger. I think you are right when you say that the room size is an important variable here.
In my experience, clustering of the instruments happens when I really start to push the decibels, where I can notice that there’s a collapse of the soundstage itself. Most probably due to overloading reflections and standing waves.
