Do you agree or disagree with this statement

[Johnny Vinyl]

Listening live and to recorded music are to me two separate and distinct experiences and I treat them as such. I want the best seats in the house if possible and build around the best seat in my house as best I can.

Having said that. I WISH I could listen to QUALITY artistry and musicianship everyday.

This!

 

[MylesBAstor]

I saw a link to this piece a while ago, and I have to say that it makes sense to me:
http://news.cnet.com/8301-13645_3-57490819-47/why-do-musicians-have-lousy-hi-fis/



Could be that our discriminatory ability when it comes to audio quality is inversely proportional to our appreciation of music.

Not in my experience. All the professional musicians that I've made an acquaintance with (during my time on the BOD of a music group) value the sound of their instrument as much as audiophiles value the sound of their systems. In fact, the musicians that I've been around describe the 'sound' of their instrument, for instance a piano, in pretty much the same terms we describe the sound of an audio system.

 

[Phelonious Ponk]

I saw a link to this piece a while ago, and I have to say that it makes sense to me:
http://news.cnet.com/8301-13645_3-57490819-47/why-do-musicians-have-lousy-hi-fis/



Could be that our discriminatory ability when it comes to audio quality is inversely proportional to our appreciation of music.

Musicians, being as familiar with the sound of real instruments as audiophiles are with the sound of their wives' voices, have no need to focus on sonic realism. They know it's not there without devoting much thought to it at all.

Tim

 

[microstrip]

In fact, the musicians that I've been around describe the 'sound' of their instrument, for instance a piano, in pretty much the same terms we describe the sound of an audio system[/B][/I].

Myles,

Are you openly admitting heresy?

 

[NorthStar]

This old road? Then I suppose it's ok to repeat myself:

When you listen to live music, it is processed, beyond recognition, by the most powerful post-production audio processor on the planet -- your brain. It receives information from the performance, from the envirnonment; it filters out the hash and focuses on the music. The mumbling audience, the rustling clothes, the cough from three rows behind you, even the reflected sound of the music gets very effectively pushed to the background as the processor focuses on what it came to hear.

When you listen to your system play a recording in your listening room, the processor works in the same way, but then it processes that environment. Even if you had recordings in your collection that captured the sound from your favorite seat in your favorite hall, you would not have this mythical reference. You'd just have bad recordings. Because for some reason I do not understand, the "processor" seems to process the environment it's in only. It doesn't address the environment the recording was made in.

Or at least that's how it seems to be. Get the best recording device and the best stereo microphone pair you can find, and record a concert from your seat, right above your ears. Take it home, plug it into your system and play it back. You will understand that we're trying to use steak to reference the flavor of apples.

Now, understanding the nuances of what real instruments sound like, that's useful. And very difficult to get in most concert situations.

Tim

---- I missed you Tim, a lot. ...And you are totally right.

 

[MylesBAstor]

Myles,

Are you openly admitting heresy?

Ooooops.....well I always idolized Joan of Arc

 

[NorthStar]

Not in my experience. All the professional musicians that I've made an acquaintance with (during my time on the BOD of a music group) value the sound of their instrument as much as audiophiles value the sound of their systems. In fact, the musicians that I've been around describe the 'sound' of their instrument, for instance a piano, in pretty much the same terms we describe the sound of an audio system.

---- In general, you are about right.

But there is another kind of artist (soul artists), and for them, the emotional performance, the message is the sound.
They don't need a $20,000 Gibson guitar, or that $500,000 Grand piano; just a second-hand or beat-up old guitar is just fine. It's not the instrument that counts, it's who is playing it, and how he's using it.

And that was my two cents.

 

[garylkoh]

A dealer importer did it in hong kong , 6 moons wrote about it , it seems high end isnt that bad after all .

http://www.6moons.com/industryfeatures/zanden/zanden.html

We did this too at the Pacific Northwest Audio Society. The biggest difference between any recording and "live" is the proximity of the microphone vs seated 15 feet away as part of the audience. During the set-up and rehearsal, I got to put my head where the mics were to hear what the microphone heard. The recording brings that sound and perspective to the seating position 15 feet away.

Here's a high-rez version of what we recorded so you can hear for yourself.
http://genesisloudspeakers.com/downloads/HD_Dan's_Song_Live.wav

Worst part was to read that powercords do make a difference .

Unfortunately, we found that too. Todd heard the difference using one of the power cords I brought on the Korg recorder he brought and we had to scrape his chin off the floor. Needless to say, said power cord was taken hostage for use in his future recordings.

 

[Gregadd]

Whew! Being an audiophile is easy. Defending it is a different story.

