"Black Backgrounds" in Music Reproduction?

[Mike Lavigne]

been RV traveling (Tecopa, Ca. today) so jumping in (thanks to Starlink) here late, but recording ambience (related to the idea of black background) is a matter of a combination of a few things. low system noise floor, source hardware noise floor, transparency of the signal path, low frequency extension and amp headroom, and especially the level of recording information into the noise floor. i find that the best direct to disc pressings and particular tape recordings take this the furthest. tape being the clear king. and when i switched from my Studer A-820 w/King Cello to the hot rodded ATR-102 with the MR-70 preamps this lower noise floor raised the bar even higher. i heard levels of ambient information that was astounding.

live tape recordings ring this bell the loudest.

one interesting way to asses this is between tracks on vinyl to hear the loading of the room with a low frequency ambient bed before the first music note starts. a 'black' background not loading the room would maybe sometimes point to a lack somewhere in the chain and one separator of hardware or media. this is all about degrees and not an 'on' or 'off' thing.

i'm not claiming that digital is not capable of all these things. but at the top of the food chain of sources, tape rules by degrees on ambience. when you hear a great live jazz club tape on great tape playback gear the degree of ambient realism is breathtaking. and worth pursuing.

i do think recent recording processes don't always value this aspect of our music enjoyment. so to hear what is possible golden age recordings more generally succeed at this. more simple live recordings.

time now for a hike.

 

[microstrip]

(...) i do think recent recording processes don't always value this aspect of our music enjoyment. so to hear what is possible golden age recordings more generally succeed at this. more simple live recordings.
.

Surely - Kingsway Hall (London) and Symphony Hall (Boston) provided natural reverberation, engineers developed microphone techniques to enhance this feeling in ordinary systems. Producers had gain hand lifted to highlight instruments during the recording, Abbey Road and Capitol Studios had carefully designed echo chambers to add reverb. Known jazz studios also had great tricks. There are recording books referring to all these Golden Age aspects.

Modern recording techniques result in a drier acoustic, preferred by many listeners. But this had little relation with being tape of digital. Just recording techniques and practices.

 

[PYP]

Modern recording techniques result in a drier acoustic, preferred by many listeners. But this had little relation with being tape of digital. Just recording techniques and practices.

Do you think this is the result of trends in recording practices, the gear or a combination of those two? I've read at least one autobiography of a recording engineer (old timer) who teaches his students to forget about the computer monitor and listen.

 

[microstrip]

Do you think this is the result of trends in recording practices, the gear or a combination of those two? I've read at least one autobiography of a recording engineer (old timer) who teaches his students to forget about the computer monitor and listen.

A combination of both surely. Look for interviews of Bert van der Wolf, he explains it much better than I would!

 

[PYP]

A combination of both surely. Look for interviews of Bert van der Wolf, he explains it much better than I would!

this passage is relevant to our hobby:

so I think it was in 2000 that I decided to go fully independent and work on my own. I started very quickly with my own label with what at that time felt like a very fresh angle. You see, we didn't know anything about hi-end audio at that time. We were just professionals in the production world. But at that time I was contacted by Harry van Dalen from Rhapsody in Hilversum who was in the hi-end world. He did his own recordings of musicians just for fun, but he wanted to try recording in higher resolution. He called and asked if I can rent him an A/D convertor so I brought it there and I walked in the shop and thought, "Wow, this is cool. What is this?!" As I said, I didn't know anything of the hi-end audio world, so I was just stunned. I mean they had cables for hundreds of thousands of euros and speakers like… speakers like these [points backwards to his Avalon professional mixing monitors]. Harry actually recognized me and had some recordings on hand that I had done at Channel Classics. It's hard to explain what it felt like hearing my music for the first time in real hi-end, but it's as if I had been looking through a dirty window and suddenly it was totally clean and I could see every detail of every image through the glass. It's funny because a lot of the records I made for Channel sounded great. Others that I thought were great for years, suddenly when I listened to them through these systems I thought, "Oh god…".

 

[PYP]

and this might ruffle a few feathers (I bolded to increase the ruffle):

"We now have a much better knowledge of digital, how it differs from analog and how it became mature to a level that exceeds the best analog. Furthermore, the development of digital mixing tools, the enormous DSP power of edit engines and various plug-ins for reverb, delay, and more have multiplied our options for creativity in the editing and mastering room. That adds a lot to the magic and makes it more likely to communicate exactly what musicians intend to transmit onstage."

