Soundstage and image height, does it exist?

@roxy54 --

With speakers I guess it’s all about the way the drivers disperse the sound.

+1

I like that the actual, total radiated field of sound extends somewhat beyond the listening height (with a line source ideally terminated at both the floor and ceiling) dictated by ear level above the ground. My own speakers are just above 6 ft. tall, but the acoustic center at the LP is situated between the upper edge of the bass bin and the lower edge of the horn above (i.e.: at 100-105 cm’s). This way there’s a sensation of what’s presented to the ears as being less restricted and more immersive (or fuller), and so there’s a larger "canvas" for the sound to emit itself from. Physical properties of sound that to my ears more closely emulates the signature trait of an acoustic live symphony orchestra concert, or even a live amplified one.

Whenever imaging or soundstage are mentioned, I like to remind people about these resources: The following provide tests, with which one may determine whether their system actually images, or reproduces a soundstage, as recorded. ie: On the Chesky sampler/test CD; David explains in detail, his position on the stage and distance from the mics, as he strikes a tambourine(Depth Test). The LEDR test tells what to expect, if your system performs well, before each segment. The Chesky CD contains a number of tests, in addition to the LEDR. (https://www.audiocheck.net/audiotests_ledr.php) and (https://www.amazon.com/Chesky-Records-Sampler-Audiophile-Compact/dp/B000003GF3) The shape of your ears’ pinnae is also a variable, regarding your ability to perceive images/locate sounds. A Stereophile article, that explains the LEDR test: http://www.stereophile.com/features/772/  

To quote Bobby Owsinksi from The Mastering Engineer's Handbook:

The LEDR test is a substitute for about $30,000 to $40,000 worth of test equipment.

Stereophile also has an article about it, written in 1989 (!) by Bob Katz:

"My system has great imaging!" "I can hear sound coming from beyond my speakers." "The depth image in my system goes back at least 20 feet." Yes, we audiophiles are proud of our imaging (footnote 1), and we've worked hard to get it. My back is still aching from the last time I tweaked my speakers until the image was just right. Wouldn't it be nice if we had a test to set up and check a stereo system for correct imaging? Yes, Virginia, there is an imaging test—your LEDR is here (footnote 2). LEDR, which stands for "Listening Environment Diagnostic Recording," is available on a test CD from Prosonus, the Studio Reference Disc (footnote 3). The CD is rather expensive (about $50), but there is no other official test for imaging. [Since this article was published, an LEDR track was included on the first Chesky Records Jazz Sampler & Audiophile Test CD (JD37).—Ed.]

Luckily it's 2022 and we don't have to buy expensive CDs anymore, as there is an online version of this test here: http://www.audiocheck.net/audiotests_ledr.php

The Stereophile article has a rather lengthy explanation about what you should hear - the short version again quoted from the Mastering Engineer's Handbook is:

If the sound for the up image doesn’t go straight up from your loudspeaker, six feet in the air as you sit there in your position, then you’ve got a problem with your crossover or with reflections above the loudspeaker.

If the sound doesn’t travel from left to right evenly and smoothly with the left-to-right test, then you’ve got problems with objects between your loudspeakers.

And the same with the beyond signal, which is supposed to go from about one foot to the left of the left speaker, gradually over to one foot to the right of the right speaker, which detects reflections from the side wall.

I apologise as I have not had time to read all the responses to your question about image height but this article was published in the Absolute Sound and was part of a series of articles about being able to determine the best digital audio music files - wav/flac etc - and computer file servers - windows/Mac. The writers of the artiicles used image height as a 'measurement' of sound quality - the higher the image the higher the quality. I use this method - not in a measured way - but listening for the height which equates to me as better/best sound quality. It usually correlates to high frequency content and higher or highest resolution in the music being played. The article - one of them is here - if you scroll down until you find image height the context can be read. Hope it helps?

= High Fidelity = Full range. Box/xover speakers aint going to out perform a  Full range, = Sensitivity issues. under 90 db vs over 92db, High sens always wins out in a  shootout every single shootout. My tech here in new orleans continues his mantra,, **Well you do have a  xover in your speaker, ..** I tell him over and over,, sure its a  single cap, acting  as  a filter on the 2 tweeters per channel. Each T has a  8.2 Mundorf SESGO cap,. Which blocks fq's at the 4kish range.  I am speaking of xovers on both tweeters and woofers ina  typical box design. My Seas Thors had 1 coil + 2 resistors + 4 caps per tweeter then the woofer had like 1 res + 1 coil + 1 massive cap. 

A Full Range has no xovers. 

Which allows the purity of the music to sing natural. 

A woofer never will out shoot a  Full Range, = Higher end FR, not lower end. 

Some FR are garbage. A few are true high end speakers, which IMHO will never be surpassed in high fidelity. 

I have a  8 inch FR + a  6 inch FR + dual T's per channel. Open baffel. FR sound like garbage ina  closed/ported box.

But of course most of you here have not heard a  FR in action, so you would not know what I am tlking about. 

For me, FR is top dawgs. 2nd to none. 

Out shoots all panels/Stats/horns.