Better than Live??

[jazdoc]

I must be a lousy kind of audiophile - although most of the real performances I attempted lately were amplified sessions (and a few of them did not need it!) I enjoyed them more than my stereo. The social part of it - going there, being with friends, the lighting, seeing the performers, the atmosphere around the concert, and debating the performance at the break with a drink in my hand are factors I really appreciate.

Also there is the surprise factor in a real performance - IMHO the fact that you know you are assisting to a unique act also creates a bias expectation that increases your listening pleasure!

+1

 

[LL21]

I wanted to think the entire premise of this thread was rather silly, but based on some of the responses I see that several people think their stereo systems sound *better* than live music. And I suppose the argument has some legitimacy if one takes into consideration the worst possible sounding live concerts and contrast them against some of the most well-recorded music. However, if anyone here really thinks that we are close to capturing all of the energy and dynamics of music being performed live, you are seriously delusional and need to get out more. Go stand next to someone blowing on a trumpet and please tell me how many watts you think it would take to come close to reproducing the sound of that trumpet and how much dynamic range you would need to capture that live sound. Ditto for a drum set-any drum set. While I was at Axpona 2013, I saw the smallest jazz drum kit I have ever seen. It was the smallest kick drum and snare you could possibly imagine. This was a 3 piece jazz combo playing live at Gibson's steak house. I was maybe 3' from the drummer and the sound intensity and dynamics just about knocked me down. We are not capturing that level of realism yet I'm sad to say-not even close. There are energy levels, intensity, and dynamics that come from instruments that our microphones just can't come close to capturing. Sure, we get some of the lightening in the bottle, but meanwhile, there is a gigantic electrical storm taking place and we just have one little piece of it.


So if you want to tell me that your stereo system sounds *better* than live music, that statement better come with a bunch of qualifiers.

Systems in my experience do not approach live...agree. Power, dynamics missing...read somewhere a fork hitting a tiled kitchen floor can peak @ 120db for a split second. Do I think that properly mic'd events might give me more nuanced insight than sitting in the 35th row with people coughing next to me, eating? Kinda like the video here where maybe some people heard the guitarist's lyrics better via the recorded playback than by listening in the middle of a reverberant church hall? Maybe...thus a very different experience. Kinda like do I want to hear in my living room in the comfort of putting my feet up...or have to sit next to 300 strangers? Different experience. But for power, dynamics, scale...a system pales.

 

[mep]

But for power, dynamics, scale...a system pales.

And that is my point.

 

[LL21]

And that is my point.

Yup...i wonder if anyone has actually studied how much juice/power/speaker we really need in order to approximate a 6-man acoustic band? (Forget orchestra...its a shame to think we could fit a 70-100 piece orchestra in even a 30 x 40 living room...without going deaf anyway.

 

[edorr]

Yup...i wonder if anyone has actually studied how much juice/power/speaker we really need in order to approximate a 6-man acoustic band? (Forget orchestra...its a shame to think we could fit a 70-100 piece orchestra in even a 30 x 40 living room...without going deaf anyway.

I comes down to the sheer physics of speakers ability to move air and amplifaction needed to pull it off. For single instrument and say one or two vocalists, the physics does not have to be a constraint, but you run out of capacity in a hurry as the band gets bigger.

 

[LL21]

Yup...i wonder if anyone has actually studied how much juice/power/speaker we really need in order to approximate a 6-man acoustic band? (Forget orchestra...its a shame to think we could fit a 70-100 piece orchestra in even a 30 x 40 living room...without going deaf anyway.

I comes down to the sheer physics of speakers ability to move air and amplifaction needed to pull it off. For single instrument and say one or two vocalists, the physics does not have to be a constraint, but you run out of capacity in a hurry as the band gets bigger.

Yes, and I was wondering if anyone has done the math to determine what we need for amplification and speakers to replicate a 6 man ensemble (say jazz for now). Be most curious to know.

