When you use atmos channel separation is a moot point because its OBJECT based not channel based
11 responses Add your response
A lot of this reminds me of medical studies. The baseline chance of developing a certain disease might be one in a million, but if you take Drug X for cholesterol then it might go to 2 in a million. The media makes breathless proclamations that the risk of this disease is doubled and panics people everywhere.
My hearing wouldn’t nearly be good enough to hear the level of cross talk that Eric describes in the Luxman. Do I lie awake at night worrying about cross channel bleeding? No, there are a few concerns ahead of that in the queue
Channel Separation is an important specification for Phono Cartridges.
Channel Balance is also important.
Of course, other 'qualities' of a cartridge count, but keep in mind, any 'preferred' sound quality of any cartridge's Imaging is aided by these two 'relatively achievable' characteristics.
Consider that all imaging is Phantom, created solely by the relative volume of L volume to R volume.
Channel separation gives the preamp/amp/speakers help maintaining the intended Phantom Imaging.
Tight channel balance also gives a more precise signal/volume difference at the start. A wider image combined with tight control gives more distinction, sharper perception of particular instrument locations.
When you view a line of cartridges, observe, as price goes up, separation specs get wider, and balance specs get tighter.
I have no idea how to tell crosstalk from a natural part of a stereo mix just by listening so honestly it’s not something I pay much attention to. Maybe I should? Bad audiophile!
Maybe if a reviewer measures and points out a bad measure for crosstalk I might pay more attention to some extent depending on the severity of the crime.