What is Imaging?

Proper speaker placement and sitting position is critical in creating the best imaging that a system offers. This effects depth and width as well as separation of the performers.

As for imaging during a live performance, how many people can fit in the sweet spot?

Something audiophiles go crazy over and music lovers don't notice as much.
Something that has caused folks to buy speakers and then get absolutely sick of their distortion and other problems.

Upgrading gears and find new sounds are fun! Problem is the return on investment of time, effort, and money is very small or disappointments! Worst thing is the investment doesn’t give back any feedback. Many audiophiles don’t know what to do next! Another gambling purchase is inevitable, or all previous are investments could be wasted. So, audiophiles must gamble with more investments.

If audiophiles know the weakest link in the chain, there will be no upgrade bugs. Compromise in sound is OK as long as the problem is identified. When the time and the price are right, the problem will be corrected. You are in control! Like stock market, the future is clear whether up or down, everyone is in control. If we don’t know what the problem is, we keep thinking about it. That bugs us. Audiophiles (men) don’t take that easy because of self-esteem, reputation, and previous investments. Man has to finish what he started. We love to get into something more serious. Take it like a man! It’s sad that almost everyone has gone without finding the musical nirvana. Life is short! There is no time for experiments!

You need a sound system that gives you clear feedback. The feedback comes from good speakers which is the end of chain and a vital piece in a sound system. If you have upgrade itches constantly, you need a good speaker.

Back to OP, imaging is an easy part to identify in a hi-end sound system. Imaging must be combined with musicality. If you are not sure, ask your wife if she likes the music from your sound system. She is correct.

Here are some observations that I have made over the years regarding imaging. When my son was in the Chorale in college we went to various concerts from small intimate settings (piano and singer) to the full orchestra and Chorale inside big churches. The acoustics in large churches has a lot of reverberation. That tends to blend all of the voices together. I could hear general locations but not even close to pinpoint. Like someone said, some voices stand out; but placement is not precise. We bought the CDs of the concerts sometimes (they were always professionally recorded) and the sound at home was very close to what I heard live. When my son performed in a chamber with a piano I tried to sit front center. The intimate sound was just like listening to the stereo at home.

When traveling in cities on the coast or in Europe, I stop to listen to live performers and even groups on the streets. The sound is usually flat- kind of dead because the performers are in open air. There is no reinforcement for the bass. The imaging is very good since there are very few reflections.

Clubs are not my favorite because I do not like the over amplified bass most of the time. Sometimes they are great if the music is more acoustic than amplified. I find the imaging in a club to be not as good as my stereo because of all of the reflections and distance from the performers.

The first Cowboy Junkies record is a great benchmark for a stereo, I think. It was recorded in a church with two microphones. The imaging is more realistic because it is not a mix down of a bunch of mics close up to each voice and instrument. I played violin as a kid and when I listen to some classical with violin solos, the violin sounds like it is close to my ear like when I played one and yet it is some distance away like it should be when listening to a performer. I think that is called cognitive dissonance. That is, the sound is very detailed as if your ear is very close to the source; but the source is several feet away from an imaging standpoint.

Maggies have great imaging. I rank Quad ESL's (modified 63s) a 10 for imaging and Maggies a 9. I'd give my Thiels an 8 and Wilson Watt/Puppies an 8.5. There are a number of other speakers that do a good job too, of course. I just haven't heard many other brands in a while. But still, imaging is just one facet of a speaker's performance and a lot of work has to go into the source, electronics and room in order to help the speakers develop clear, focused images.

Last weekend I did a comparison between MIT interconnects with Audioquest Colorado, Niagra and Sky. Audioquest was superior to the MIT interconnects in every single part you Judge a cable for. The silver interconnect made the stage wider and deeper compared to the MIT interconnects. Voices also became 3-dimensional. Going back to the MIT voices became rather flat. You can make a stage wider and deeper with amp. cables, conditioners and even sources. The difference also in imaging is huge. Audioquest is superior in giving a much sharper individual focus. I would love to invite MIT people on a A-B test. With a big panel as well.

Spoken by a true audiophile: "As for imaging during a live performance, how many people can fit in the sweet spot?"

As a music lover, I don't worry about where I'll find the "sweet spot". I just go. And I often find, with jazz and chamber I am withing 12 feet of the performer, in a venue not using sound reinforcement. But you have to like music enough to go without a guarantee of being in the "sweet spot". My gosh, so many folks listen to the equipment, and want live music to conform to the audiophile home experience. Can you see that this is backwards?

That's a rhetorical question. We know the answer.