Rrog
Agreed.
This is interesting on a couple of levels.
Not knowing any better
Id define a Sound stage as whatever sonic information is being depicted or displayed immediately about the loudspeakers, by the contributing audio system.
How dimensional, deep, tall or wide, and how close in proximity to the LP is the result of more than just the speakers.
I doubt seriously any recreated sonic picture generated in ones home is going to be identical or a duplicate of the original recording venue and atmosphere. I would say that it is entirely possible to recapture a sufficient amount of it for it to be emulated well for all practical purposes and as such, be very representative of the initial recording setting. But itll be no fingerprint.
Especially if the producer/engineer takes some liberties during the mixing.
Ive noticed as the sensitivity of the loudspeaker increases, the depth of stage diminished. Some of this again, is contributed by the electronics and the recording itself.
Whatever is inside the recording should be reproduced via the electronics in varying degrees. Those degrees or the accuracy of the sound stages geographical layout depends on the whole of the rigs abilities. Its degree of transparency, resolution, and its talents for placing audio cues into space coherently, and as the supplied info requests.
Ive heard for a while now and tend to agree with it, that speakers make the largest impact upon a system. They simply do not make the only difference. Nor, when some change is needed/desired should they be the only consideration to that end.
One configuration of equipment I owned provided me an exceptionally deep and wide stage for the musical setting. Almost nothing ever presented itself forward of the plane of the drivers. It was littered with details and cues sufficient enough for it to be very stimulating and involving, yet after some time I noticed my disinterest in that sort of sound stage. It was simply to remote.
Some alterations made the stage approach the LP more so. Different cabling, preamp , and speakers were thereafter added for the geography to change.
More electronics and then speakers again were exchanged, and as you might think so too was the stage lo.cation and expressiveness of the musical content thereafter altered. It got a lot closer to the LP though its closer presence did not alone increase its involvement or excitement.
It was the result of the sum of things. The system wide changes which made for the continued improvement (s).
My stage now sits about my speakers, with about as much info behind them as in front of them. Its most forward points to either side of where I sit
at times
depending once again, on whats in the recording and its fidelity.
For a while now, and some time to come perhaps, I find a closer involvement with the music more fun. Neither am I on the stage, nor are the musicians in my lap, nor is the sound itself aggressive or untoward at any time.
I feel Ill continue to enjoy being set in nearness to the production, rather than being set well back and apart from it. That being said, I could live with more separation, though not by much.
So long as the sound stage has enough cohesiveness and information contained within it to be laid out intuitively, is inspiring and is captivating, while sounding great, Id sit anywhere in that space to receive it.
When a representation does not make sense as it is scattered about, too large an image, set well up onto the walls, or its contents are out of proportion with relation to other objects also contained in it, I will have trouble soon enough concentrating on it, and quickly Ill lose all interest.
A good sound stage IMO has to be food for the soul, candy on the ear, and easy on the mind. It will become illusion and magical. Itll just click, then, when the mind no longer has to involve itself, real enjoyment comes due to that relaxation.