But, this is an important clarification:

"Remember when HDTV came out? By capturing more information, the new visual transparency revealed too much of the actors’ make-up. This changed the “grime departments” at television shows forever, and vastly complicated the tasks of set decoration, lighting, and more. With ultra-resolution audio, engineers now have to come up with more subtle accents, more sophisticated mixes. That has not happened across the board. Timbres, transients, and imaging are still being overproduced, as if high-res did not exist; the make-up is showing. Analog—and DSD, in a way—comes with a nice layer of “lingerie,” a term I use for differences between real life and the “ultimate/naked” truth of high-resolution audio.

Going back to cruder formats like analog tape or vinyl is certainly not the solution."

 

[Gregadd]

It depends on the question.
There are plenty of reasons not to back to tape and vinyl. When done right both can be dead silent.

 

[Kingrex]

and this might ruffle a few feathers (I bolded to increase the ruffle):

"We now have a much better knowledge of digital, how it differs from analog and how it became mature to a level that exceeds the best analog. Furthermore, the development of digital mixing tools, the enormous DSP power of edit engines and various plug-ins for reverb, delay, and more have multiplied our options for creativity in the editing and mastering room. That adds a lot to the magic and makes it more likely to communicate exactly what musicians intend to transmit onstage."

But, this is an important clarification:

"Remember when HDTV came out? By capturing more information, the new visual transparency revealed too much of the actors’ make-up. This changed the “grime departments” at television shows forever, and vastly complicated the tasks of set decoration, lighting, and more. With ultra-resolution audio, engineers now have to come up with more subtle accents, more sophisticated mixes. That has not happened across the board. Timbres, transients, and imaging are still being overproduced, as if high-res did not exist; the make-up is showing. Analog—and DSD, in a way—comes with a nice layer of “lingerie,” a term I use for differences between real life and the “ultimate/naked” truth of high-resolution audio.

Going back to cruder formats like analog tape or vinyl is certainly not the solution."

Is he talking about digital in the sense of recording and mastering, or is he talking about digital in the sense of playback media.
That comment is coming from a guy who, how long ago saw a decent stereo. Prior to that, he may have based his process on how it sounds in a car.

 

[Al M.]

Is he talking about digital in the sense of recording and mastering, or is he talking about digital in the sense of playback media.
That comment is coming from a guy who, how long ago saw a decent stereo. Prior to that, he may have based his process on how it sounds in a car.

Just like he had never heard how his recordings sounded on a high-end system before he met Harry van Dalen (post prior to the one you quoted), I am sure he will have heard plenty of great vinyl and tape on Harry's systems.

 

[PYP]

Just like he had never heard how his recordings sounded on a high-end system before he met Harry van Dalen (post prior to the one you quoted), I am sure he will have heard plenty of great vinyl and tape on Harry's systems.

Aren't you feeling The Spirit of the Turtle? https://spiritofturtle.com/ Nice little setup now.

 

[andromedaaudio]

A combination of both surely. Look for interviews of Bert van der Wolf, he explains it much better than I would!

I have 4 of bert vd wolfs CD / SACD s .
No comparison whatsoever with tape.
Not even close

 

[andromedaaudio]

The best CD s i have for classical are pentatone classics.

 

[Kingrex]

Recording engineef are people too. They have an opinion of what they feel makes for compelling playback. Just like a friend of mine calling his own system world class. He can't get enough of himself and his system. I like his bass performance. That is very good. Excellent in some metrix. His soundstage is also very good. But, I would not want it in my room. It falls short in area that are meaningful to me. So an engineer saying he prefers digital over analog is just anothet guy with an opinion.
I personally don't care either way. I like both. I have some source material I prefer on either or.

I do have a stronger attachment to my feelings of "Black" background. I less prefer certain genera on systems I perceive as Black. My friends stereo trends that way. I much prefer a livelier, more expressive sound from say a horn. I don't have a horn. Might never have one either. But I like them when I hear them.

I see how people like stereo that present as I see as Black. There are musical genera I prefer on that type of stereo. There are genera I find booring on it. I also find some music less appealing on a horn than on say a more Black presenting stereo. Its all a mixed bag. But they are definitely different.

 

[PeterA]

Recording engineef are people too. They have an opinion of what they feel makes for compelling playback. Just like a friend of mine calling his own system world class. He can't get enough of himself and his system. I like his bass performance. That is very good. Excellent in some metrix. His soundstage is also very good. But, I would not want it in my room. It falls short in area that are meaningful to me. So an engineer saying he prefers digital over analog is just anothet guy with an opinion.
I personally don't care either way. I like both. I have some source material I prefer on either or.