 

[Johnny Vinyl]

Apparently, this guy does listen to "live" music BUT stated that in the typical venues that one hears "live" music...that this system sounded better to him

I thought this was the question, but yet we seem to have strayed from it. Or it got misinterpreted to meaning..."Hey, let's have another discussion about gear instead or mic placement, etc.". I brought up the fact that a lot of rock concerts suck because of the loudness levels. Micro brought up the social aspect and surprise factor in his post. Those are answers that relate to the question.

I thought this was a very interesting question and was looking forward to a furthering of it, but again.........it just moves away from music and focuses on all things technical. No wonder I'm a crappy audiophile.

 

[mep]

Well John, I tried to focus on the music in my post and how far we are from capturing all of the information that is there to be heard live. If this thread is focused on crappy sounding live concerts sounding worse than a polished studio recording fine. If anyone is trying to kid themselves and say their stereo sounds better than live music played back competently, that is another issue that is seriously misguided.

 

[Mark (Basspig) Weiss]

I was maybe 3' from the drummer and the sound intensity and dynamics just about knocked me down. We are not capturing that level of realism yet I'm sad to say-not even close. There are energy levels, intensity, and dynamics that come from instruments that our microphones just can't come close to capturing. Sure, we get some of the lightening in the bottle, but meanwhile, there is a gigantic electrical storm taking place and we just have one little piece of it.


So if you want to tell me that your stereo system sounds *better* than live music, that statement better come with a bunch of qualifiers.

I realize that the 'norm' in audiophile systems means barely struggling to get to 120dB, but there are <ahem> systems out there that play louder the a jet engine and can destroy wood frame dwellings. You probably can count such systems, worldwide, on the fingers of one hand, but they do exist.
Last year's B.A.S.S. meetup featured my Ultimate Fireworks Blu-ray disc, a close up and personal surround sound recording of a Zambelli fireworks show, from the launch zone (we had to sign insurance releases as part of the job). The final recording has a dynamic aperture of 86dB and cannot be played on 16-bit systems without severe degradation. One attendee at the meet last year told me after the demo that his baseball cap kept getting blown off his head. Many people thought it was actually a better sonic experience than being at life fireworks. Reproducing a snare drum is very light work by comparison. When you have 112dB sensitivity array of speakers and 17,000 watts on tap, just 12 watts produces 129dB (measured) at the seating position (not 3' from the speakers). That's when the 'signal present' LEDs just start to flicker on the power amps.
I've made some incredible recordings over the years, but less than 1% of stereo systems in existence can do them justice.

 

[DaveyF]

Mark, that's an interesting post. However, i do not believe that sheer volume has anything to do with the re-creation of the "live" event. My brother works for a company that supplies the military, among others, with speakers that can produce a directed sound that close-up is in excess of anything that the human ear can tolerate. These speakers are 'active' and utilize class D amps with little more than a few hundred watts. The fidelity of these speakers is nothing that any of us would consider putting in our homes. They are utilized primarily on ships to warn others away from a long distance.

IMHO, a belief that a "live" performance has to be reproduced loudly is not necessarily accurate.

 

[NorthStar]

-- 1. As Mike (Lavigne) mentioned in that previous video, why are R2R tape decks not more in use (norm) today?
Why is that that we don't have more 'audiophiles' in the genre of Mike Lavigne and Ki Choi?
{I used to record my own music in one of those, and it sounded excellent; I don't remember the brand name, but it was from Germany.)

2. Like I said before, a live musical performance at a live venue (Concert Hall, Jazz club, etc.), and a reproduction at home from that recording are two completely different audio systems.
-> In a Classical concert hall, with full orchestra, the power and the grandeur of the space can only (IMO) be approximated at home with a full range surround sound system (7.5-channel or so), and at a realistic volume level relative to that space. ...At the seating position of course (Concert hall & Home).

3. Like Marc (Basspig) said earlier, you can have tremendous power at home as well (if you really want to), but it is not the search, not the goal, and certainly not healthy.
=> http://www.audioaficionado.org/461487-post22.html

4. A live Rock concert, in a stadium, or an arena is usually awfully sounding (kids' stuff, not for 'audiophiles').
Then a stereo home sound system sounds much better, duh, than the live Rock concert. ...But the 'emotions' aren't the same.

