SDA response to studio mixing

[tugboat]

Okay, I'm not very knowledgable when it comes to recording and mixing in the studio other than I know an engineer with a bum ear can ruin an otherwise good album.

I know that during the mixing the soundstage is set and I'm sure it's done by varying the r and l channel level to move it where they want it. Now what I just wrote has to be such a simplified view. There has to be much more than that available when the engineer is mixing for the final release.

So not to ask anyone to try and give me a lesson in mixing, here's really what I'm curious about. Never was til I finally got my 1.2TLs. The soundstage I hear with them is not only wide, but there's depth. Now a wide soundstage doesn't surprise me, but how about depth? How is that done? Then there's the one that I'm sure is caused by somekind of over processing effect and combined with the SDA, creates something they didn't intend on. For instance, CCR's Susie-Q is way spread out beyond a normal soundstage. It's like having a speaker sitting next to me playing in my ear. NWA's Chin Check has a part where the sound is all around me like the kids voice at the end of Marilyn Manson's Man That You Fear. Not that I don't like the 360 degree effect, but I'm sure they didn't intend on this, so it must be the SDA helping it along. So how does the SDA give that 360 effect and what in the mixing does it?

Okay, I'll stop babbling now. :)

Thanks

[Ricardo]

....The soundstage I hear with them is not only wide, but there's depth.....It's like having a speaker sitting next to me playing in my ear..... the sound is all around me.....
Thanks

DON't YOU LOVE IT????????

I don't know how they do it...but this SDA thing is getting addictive.....

(Sorry..I know I'm not answering your questions.... :) )

[hoosier21]

good quality speakers will give you the soundstage depth, has nothing to do with SDA.

[ND13]

good quality speakers will give you the soundstage depth, has nothing to do with SDA.

Party pooper :p

[tugboat]

True, depth is not something that blew me away with the 1.2TLs as I've heard that from many speakers I've had over the years. Bose 901s had it, but who are they fooling with the muddy soundstage. Those speakers were even able to mess up the soundstage and pinpoint vocal/instrument I've come to use as a reference piece. My friend loved the 1.2TLs so much, he broke down and brought over his Denon TT with a ruby cartridge and his Steely Dan vinyl to hear. He owns CDs, but swears by the warmth and accuracy of vinyl (analog, no loss through sampling). Must say it sounded amazing and I did like it better than the CD, but the setup process for the TT took forever. Leveling, balancing, reducing harmonics....blah, blah, blah. In my younger years, as long as the TT wasn't on the speaker, all was well. Hahaha

Seriously, I'd love to know what causes the 360 effect. I have many friends with bands and would love to ask them to add that in the recording. With normal speakers it sounds normal, but with SDA it comes alive and makes me smile.

[tugboat]

HTrookie -

Yes, the SDA is addictive. I had ripped all my CDs (over 800) to MP3s and did it at 128 for lack of storage. Now I have more storage I'm doing them all over at 256. I have a dlink media lounge and playing anything less than a bit rate of 256 sounds flat on the Polks. I'm working hard on this as it's crazy finding and playing the CDs. By the time I'm done, I'll be using over 100G of space just for my MP3s. So glad hard drives are so cheap now. Just got a WD 320G drive for $115. Now I am past the Gigabyte storage and into the Terabyte. I have 1.3 terabytes of storage. Goal is to have enough space for all CDs and DVDs.

Okay, I'm babbling again. Can't seem to stop myself. :)

[hoosier21]

The 360 IS the SDA, like it has been said before, the SDA gives you a headphone like experience.

Recording engineers most often use near field speakers, near field listening gives you great stereo separation, being close to the speaker, you have less crosstalk of the l and r channels. SDA and the crosstalk cancellation gives you this same effect.

[Spawndn72]

Warning: long read

Probably more than you ever wanted to know, but.....

http://www.digido.com/portal/pmodule_id=11/pmdmode=fullscreen/pageadder_page_id=32/

[heiney9]

HTrookie -

Yes, the SDA is addictive. I had ripped all my CDs (over 800) to MP3s and did it at 128 for lack of storage. Now I have more storage I'm doing them all over at 256. I have a dlink media lounge and playing anything less than a bit rate of 256 sounds flat on the Polks. I'm working hard on this as it's crazy finding and playing the CDs. By the time I'm done, I'll be using over 100G of space just for my MP3s. So glad hard drives are so cheap now. Just got a WD 320G drive for $115. Now I am past the Gigabyte storage and into the Terabyte. I have 1.3 terabytes of storage. Goal is to have enough space for all CDs and DVDs.