I do have a stronger attachment to my feelings of "Black" background. I less prefer certain genera on systems I perceive as Black. My friends stereo trends that way. I much prefer a livelier, more expressive sound from say a horn. I don't have a horn. Might never have one either. But I like them when I hear them.

I see how people like stereo that present as I see as Black. There are musical genera I prefer on that type of stereo. There are genera I find booring on it. I also find some music less appealing on a horn than on say a more Black presenting stereo. Its all a mixed bag. But they are definitely different.

Rex, What do you think causes the effect you hear in systems you describe as "black presenting stereo"? Can one culprit be power delivery, or is it something else?

 

[Lee]

been RV traveling (Tecopa, Ca. today) so jumping in (thanks to Starlink) here late, but recording ambience (related to the idea of black background) is a matter of a combination of a few things. low system noise floor, source hardware noise floor, transparency of the signal path, low frequency extension and amp headroom, and especially the level of recording information into the noise floor. i find that the best direct to disc pressings and particular tape recordings take this the furthest. tape being the clear king. and when i switched from my Studer A-820 w/King Cello to the hot rodded ATR-102 with the MR-70 preamps this lower noise floor raised the bar even higher. i heard levels of ambient information that was astounding.

live tape recordings ring this bell the loudest.

one interesting way to asses this is between tracks on vinyl to hear the loading of the room with a low frequency ambient bed before the first music note starts. a 'black' background not loading the room would maybe sometimes point to a lack somewhere in the chain and one separator of hardware or media. this is all about degrees and not an 'on' or 'off' thing.

i'm not claiming that digital is not capable of all these things. but at the top of the food chain of sources, tape rules by degrees on ambience. when you hear a great live jazz club tape on great tape playback gear the degree of ambient realism is breathtaking. and worth pursuing.

i do think recent recording processes don't always value this aspect of our music enjoyment. so to hear what is possible golden age recordings more generally succeed at this. more simple live recordings.

time now for a hike.

Mic placement also matters as optimal placement is very time consuming and if not done right can also obscure low level information.

 

[microstrip]

(...) So an engineer saying he prefers digital over analog is just anothet guy with an opinion.
I personally don't care either way. I like both. I have some source material I prefer on either or. (...)

The same for me. I care little on what they prefer. But I care a lot on the reasons of their preference and their argumentation, either technical or subjective.

 

[Kingrex]

Rex, What do you think causes the effect you hear in systems you describe as "black presenting stereo"? Can one culprit be power delivery, or is it something else?

I commented earlier on that. I feel a speaker with a massive crossover and very damped driver is not as able to transmit low level signal to sound as well as a speaker with a much more minimal crossover and a tiny diaphragm. When the speaker is playing at high volumes, both present fine details. It's the quiet passages that are heard differently. Thats just my opinion. Sort of how I hear it.

 

[microstrip]

I commented earlier on that. I feel a speaker with a massive crossover and very damped driver is not as able to transmit low level signal to sound as well as a speaker with a much more minimal crossover and a tiny diaphragm. When the speaker is playing at high volumes, both present fine details. It's the quiet passages that are heard differently. Thats just my opinion. Sort of how I hear it.

Ok, it is your feeling. And how do you analyse it technically?

 

[PeterA]

I commented earlier on that. I feel a speaker with a massive crossover and very damped driver is not as able to transmit low level signal to sound as well as a speaker with a much more minimal crossover and a tiny diaphragm. When the speaker is playing at high volumes, both present fine details. It's the quiet passages that are heard differently. Thats just my opinion. Sort of how I hear it.

I generally hear more nuance and ambience and fine resolution from more efficient loudspeakers. Basically, more information. The music is also presented differently, with more life and energy.

Of course, this is only my subjective impression and maybe it’s in my imagination, but it is based on direct observation using my senses. I have not measured it.

 

[Kingrex]

Ok, it is your feeling. And how do you analyse it technically?

I'm not an EE. I am a line level electrician. I don't know much at all about using meters.
I read threads on people building speakers. And a good friend builds them. My understanding is energy is absorbed in a crossover. It would be best to have a line level device. I also have been told as I examined drivers to make a swarm of subs that dri ers also have different levels of power requirements. Some are very sensitive. Other require a lot of power, but can exert more force.

I make an inference then that a very quiet passage in a musical piece might have the amp only pushing a fraction of a watt. That fraction could be wasted as heat in the crossover and driver. If that happens, that is lost information emanating from the driver, leading to a perception of Black, as there is no sound.
Maybe you can put what I am saying into technical jargon. If it makes sense what I'm trying to convey. Or maybe explain how I'm wrong and power loss is not an issue with modern dynamic driver speakers.