5. True, a solo folk musician/singer (or solo classical pianist) would be much better to experiment with, realize, and reproduce; space dependent, microphone's techniques and positioning dependent, and room's acoustic treatments dependent. ...And of course the quality of the recording machine(s), the reproduction chain (electronics), and the loudspeakers.

6. A small Jazz or Blues band is then the next logical step in trying to approximate in our rooms at home (like a 4-member band for example). ...Or a small Classical chamber music trio or quartet.

_________________

As a very young adult; I had the experience, because of my very early music passion, to assist and work at different venues like small Jazz clubs, small Classical chamber music auditoriums, and larger Classical concert halls.
And of course I also assisted to several Rock concerts at all type of larger venues (inside and outside), like forums (arenas), stadiums, etc.

I played music (guitar) to live audiences, up close and personal, when I was only 16-years old.
I performed oral speeches, and also Theater acting around that same time, and even earlier (14-15).

I only mention this because even today it is still part of my beneficial audio/music baggage. And from that I can extract some real 'live' experiences and beneficial knowledge.

* The Live music experience (performance's event) is one and only one.
The music reproduction at home from our playback stereo sound systems (or multichannel ones), is also one and only one. ...Or simply a facsimile of the real emotional 'thing'. ...Still very emotional though, but in a different kind of way.

And yes, a sound system at home can sound much much much better than a live music performance.
But with great live music, like an acoustic band, a classical Opera at the hall, a Ballet at the Opera Theater, a Jazz band, a Blues band in a good venue, comes great live experience that no home sound systems can reproduce.
...Volume levels, yes, but sheer 'realistic' dynamics, tones of the instruments, emotional live impact, accurate rendition of the human vocal range and levels of emotion, the acoustic space, reverberations, sustain, all the small and big transitions between fortissimo, crescendo, pianissimo, chords, chorales, etc., is the domain of live musicians, even in your own living space at home.
But short of hiring a live band at home, or having your friend musicians over, or not being able to afford classical music concert tickets; then we play with audio electronics and loudspeakers (subwoofers included). ...We experiment with various audio brands, from various price range, change the wires, add more speakers, look for the better music recordings, expand our musical horizons, perfect our turntables, re-explore the world or R2R tapes, and swim in the newer and never resting digital world of low and high music resolution; DACs, ADCs and all that jazz ....

We try our very best to live in a jitter-less (free) audio world, with all the music we dearly love.
...Both live, and reproduced by our playback systems. ...Two completely different systems.

 

[NorthStar]

-- See Davey, another smart thread from you. :b

I would like to hear some more from Mike Lavigne, Ki Choi, Gary Lkoh, Bruce B, U47, Flez007, and few others on Live versus Reproduction, and on analog R2R tape recordings.
Tim too, because he's a musician, and from members who have/had experience with professional music studio recordings. ...Music, and Movies too (because movies also contains music, classical music, orchestras, and all that jazz).

 

[Champ04]

I used to think about this a lot. But I ended up deciding that none of all these different arguments matter much.

I've never once enjoyed my own system MORE than actually being at a live venue.
This is not to say I think my system is lacking. On the contrary, there isn't another system I've ever come across that I would replace mine with.
And it can be downright transcendent at times and with the right material.

But given the choice between sitting on my couch listening or being at the event, in the moment, I'll take the live event every time. Even if the acoustics are less than stellar.
Hell, if it's a song I like well enough, I can fully enjoy a mediocre karaoke performance.

So for me, the question of which is better is a non starter.
I really enjoy experiencing various pieces of equipment. But I enjoy music more.

 

[DaveyF]

-- 1. As Mike (Lavigne) mentioned in that previous video, why are R2R tape decks not more in use (norm) today?
Why is that that we don't have more 'audiophiles' in the genre of Mike Lavigne and Ki Choi?
{I used to record my own music in one of those, and it sounded excellent; I don't remember the brand name, but it was from Germany.)

2. Like I said before, a live musical performance at a live venue (Concert Hall, Jazz club, etc.), and a reproduction at home from that recording are two completely different audio systems.
-> In a Classical concert hall, with full orchestra, the power and the grandeur of the space can only (IMO) be approximated at home with a full range surround sound system (7.5-channel or so), and at a realistic volume level relative to that space. ...At the seating position of course (Concert hall & Home).

