Your definition of soundstage

Rrog
Agreed.

This is interesting on a couple of levels.

Not knowing any better… I’d 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 one’s 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 it’ll be no fingerprint.

Especially if the producer/engineer takes some liberties during the mixing.

I’ve 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 stage’s geographical layout depends on the whole of the rig’s abilities. It’s degree of transparency, resolution, and it’s talents for placing audio cues into space coherently, and as the supplied info requests.

I’ve 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 it’s closer presence did not alone increase it’s 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. It’s most forward points to either side of where I sit… at times… depending once again’, on what’s in the recording and it’s 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 I’ll 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, I’d 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 it’s 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 I’ll 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. It’ll just click, then, when the mind no longer has to involve itself, real enjoyment comes due to that relaxation.

I think Jim hits the nail on the head especially in the last 3 paragraphs.

I loved reading Jim's long post. I define soundstage as the sound field that's created when the system plays. Sometimes it's high, wide and deep, sometimes it's low, narrow and shallow. Seems to depends on system components, the recording, power cords and lots more.

I like to define it that way because it seems easy to differentiate it from image, which would include instrument definition, separation, detail and clarity. It's possible, for example, to have a wide and expansive soundstage and within it, instruments that can't be located precisely, or wander about.

Not only speakers and amps but also the source components can have a big effect on the soundstage as well, especially when we are talking about turntables. Even within a product line there can be big differences. One of the main reasons I chose Rega over other relatively inexpensive tables like Project and Music Hall is because the soundstage is so much larger and more lifelike.

This is very interesting to read and learn. I've had several systems and have enjoyed several really different stages. My old system had a very good stage that was more from speaker to front wall and the further I set that stage to be back of the speaker the more detail and dynamics I lost. I found myself to enjoy the laid back stage on certain things and not to enjoy it on others. I think I was trying to get more stage out of that system than something in it was capable of. If I just let it come forward to the speakers it was over all a much better listening experience. Prior to that equipment my system was much better at staging without losing detail but was just not what I wanted.

Now I have a new system and the stage is unlike anything I've heard before. There are several factors in my new systems ability to stage and one of them is the Critical Mass Systems platinum series racks. My system now has what I would describe as a stage without boundary. Meaning my walls have nothing to do with the ends of my stage and that can be said front, right, and left. My speakers are only maybe 3 feet off the front wall and 9 feet apart. My stage is more detailed than ever, and also can extend up to I would say 20 feet wide on some music. The layers of depth in the band start at the front wall and extend back from that. It never gets up to the speaker. In the past with this stage or anything close to it that I've heard it lacks the impact and dynamic detail but this system lacks none of that and I hear more than I have ever on just about every disc I put in. I enjoy all the stages and it is something I like. I also like detail so don't sacrifice detail like I did once to try and get more out of your stage.

Cables make a difference as I am doing a demo on Interconnects and speaker cables now and each one actually changes the demension of the stage to some degree.

Important to note that while I say how big my stage is, it still remains very musical and cohesive. Its not fatiguing to listen to but does take a bit of training or getting use to as for the first time you hear it, you will just be like, "man what was that and where did it come from, I've never heard that there before"... so I wind up replaying things over to hear it because I've just never heard it like that before.

Stage is important but so is detail and musicality so just try to find the happy balance with the gear you have to draw out the best it can do across the board.

Enjoy the music,