[Gary Eickmeier]

"William Sommerwerck" wrote in message
...
"Gary Eickmeier" wrote in message ...

The stereo reproduction problem is an acoustical one, not an "accuracy"
one. It is not accurate to take the huge direct and reflected sound field
that was recorded and reproduce it from two points in space as a high
direct field.

We've been through this before. What you're saying is a major
misunderstanding of what sound reproduction is about.

Neil and William -

I don't wish to belabor this subject all over again any more than you do.
Too big a subject for a few posts in a newsgroup. Scott made some statements
about my speakers, not realizing that I have designed and installed some new
ones, so I showed him what I am doing now. Neil asked some questions about
the principles behind them, so I was glad to talk about it - any time!

Neil, we all know that the radiation pattern of most speakers varies as
frequency increases, but the devotees of the direct sound type of
reproduction advocate sound absorbing materials to kill most reflections
around the speakers. Also, it is mainly in the mid and high frequencies that
imaging happens. On the obviously audible difference between speakers with
"appropriate" dispersion with multi directionals, what do you hear as some
of those differences? Dipoles such as the Maggies and omnis such as the MBLs
have been highly praised in the audio press. What is appropriate dispersion?
What is your listening space like?

William, to say that I have a major misunderstanding of what audio
reproduction is all about is just a little too glib to let you get away
with. I could say the exact same thing to you and it would get us nowhere.

You are always telling me that the way to do research is to ask the right
questions. Well, some 30 years ago I began asking myself what should the
model, or paradigm, for stereo reproduction be? Around 4 years ago Siegfried
Linkwitz asked similar questions of the entire AES, in a letter called The
Linkwitz Challenge. The questions were, what should the ideal radiation
pattern, room positioning, and acoustical qualities be for speakers and
rooms? I answered those questions both in the Challenge blind testing and
now at my home with my new speakers, made a lot better than my Challenge
prototypes and with a variable radiation pattern in my somewhat ideal 21 x
31 ft listening room.

I am in central Florida and would welcome you for a listen. I would also
love to come up there and give a listen to your systems. I have not heard an
LEDE or other recording engineer's ideal system yet, though I have heard
most everything else, including Maggie Model 20s demo'd by Jim Winey, Quad
ESL 63s demo'd by Peter Walker, DBX Soundfield Ones in Mark Davis's home in
Pacifica California, Martin Logans in Noel Lee's home and many, many others
that I have forgotten. I am not just "pipedreaming" or talking theoretical
BS when I say I always come back to my system because I have all of the
factors of audibility of differences under my control and can manipulate
them for the best sound.

Gary Eickmeier