Okay, I'm babbling again. Can't seem to stop myself. :)

Well I was groovin' right along with you on this thread until you mentioned MP3's :( . If you are using MP3's as your source you have a lot more to learn about the recording process. Because MP3's sound like ass and to be pumping thru your Sda's is not doing a bit of good. There are enough problems with crappy recording techniques and poor mastering and engineering that to add MP3 to the mix is going to make it dreadful. This is all my opinion of course and I'm really not trying to pick on you. Dump the MP3's and start listening to the real redbook cd's and you'll be amazed how much better everything sounds.

As far as your ???'s about the recording process....Google it. And I'm not trying to be flippant. There is no short simple answer. Get your learn on as there is a lot of good info out there, but you have to ease into it because it really is part art and part science to acheive good all around sound in a recording. :) If I get a chance to find some good articles I'll post the links here.....my bookmarks are a mess.

If you want to know how the SDA effect works search the forum there have been plenty of meaningful discussions about it.

Have fun

H9

[heiney9]

Warning: long read

Probably more than you ever wanted to know, but.....

http://www.digido.com/portal/pmodule_id=11/pmdmode=fullscreen/pageadder_page_id=32/

This a good link.....I actually have it in my bookmarks but they are such a mess I couldn't find it easily.

[scottnbnj]

...So not to ask anyone to try and give me a lesson in mixing, ...how does the SDA give that 360 effect and what in the mixing does it?

you're right, info in a good recording gives you the perception of depth. there are lots of recording methods and theory that try make the perception more realistic in different ways. what makes sda and some other post-recording methods different is crosstalk cancelation.

crosstalk cancelation theory is simple. sound from left speak does not reach right ear and sound from right speak does not reach left ear. it just gets complicated when you try to do it with electronics. sda uh,erases info from left speak that reaches right ear and vise verse.

you can prevent (as opposed to erase) normal speak crosstalk with lots of acoustic treatments in your listening room too. it's the real deal and will knock your socks off, but, for sure, can make you wonder about your sanity. and,.. forget about ever letting your wife, family or anyone else that's not seriously hardcore ever find out about it too, much less catch you in the act. absolute, certified hair on your palms, tinfoil helmet country.

)

[heiney9]

Scott great explaination. I would just one more bit of impt. info. You are correct about the sounds from the left not reaching your right ear and so on. But technically it should be stated that those sounds reach the opposite ear and different times due to reflected sound. What SDA does is allow the sounds from each speaker to reach each ear at the same time (theoretically). I say theoretically because reflected sound is always going to be present and there are certain phase shift elements that the crossover has to try to compensate for. It's actually quite complex and that's one of the reasons they are not manufactured anymore. Very cost prohibitive for a speaker the size of normal SDA's

H9

[hoosier21]

What SDA does is allow the sounds from each speaker to reach each ear at the same time (theoretically).H9

?? that is a new one to me.

[heiney9]

?? that is a new one to me.

Yeah ya know I went back an re-read my post and I might be taking 2 seperate issues and blending them together :confused: :confused: . I thought the idea was to have sound from both L-R reach the ears at the same time, thus tricking the brain into thinking the sound was coming from everywhere & nowhere at the same time. Crosstalk simply is bleed thru of a signal from either another channel or another source. I thouhg the way Polk solved the problem of sound waves reaching the opposite ear at different time intervals was to feed a lower level opposite signal to each channel (hence SDA). I may have some things confused. Hopefully one of the experts will chime in and straighten this out.

H9

[heiney9]

To futhur expound on the above. It's physically impossible for the signal from the right channel to reach your left ear at the same time it reaches your right ear. The width of your head (space between your ears) is the limiting factor. Sda allows the signal from the same right speaker to reach you left ear at the same time interval by feeding a low level opposite signal to the SDA driver in each cabinet. That's how I've always understood it.

H9

[hoosier21]

Well I think your close, read this entire review and the side notes and see if it explains it better than I can type it out, plus I am lazy.

http://www.polksda.com/srsreview.shtml

[heiney9]

Well I think your close, read this entire review and the side notes and see if it explains it better than I can type it out, plus I am lazy.

http://www.polksda.com/srsreview.shtml

Yep I was close....and that link describes it better than any of us could. I forgot about this web site. Time to book mark it.

H9

[tugboat]

Okay, where to start here...

I know MP3s are not the best format for quality listening, but then again, neither is CD. Something from the analog wave has to be lost in sampling for CDs and more so for MP3s. When I want the best recording (based on what I have at hand), I use the original CD and not the MP3. For non critical listening, a high bit rate MP3 works just fine.