3. Like Marc (Basspig) said earlier, you can have tremendous power at home as well (if you really want to), but it is not the search, not the goal, and certainly not healthy.
=> http://www.audioaficionado.org/461487-post22.html

4. A live Rock concert, in a stadium, or an arena is usually awfully sounding (kids' stuff, not for 'audiophiles').
Then a stereo home sound system sounds much better, duh, than the live Rock concert. ...But the 'emotions' aren't the same.

5. True, a solo folk musician/singer (or solo classical pianist) would be much better to experiment with, realize, and reproduce; space dependent, microphone's techniques and positioning dependent, and room's acoustic treatments dependent. ...And of course the quality of the recording machine(s), the reproduction chain (electronics), and the loudspeakers.

6. A small Jazz or Blues band is then the next logical step in trying to approximate in our rooms at home (like a 4-member band for example). ...Or a small Classical chamber music trio or quartet.

_________________

As a very young adult; I had the experience, because of my very early music passion, to assist and work at different venues like small Jazz clubs, small Classical chamber music auditoriums, and larger Classical concert halls.
And of course I also assisted to several Rock concerts at all type of larger venues (inside and outside), like forums (arenas), stadiums, etc.

I played music (guitar) to live audiences, up close and personal, when I was only 16-years old.
I performed oral speeches, and also Theater acting around that same time, and even earlier (14-15).

I only mention this because even today it is still part of my beneficial audio/music baggage. And from that I can extract some real 'live' experiences and beneficial knowledge.

* The Live music experience (performance's event) is one and only one.
The music reproduction at home from our playback stereo sound systems (or multichannel ones), is also one and only one. ...Or simply a facsimile of the real emotional 'thing'. ...Still very emotional though, but in a different kind of way.

And yes, a sound system at home can sound much much much better than a live music performance.
But with great live music, like an acoustic band, a classical Opera at the hall, a Ballet at the Opera Theater, a Jazz band, a Blues band in a good venue, comes great live experience that no home sound systems can reproduce.
...Volume levels, yes, but sheer 'realistic' dynamics, tones of the instruments, emotional live impact, accurate rendition of the human vocal range and levels of emotion, the acoustic space, reverberations, sustain, all the small and big transitions between fortissimo, crescendo, pianissimo, chords, chorales, etc., is the domain of live musicians, even in your own living space at home.
But short of hiring a live band at home, or having your friend musicians over, or not being able to afford classical music concert tickets; then we play with audio electronics and loudspeakers (subwoofers included). ...We experiment with various audio brands, from various price range, change the wires, add more speakers, look for the better music recordings, expand our musical horizons, perfect our turntables, re-explore the world or R2R tapes, and swim in the newer and never resting digital world of low and high music resolution; DACs, ADCs and all that jazz ....

We try our very best to live in a jitter-less (free) audio world, with all the music we dearly love.
...Both live, and reproduced by our playback systems. ...Two completely different systems.

That's a great post, Bob. I completely agree with you.
BTW, IF we are to assume that tape is the highest form of playback ( can we do that??) then I think the answer to why tape isn't used more would seem to me lie along the lines of why I don't indulge in it...and that is too little software available to me and I have too much invested in LP's and analog in general to want to add another source, without having perfected what I have.

 

[NorthStar]

Yes, practical, financial, and accessibility reasons.

But I still want to go where 'Better' is, regardless of all the constraints.
...And even further; R2R tapes with multichannel music reproduction; for systems comprising five main speakers and subwoofers (at least two).

* That's why in my last post above I mentioned Mike Lavigne, Kin Choi, Bruce B, Gary Lkoh and few others; so that I can learn some more, or stronger implemented in my brain and soul, plus the realistic approaches for more people to make the dream come truer.

