Mixing with headphones?

[jonmatifa]

 

I'm curious though, has anyone tried to make two impulses (one for the left, then right channel) with a dummy head at mix position in a good studio with good monitors, and use that as a binaural-monitor-translator, recreating the monitor cross-talk and ever so slight amount of room reverb present in a control room? I've thought about it, it seems like the logical thing to do IF you had no choice but to mix on headphones. A substitute for a good control room and monitors? No. Still not yet. But it would be interesting to see how close the experience could be recreated.

 

 

http://namm.harmony-central.com/WNAMM07/Content/beyerdynamic/PR/Headzone.html

 

Close to what I was talking about, though I wonder if there's an emphasis in headphone listening correction, or if it just gives you a 5.1 perspective on headphones (without addressing monitor crosstalk and all the lovely things you get with having a pair, or more, of speakers in front of you)

[Rudolf von Hagenwil]

Human related psychoacoustics, as well the stereo recording process for stereo headphones are not the same as for two-channel loudspeaker stereophony.

 

If the stereo audio is binaural (dummy head), then headphone monitoring is mandatory, or the head related effect is not hearable.

 

For monitoring or mixing for two-channel loudspeaker stereophony you don't use headphones.

 

.

[jonmatifa]

Well, what I was talking about is more like transaural, except the opposite.

[Rudolf von Hagenwil]

Transaural audio is a method used to deliver binaural signals to the ears of a listener using stereo loudspeakers.

[fantasticsound]

Transaural audio is a method used to deliver binaural signals to the ears of a listener using stereo loudspeakers.

 

Hadn't heard of transaural. Does it work in a significant way? Normally the distinct cues created by a true binaural recording are destroyed when played back in anything but complete isolation. (i.e. Closed headphones.)

 

I'm intrigued with the idea you can create location info using only two speakers in an open room setting. I'm surprised more wasn't done to advance such technology. If you can move the sound location in a Y-axis using two speakers (The X-axis being left-right, Y-axis being up-down), perhaps it's possible with two speakers to move location on the Z-axis (Depth) using only two speakers too. Wouldn't that be something?

 

Actually, I've heard some strange psychoacoustics in automobiles. Keeping in mind that a typical car stereo is not surround sound, simply LR in front and the identical LR in back (plus a sub in many cases) it's odd that I've heard some recorded sounds that appear to emanate from the back of my car when the sound is properly balanced between front and back speakers.

 

So maybe it would require 4 speakers but you could still have a two channel (stereo) delivery that would sound stereo through a two speaker system but approach binaural in a 4 speaker (2 front-2 rear) system.

 

Hmmmmmmm???!?!?!?

[jonmatifa]

Transaural audio is a method used to deliver binaural signals to the ears of a listener using stereo loudspeakers.

 

Right, you basically create a "sweet spot", where the listener can experience binaural recordings similarly as they would with headphones by canceling out the crosstalk between speakers.

 

What I'm talking about is recreating as accurately as possible the stereo loudspeaker experience for headphones by utilizing convolution reverbs to simulate room ambiance and speaker crosstalk. I thought about doing this experiment myself, but I didn't know if someone's already tried it.

 

Sorry if I've taken this thread too off topic

[Rudolf von Hagenwil]

 

... transaural. Does it work in a significant way?

 

 

Intuitively I do not like processing who tries to transcode/process one recording technique into another, i.e. a binaural recording into loudspeaker stereophony, or a stereo recording to 3D for stereo loudspeakers. When ever possible I would prefer multiple speaker for multi dimensional sound with discreet channels on each loudspeaker. But in a mix, I would use any sort of psychoacoustic processing and sound field models, like virtual 3D environments, binaural room simulation etc.

 

Transaural crosstalk cancellation was originally invented for hi-fi in the early sixties. Today many companies develope synthetic 3D concepts and tools which we can use to enrich our music. Even plugins for desktop media players are available, see this website for example:

 

http://www.holistiks.com/amphiotik/modules.php?name=_hes_Technology

 

,

[fantasticsound]

Thanks for the link, Angelo.

 

I understand your preference for multi-channel surround sound, but I'm interested in other possible delivery of surround from stereo pairs because of the potential to present some type of surround sound in areas where multiple channel surround simply isn't a practical option. I'm sure we're a long way from achieving excellence in this type of delivery, but I think the phrase "holophony" (as opposed to holography, holograms) describes what I'm hoping for, someday.

 

Think, "The Veldt" by Ray Bradbury, a room that can immerse you completely in virtual reality, only without the being eaten by lions part.

[Rudolf von Hagenwil]

fantasticsound, when thinking about surround and the external world of objects and the internal world of subjects...

 

- When doing my daily walk, where I visit either the symphony orchestra rehearsing in the concert hall or I go for a few minutes into the cathedral where sometimes the organist is practising, for me such experiences represent the quality of being "real."

 

- Second, the capturing of a real event. For example an orchestra or a church organ recorded in a room who supports the stereo or surround sound field. This media is what I refer to as a "copy of a real event."

 

- A "manipulated copy of a copy" quasi a modified re-recording of a recording, i.e. thru processing imposed upon the limitation of our hearing. This can be interesting, for example for video art presentations in a secluded environment, where the recipient can relax, and therefor is not subject to harm, and then can dive into the art presentation. Also, sounds coming from behind can be vigilantly attentive.

 

.

[fantasticsound]

fantasticsound, when thinking about surround and the external world of objects and the internal world of subjects... - When doing my daily walk, where I visit either the symphony orchestra rehearsing in the concert hall or I go for a few minutes into the cathedral where sometimes the organist is practising, for me such experiences represent the quality of being "real."...

