I just want to expand on the comment I made a couple of posts ago about how 'depth' cannot be more than a mental illusion. It's a beneficial, enjoyable illusion of course, but it is an illusion as I mentioned in post #18 and hence, the strength or this illusion will vary dramatically from person to person.
Originally Posted by hifi_dave
There is a parallel with photography. This afternoon, out for a walk at nearby National Trust Sheffield Park I took three pictures of the lake and as I rather like panoramic shots, I joined them together. Yes, this is still a 2D picture as it was taken with a standard camera and is appearing on the screen of your monitor which is definitely 2D and is certainly devoid of optical depth. But we know from our experience out and about in nature that those trees around the lake must be some distance away. So we convert what is unquestionably a flat 2D picture into what is almost palpably 3D. But look at the reflections in the still water: could we turn this picture upside down and the illusion would still work? That depends if we've ever experienced mirror-like reflections off water. The tell-tale give away as to what is the direct image and what is the reflection is only the tiny shimmering effect because the water is not perfectly still. But if you'd never seen a still lake, you may not have the experience to make sense of the image. The same applies to sound: if you've never been in a concert hall, you will have a vary skewed idea of what I would consider to be high fidelity sound.
Perception is all in the mind and will vary significantly between observers.
Alan A. Shaw
Harbeth Audio UK