It seems to me that the West coast (Pacific Rim), comprising Seattle, Washington, Oregon, Montana, Idaho, North California, Vancouver, Vancouver Island, Alaska, and few more is the roof of (houses) a 'click' of serious music people who are wise and explorers of all things related to the sense of hearing (audition). ...Plus much much more .... :b

 

[vinylsound]

While this is an older thread, it is always relevant to ask these questions. My wife and I are now hosting live singer songwriters in our home, she for the fun of it and I for the mental A-B of it. Some of our concerts will be recorded, most not. I encourage audiophiles to participate in the Concerts in your Home (http://www.concertsinyourhome.com/) series. Musicians are practically begging to come to your homes and play for 20-30 dedicated listeners. [Disclaimer:I am a host, but not affiliated with the organization in any other way.] Since joining in January I have turned away 15 acts wanting to play in our home and accepted three. Wish we had more time for everyone to play, but we do not.

 

[GaryProtein]

Listening to just about anything at home is better than having to stand to see a concert and/or listen to a bunch of singing, yelling, clapping arm-waving concert-goers who can't just sit still and just listen. The show is on the stage-NOT in the audience.

 

[NorthStar]

While this is an older thread, it is always relevant to ask these questions. My wife and I are now hosting live singer songwriters in our home, she for the fun of it and I for the mental A-B of it. Some of our concerts will be recorded, most not. I encourage audiophiles to participate in the Concerts in your Home (http://www.concertsinyourhome.com/) series. Musicians are literally begging to come to your homes and play for 20-30 dedicated listeners. [Disclaimer:I am a host, but not affiliated with the organization in any other way.] Since joining in January I have turned away 15 acts wanting to play in our home and accepted three. Wish we had more time for everyone to play, but we do not.

Only couches at my place, no chairs for the listeners, only for the musicians those chairs (the ones who like to sit down that is).
...You can call it a real living room environment; so it has to be first very comfy & cozy.
Music listeners always first, then the musicians. ...After all they're the ones who perform for the rest of us. :b

* If live musicians don't take care of their listeners by providing them with quality sound, then they are not true musicians. ...And from the live venues, and from the music recordings on LPs, CDs, SACDs, Internet Files, etc.

I'd rather go to a strip joint and look at stripteasers putting their own music already recorded and exhibit in front of me.

 

[Mark (Basspig) Weiss]

Mark, that's an interesting post. However, i do not believe that sheer volume has anything to do with the re-creation of the "live" event. My brother works for a company that supplies the military, among others, with speakers that can produce a directed sound that close-up is in excess of anything that the human ear can tolerate. These speakers are 'active' and utilize class D amps with little more than a few hundred watts. The fidelity of these speakers is nothing that any of us would consider putting in our homes. They are utilized primarily on ships to warn others away from a long distance.

IMHO, a belief that a "live" performance has to be reproduced loudly is not necessarily accurate.

Sheer volume isn't everything, of course. But without lots of headroom, recorded music can never sound 'live'. It is one of many (but a very important) aspects that play a role in realistic sound reproduction. My yardstick for hi-fi lately is a regional symphony that I recorded for. And last weekend I was in Manhattan, recording one of the great Jazz legends. I still marvel at the fact that, despite the sheer braun, my system adds nothing to the sound of the acoustic piano, bass and percussion instruments that I recorded. It was just the same as I remembered it from my position behind the camera. It makes me realize that most Jazz recordings have the bass super-hyped. A bass sounds so different, close-miked.

 

[Phelonious Ponk]

I have sat at many amplified concerts, where i wish i was at home listening on the stereo.....unamplified, never.

Me too. And even the ones I thoroughly enjoyed were not because the sound was superior to good recordings. I saw the Richard Thompson/Emmylou Harris/Rodney Crowell show that's currently touring a couple of nights ago. It was not too loud. It was in an excellent venue with a really good sound system, and I had good seats. Overall, it was a very satisfying amplified live music experience, but there are many things that would have been better about the playback of a good live recording, even on a fairly modest hifi system. IMHO live music, even un-amplified symphonic music, is a thing of its own, and very rarely a good reference for judging the quality of recordings or their playback. That POV is very easy to support and, if you apply even a spec of logic, very difficult to refute, but it has been discussed here many times without changing any minds so, YMMV.

Tim