 

You're a lucky man, Angelo.

 

I certainly think in similar terms when deciding what a recording should be... As close an approximation of my perception of reality or a false pallette. (False in the sense of being an exaggeration of reality or a completely manipulation.)

[GioNYC]

I've been listening to music through Sony headphones for almost 20 years. It's my preferred method of listening to music. Since I'm familiar with them ( in this case, 9506), I mix exclusively on them. I do have a pair of Events powered monitors, but because of the acoustic environment, I use the cans. I usually get positive responses to the mixes.

 

So, if I'm getting decent results now, should I switch to the monitor?

[Rudolf von Hagenwil]

 

I've been listening to music through Sony headphones for almost 20 years. It's my preferred method of listening to music. Since I'm familiar with them ( in this case, 9506), I mix exclusively on them. I do have a pair of Events powered monitors, but because of the acoustic environment, I use the cans. I usually get positive responses to the mixes. So, if I'm getting decent results now, should I switch to the monitor?

 

 

Yes, definitely switch to loudspeaker !!!

 

The level, time and phase differences at the listener's ears with headphones are not the same as those coming to the ear via loudspeakers.

 

Thru headphones you never heard the inter-channel signal as it was meant to be heard. This inter-channel signal has a fiat distribution of sound sources between the two loudspeakers in front of the listener, often called phantom sources, but without spatial perspective. Also a coincident stereo recording does not provide any head-specific interaural signal differences, and fails not only in generating a head-referred presentation and depth, but also in generating a loudspeaker

[realtrance]

I'm curious about a related thing: due to living circumstances I've had to listen to music through headphones more than I'd like, and as a result I think when I listen to music through speakers, my ears/brain are now somehow "tuned" to hear things in a certain way by my headphone use, that makes listening to speakers irritating. The soundfield seems much more fragile, things seem off-center, I have to hold my head in a specific position to capture what sounds "right," etc. etc.

 

I could easily consider this all a question of speaker placement and room acoustics, but I don't think so; I think listening via headphones too much has just made me oversensitive to imaging and placement issues in a way that wouldn't have bothered me as much otherwise.

 

Or is that all just superstition?

[Rudolf von Hagenwil]

 

Don't Record, Mix or do anything else related to music with headphones!!!

 

 

.

[realtrance]

Wonderful reference, thank you, Angelo.

[Jeff da Weasel]

It used to be true that headphones were a really poor choice in mixing, and still are for all the reasons listed here.

 

However: in today's environment, doing a reference on phones is crucial. You have to assume that a much bigger percentage of people are going to get the majoity of their listening time in on portable media players such as iPods, Zunes (ha ha!), and so on.

 

While it's certainly not a good idea to try and mix on phones, especially EXCLUSIVELY on phones, it's pretty imperative that everyone at least check their mixes on consumer phones just to have some idea of what Joe Blow is going to hear when he listens to his iPod on the subway.

 

- Jeff

[Rudolf von Hagenwil]

Jeff, just imagine what that would mean to the producer. He would have to check each produced media on the worst possible reproduction system. For example and analogous in video, I would have to check a HDTV recording on a iPod, just to see if the quality is enjoyable on the little screen. That's what we have calibrated audio and video reference systems for, systems who fullfill the standard, and on which we control the quality once and for all.

 

.

[Jeff da Weasel]

Jeff, just imagine what that would mean to the producer. He would have to check each produced media on the worst possible reproduction system.

 

And that, my friend, is why we use NS-10's.

 

I don't know about your situation, but in music engineering/production, we often do use purposefully poor reference choices (the famous Auratone speakers are a great example) so that you do have some idea of what things sound like over a 3" TV speaker, or a built-in computer speaker, or in mono, or on a horrible boombox or car system. You have a master reference mix that hopefully translates to all of these, but it's nice to check anyway.

 

That's why I'll give things a listen through phones, or (better yet) create a typical 128kbps MP3 and actually pop it into my iPod and listen through the crappy stock little white earphones. It tells you things, sometimes.

 

- Jeff

[Rudolf von Hagenwil]

Well, i think checking on Auratone cubes or NS-10's is not necessary in my case. I look at it the way, that when it sounds good on the best speakers it sounds good on any speaker. However i use the Auratone sometimes when I work long hours, and because the immense kinetic power of the main monitoring is strenous over 10 or more hours. What you say is kind of similar like checking graphics made with Photoshop on a top monitor, then reassuring the quality on a screen of a mobile phone, which of course I do sometimes for a test, to see that it doesn't contain too much details for a little LCD

 

.

[UstadKhanAli]

Well, i think checking on Auratone cubes or NS-10's is not necessary in my case. I look at it the way, that when it sounds good on the best speakers it sounds good on any speaker. .

 

I dunno. I can make just about anything sound good on really great sounding monitors. If it sounds great on a variety of mediocre speakers, that's when you know you've got something.

 

Besides, it's a lot cheaper to make things sound good on mediocre speakers!

[Rudolf von Hagenwil]

Well, you two, Jeff & Ustad, are relatively right as always !!!

 

I also have Auratone/NS-10 equivalent loudspeakers, they are Bowers & Wilkins Nautilus, and a pair of Strauss Model 350

 

It looks similar like that, it is not my room, it's room No. 12 in Tokyo:

 

http://www.strauss-elektroakustik.com/pic_big/sony/4.html

 

.

[david henman]

...i tend to avoid headphones completely, for all the reasons mentioned, plus i find they tend to give you ear fatigue very quickly.

 

-dh