As for the SDA effect going 360, I have the original manual for the 1.2TLs and the explanation and illustrations never note or show the SDA going beyond expanding the soundstage in front of the listener. There is no mention or illustration showing SDA placing sound at the listeners side or from behind. That's something I rarely hear, but have come across a few songs that achieve this. So if this is noted anywhere in a Polk document, I either missed it, or it's not noted.

Didn't post to be insulted on my quest to understand more about SDA or my use of MP3s. Really don't care if an audio snob wants to flaunt their knowledge (or perceived knowledge). Got better things to bunch up my boxers.

Anyway, thanks to those with non-condescending replies.

[VR3]

I would think that it has something to do with DELAY and LEVEL...

Rock recordings have like a 4db dynamic range...

where as better recordings will have a much higher one.

Dynamic Range (atleast what I am referring to) is the range between the loudest and softest instrument.

This is why rock CDs rarely have great depth or seperation - where as stuff like Dave matthews, Classical, etc will have much better depth.

[tugboat]

One of my favorites is Steely Dan. Great engineering. You can point to an instrument. Separation of the instruments and the perfect placement in time and space. On the other end of the spectrum is Oingo Boingo. Might as well be mono.

[nadams]

You should rip those CDs at 320kbit instead of 256... at least give the MP3s a chance at sounding near CD quality. I can't listen to anything below 320... I can hear all kinds of artifacts in the higher frequencies. The 320kbit sound okay, but the real CDs sound even better!

[WilliamM2]

Rock recordings have like a 4db dynamic range...

Define rock. All of my rock recordings have a dynamic range of well over 4db's, or 40db's for that matter.


This is why rock CDs rarely have great depth or seperation - where as stuff like Dave matthews, Classical, etc will have much better depth.

No separation? I actually find many rock recordinfgs, especially older ones are a little overdone on stereo separation. You need to define the type of rock you are talking about, as "rock" encompasses many different types of music.

As stated above, I find Steely Dan recordings to be exeptional for dynamic range, soundstage, depth, AND separation. And they are classified as "rock".

[VR3]

Modern Rock.

[F1nut]

It's actually quite complex and that's one of the reasons they are not manufactured anymore. Very cost prohibitive for a speaker the size of normal SDA's



With respect, I have to disagree with that statement. The SDA crossover is pretty simple really and adds next to nothing to the cost.

[TroyD]

I'd agree with F1, I'd say the reasons are more WAF related than anything.

BDT

[michael_w]

I'd say the reasons are more WAF related than anything.


Exactly. Six foot tall, 150 lb speakers aren't for everyone ;)

[heiney9]

Okay, where to start here...

Didn't post to be insulted on my quest to understand more about SDA or my use of MP3s. Really don't care if an audio snob wants to flaunt their knowledge (or perceived knowledge). Got better things to bunch up my boxers.

Anyway, thanks to those with non-condescending replies.

Ok I'll bite...i re-read the replys and you are obviously talking about my post. It wasn't intended to be snobbish and I wasn't flaunting my knowlegde you asked for an explanation about SDA's and I tried to give you one. The speil about MP3's is my opinion and I stand by it. Sorry if you got your feathers ruffled. Did you click on the SDA link and read the article? It really gives a great explanation about how the SDA process works. If you haven't read it, please do so it will answer many of your questions.

H9

[heiney9]

With respect, I have to disagree with that statement. The SDA crossover is pretty simple really and adds next to nothing to the cost.

F1, I was just going on the comments made in a review about the SRS isophase crossover. It looks complicated and sounds complicated, but then I'm not a big electronics wizard either :) .

H9

[F1nut]

Believe it or not, it's still a pretty simple design. The tweeter network is a bit more involved, but not that bad.

Oh, my .02......I agree, MP3's are not worth listening to.

[tugboat]

I agree that MP3s aren't very good, but for passive listening it gives me instant access to over 11,000 songs. I'd love to directly copy all my CDs to my PC, but that's a storage nightmare. Also, not sure if any of the media receivers play CDA (think that's the extension). Could convert to raw WAV files, they'll play, but space again is an issue. For active listening I usually try to make a mental list of what I want to hear and pull all the CDs. It's kind of distracting to have to keep getting up and changing them.

H9 -

I apologize. Been kind of on edge lately and I should have known better. Your input was helpful. Hope there's no hard feelings. I take complete blame.