There are many natural sounds on recordings that you can recreate in your home to verify the accuracy of your system
Cow bell
Cough
Applause
Whistle
Tambourine
Druem sticks
Many have budding musicians in house or nearby
At one time a piano was in house. We had one
It still boggles th mind that I am supposed to be able to listen a fifteen second selection of music and compare it to another and decide it is the same. But I learn nothing useful about the sound of instruments after spending an hour at a concert and go home and compare it to my stereo.
Amazing.

 

[andromedaaudio]

Great innitiative ,nice video !!
Only couldnt play the recording high rez ( needed an extra file or something)

 

[Gregadd]

It took me a moment to recall.
To hear Branford and Ellis Marsalis at Blues Alley play this CD at Blues Alley Loved Ones. Then go home and listen to it.
Then to see Dee Dee Bridgewater perform Lone and Peace at Bues Alley . Then go home and listen.

 

[mep]

When you listen to live music, it is processed, beyond recognition, by the most powerful post-production audio processor on the planet -- your brain. It receives information from the performance, from the envirnonment; it filters out the hash and focuses on the music. The mumbling audience, the rustling clothes, the cough from three rows behind you, even the reflected sound of the music gets very effectively pushed to the background as the processor focuses on what it came to hear.

I hope you are kidding because if not, this is the dumbest thing about audio that I have ever read. If live music was "processed beyond recognition," then we wouldn't be able to recognize it as music, let alone live music. Really?? I don't think so.

When you listen to your system play a recording in your listening room, the processor works in the same way, but then it processes that environment. Even if you had recordings in your collection that captured the sound from your favorite seat in your favorite hall, you would not have this mythical reference. You'd just have bad recordings. Because for some reason I do not understand, the "processor" seems to process the environment it's in only. It doesn't address the environment the recording was made in.

I don't agree with that statement either. I think we get as much of the environment of where the recording was made (either a studio or a live venue) as the recording could capture.

 

[NorthStar]

-- This is great, life is great; we're free! ...To agree or disagree with anything, everything. :b

 

[garylkoh]

Great innitiative ,nice video !!
Only couldnt play the recording high rez ( needed an extra file or something)

You might need to download it and then play with a high-rez capable player......

 

[NorthStar]

Great innitiative ,nice video !!
Only couldnt play the recording high rez ( needed an extra file or something)

---- Does "initiative" spell with one "n" only? --------------------------------------------

 

[jazdoc]

If you don't listen to live unamplified music twice a month you have no reference point to be able to judge if a system sounds like real music.

I go out and hear a lot of live music. (BTW, if you are in Seattle this weekend, Crack Sabbath is playing the Royal Room.) I hear live acoustic instruments almost every day when my musician son practices. Knowing the sound of real instruments is important to developing a personal sense of what is important when evaluating audio equipment, i.e. having a sound (not voices!) in your head as a reference. This is useful to avoiding the pitfall of chasing 'different' instead of 'better'.

However, I don't thing you need to hear live music twice a month to be a good judge of audio equipment.

 

[Phelonious Ponk]

I hope you are kidding because if not, this is the dumbest thing about audio that I have ever read. If live music was "processed beyond recognition," then we wouldn't be able to recognize it as music, let alone live music. Really?? I don't think so.



I don't agree with that statement either. I think we get as much of the environment of where the recording was made (either a studio or a live venue) as the recording could capture.

Not kidding, but exaggerating for effect. make the recording from your favorite seat in the hall, then, with the the concert fresh in your ears, go home and listen to it. Yes, it will be recognizable as music, but it will sound nothing like what you heard from your seat. And it will make your manipulated studio recordings sound natural by comparison.

Tim

 

[Phelonious Ponk]

---- I missed you Tim, a lot. ...And you are totally right.

I really appreciate the kind remarks. The music-playing activity has cranked up a notch, and I bought another guitar, driving me to a different kind of discussion board. Meet Margret:



Sorry if she's sideways. I haven't figured out how to make the iPhone stop doing that. Oh well, I seem to have attached two photos. Technologically challenged this evening. The other is Black Dog.

Tim

 

[Gregadd]

Sweet

 

[NorthStar]

I go out and hear a lot of live music. (BTW, if you are in Seattle this weekend, Crack Sabbath is playing the Royal Room.) I hear live acoustic instruments almost every day when my musician son practices. Knowing the sound of real instruments is important to developing a personal sense of what is important when evaluating audio equipment, i.e. having a sound (not voices!) in your head as a reference. This is useful to avoiding the pitfall of chasing 'different' instead of 'better'.

However, I don't thing you need to hear live music twice a month to be a good judge of audio equipment.

---- Voices (human voices) are the very best 'sound' reference you can have in accurate music reproduction.

* Vocals are the most emotional 'musical' instrument (vocal chords).