What is nearfield listening?

Onh,

True the spatial cues are in the recording, but i'm pretty sure reflected sound and the proper time delays for reflected sound to reach your ears is needed to deliver a big 3-D soundstage from a stereo recording as opposed to just 1 dimension between the two speakers. The proof would be in hooking up a pair of speakers outside with no rear or side walls and see.

The time alignments required to make that happen are not possible imo because it would need a precise and particular room dimension, would it not? I think reflected sound is actually a hindrance. Sit outside on a really humid day with a big system(because that's what it would probably need) and you'd rock the house!

Csontos,

Proper distance to rear and side walls within certain parameters so that reflected sound does not arrive at your ears too soon, which results in early reflections that smear the sound, is the key.

The general guideline I've read and followed with excellent results is that reflected sound should travel at least 10- 12' further to reach your ears than the direct sound in order for 3-D spatial cues in the recording to be delivered constructively . Particular room dimensions are not required. Of course, there are many other aspects of room acoustics that can come into play as well, so the exact best position will vary based on other considerations from there.

My philosophy is that the 3-D sonic cues exist to various degree in most recordings (including mono recordings). TO not reproduce these correspondingly in a 3-D manner dduring playback represents a form of distortion in that what is in the recording is not reproduced as accurately as possible. Granted that it is a kind of distortion in playback that is not as offensive as certain other kinds most likely, but 1 dimensional stereo or monophonic sound is a distortion nonetheless, pretty much by definition, since sound is a 3-d natural phenomenon.

But how can a recording incorporate sound not yet in existence? Has the reflected sound deliberately been eliminated during mixing in order to reintegrate it during playback? How does speaker response and an-echoic specs relate to this? How do you 'engineer' sound?

"But how can a recording incorporate sound not yet in existence?"

A recording can only capture what was put into it by the producers.

"Has the reflected sound deliberately been eliminated during mixing in order to reintegrate it during playback? "

I would guess not normally. But different amounts of reflected sound in recordings can and will result depending on the specific production techniques used.

How does speaker response and an-echoic specs relate to this?

I think those practically are best determined using electronically produced test signals, which are different, not real recorded music.

How do you 'engineer' sound?

Isn't that exactly what all sound recording engineers and producers do? I believe they typically use near field listening techniques and monitors designed for near-field listening to do this in order to take room acoustics out of the picture in that acoustics will be different in each case where the recording is played back by the customers who buy their product.

SOme labels, like Mapleshade for example, have production techniques specifically designed to optimize soundstage and imaging overall.

Also a lot of early hi-fi recordings, like those from MErcury Living PResence, for example, were made with an emphasis on maxing out sound quality, including soundstage and imaging, when such things were still quite novel and marketable on a relatively large scale (compared to today).