[heiney9]

No hard feelings, it's all good :) . Written words on the screen can sometimes take on a life of their own. Enjoy your 1.2tl's those are the cream of the crop and a unique sounding speaker. As far as your original question...I've been giving it some thought. I used to sell SDA's and I could never figure out what it was about a particular recording that made it sound good on SDA's, while others were just OK sounding. I'm not sure anyone but Matt and the engineers know exactly what type of mixing process is best served played thru a pair of SDA's. I know in the Vintage Speaker forum there is a thread (sticky) about recordings that sound great on SDA's check it out if you haven't already. Maybe with enough time and experimentation you'll discover a pattern. I never could, but my best experiences with SDA's were quite awhile ago and the memory is fuzzy especially on the small details. My best guess is anything that already has good channel seperation a wide soundstage and a lot of dynamics on a standard pair of speakers will sound exceptional on SDA's. We used to impress the hell out of most customers with some of the recordings we played....good times.

H9

[heiney9]

Also wanted to add that you could consider converting your music on the computer to Flac files. It a lossless compression system for audio. It typically only reduces a standard .wav file by 20-25% but you get no loss of audio quality. A good Flac file player is Foobar, but it's not too fancy like a music jukebox player, etc...There maybe other Flac file players out there too. Just another option. It's still going to take a lot of hard drive space for the amount of music you have.

H9

[tugboat]

Thanks, I'll check that out. I have a 400G drive on the way, so it just might be possible. Never thought my shorage would exit the Gigabyte range and into the Terabyte. I will have 1.4 terabytes soon. Yikes!

Wish I could describe the affect used in some recordings that pull the voice (and it's almost always a voice), but if I hear it on non SDA speakers, I know what to expect on SDAs. Don't know the type of music you listen to and / or have access to, but two perfect examples are Snoop Dogg on NWA's Chin Check and on Marilyn Manson's Man That You Fear from his Anarchist Superstar album. It's near the end of the song. There's a kid saying something about religion being destroyed.

[scottnbnj]

Scott great explaination. I would just one more bit of impt. info. You are correct about the sounds from the left not reaching your right ear and so on. But technically it should be stated that those sounds reach the opposite ear and different times...

doh!, you're right. i was careless.

i attempted to get at the difference between crosstalk elimination (through treatments) and cancelation (through sda).

where, in theory elimination of crosstalk with normal speaks is simple. sound from left speak does not reach right ear and sound from right speak does not reach left ear. it's really not difficult or technically complex to do and get excellent results with. it just looks and feels cumbersome and silly.

and that, it just gets complicated when you try to achieve the same perceived ends through electronics. where sda does something more like erase info from left speak that does reach right ear and vise verse.

)

[scottnbnj]

Seriously, I'd love to know what causes the 360 effect. I have many friends with bands and would love to ask them to add that in the recording.

recordings can be mixed with crosstalk cancelation too. these use qsound:

http://www.qsound.com/2002/spotlight/main2a.asp

)

[Phil Dawson]

Back to the 360 degree issue for a moment. This will be an attempt to simplify what the recording engineer has to work with. The recording engineer can do several things to present the stereo imaging and the sound stage. We will assume that each instrument has its own track. Panning (just like the balance control on a reciever or pre-amp) is used to place the individual instruments across the left to right stereo image. Instruments can be placed in any of about 5 distincly different positions in a normal stereo mix. Instruments can also be moved from the front to the back or anywhere in between. Thsi is usually done by increasing or decreasing the gain on each track. The louder the track, the more to the front the track is. As a side note you can make an instrument seem to be on roller skates if you bring it up too much for solos and then cut it back too much after the solo is over. If you want a mono mess of a recording you pan all enstruments to the center and have each at the same relative gain. If you want to get that 360 type of feel you can obtain it by panning some of the instruments hard left and hard right and then bringing them up in the mix. You have to be careful with the phantom center though. You can also add some delay or reverb that can add an open feel to the sound if it is done well. This whole problem is taken care of very nicely in 5.1 MUSIC. The center channel solves the phantom center problems and the rears solve the 360 degree issues. As a side note to the MP3 Cd debate on this thread, the high resolution of both SACD and DVD-Audio is far superior to that of CD - in fact it sounds almost as good as analog.
I hope this helps, Phil

PS the SDA efect in surround can be really cool

5.1 Music rig:
SRS SDA front
2.3tls rear
2 cs400i center
Shure 12" sub
2 PSE mono blocks and 1 stereo amp front
2 PSE stereo amps rear
1 PSE stereo amp center
Mac 2100 bridged to mono sub
B&K ref 10 upgraded to ref 50 pre/pro
Harmon Kardon Citation tuner
Pioneer tuner for AM
Pioneer DA-45 universal player
Sony X7esD CD player
Technics 1200 TT
PSE pre amp for the analog stuff