Also, in the case of crash cymbals or one on a stand their sound including color depends on their weight and how they are played.
Is Live, Unamplified Music the Correct Reference for the Sound of our Audio Systems?
- Thread starter Ron Resnick
- Start date
Also, in the case of crash cymbals or one on a stand their sound including color depends on their weight and how they are played.
Music is but a communication between humans. It can make you think, laugh, cry, dance, happy, sad, reminisce and or forget. It can make you fall in or out of love, make you want to live or die. It can be profound or frivolous. It cab be incredibly complex or simple. It can incite a riot, broker peace, or bring soldiers yo battle. It can make you long for a deceased best friend or pet. It can make you wonder what might have been on the road not taken.
If your system can do any of that you are blessed.
If your system can do any of that you are blessed.
"That's a big word salad for a simple fact, some amplifiers clip softly so you don't hear it, others clip very harshly so it's horrid to hear. But sometimes even soft ones can clip to the point of being harsh. "
There is no reason at all to run an amp into clipping.That's the whole point. You can also do it in such a way where power compression does not become an issue as well. So a win win.
Rob
There is no reason at all to run an amp into clipping.That's the whole point. You can also do it in such a way where power compression does not become an issue as well. So a win win.
Rob
"That's a big word salad for a simple fact, some amplifiers clip softly so you don't hear it, others clip very harshly so it's horrid to hear. But sometimes even soft ones can clip to the point of being harsh. "
There is no reason at all to run an amp into clipping.That's the whole point. You can also do it in such a way where power compression does not become an issue as well. So a win win.
Rob
Most stereo's clip a tiny bit during a listening session. It's whether it makes itself known or not...
Very well said. Very.
And if one takes that position straight on, the requirement to move toward "the absolute sound" (whatever that is) gets way less critical. It then becomes (for me) a DIFFERENT way to enjoy music. Which means, (for me), I can (and do) take "liberties" that enhance the overall listening experience.
In the past, I have had more "accurate" equipment and systems. But NONE come marginally close to providing the musical enjoyment I now have - which is what this hobby should be all about. Couple that freedom AND the ability to easily experience all kinds new music (e.g. Roon/Qobuz) and I have reached audio nirvana.
This question of "the absolute sound" is quite fascinating. My mentor in Vienna told me during a rehearsal at the opera that there is no absolute sound. There are way too many variables in play, from seating position, to the sound of specific halls, to the sound of specific instruments, to whether or not there is an audience in the hall, to the temperature or humidity levels. Then there are the choices the recording engineers and mixers make.
I had an interesting experience the other night. Madfloyd was invited to a "working rehearsal" of the BSO for their upcoming performance of Dvorak's Stabat Mater. He asked me to join him. It was fascinating to see the familiar faces up on stage while the musicians were dressed casually. It was fun to see how Andris Nelsons works behind the scenes and directs the performance. During the intermission, I suggested to Ian that we change our seats for a different perspective.
We started out in the seventh row, center aisle. We then moved much further back to about 3/4 of full orchestra seating from the stage, dead center in the hall. The sound was much different. Up close, the sound was loud, large, very clean and exciting. We clearly heard the string texture from the instruments, the articulation of the soprano and the tenor and bass soloists. The sound was vivid and alive.
Further back, the sound was more homogenized with much greater emphasis on the midrange frequencies. I could not differentiate between individual instruments. It was a smaller, quitier, less grand presentation. The sound was warmer, heavier, thicker.
Most of the listening perspectives presented by my analog recordings of similar large scale music seems to be from an area slightly behind where we sat in the seventh row, perhaps row 12-15. Of course, this impression must have much to do with my own room and system set up and components, but what is clear is that the sound changes drastically depending one where one sits. It also changes dramatically depending on what type of piano is being played, how it is being played, and in what kind of room it is being played.
It was a very interesting and educational experience and one that gives me yet another perspective into this whole notion of an "absolute sound", what we hear from live music and how it relates to what we hear at home. Fascinating stuff.
Here are two photos from the two seating positions.
I once wrote a letter to "The Absolute Sound" magazine and the response I got from asking about their definition of "the absolute sound" suggested that what we should be trying to reproduce at home is what is captured on the recording medium (tape, digital file, or whatever).
I posed the question because for the 25 straight years of my attendance to the Atlanta Symphony, I could NEVER hear individual specific instruments that I could hear on a recording. Front to back depth was also exaggerated on the recording. And lots of other tonal difference as well. In fact, (from row G, just left of dead center) what I heard was, for the most part, gigantic mono.
I posed the question because for the 25 straight years of my attendance to the Atlanta Symphony, I could NEVER hear individual specific instruments that I could hear on a recording. Front to back depth was also exaggerated on the recording. And lots of other tonal difference as well. In fact, (from row G, just left of dead center) what I heard was, for the most part, gigantic mono.
Very, very interesting and relevant, Peter!
Starting out with a single performance of live music itself not being susceptible of being perceived as a singular “absolute sound” it is almost amazing that any of us can agree on anything at all in this hobby!
Peter, nice report. Yes, we have discussed numerous times in the past that there is no absolute sound, and it all depends on where you sit; and consequently, what the microphones pick up is not what you hear. Regarding your system's presentation, my educated guess it's mostly the Q3s, having heard the same presentation myself from them a number of times.
BTW, there are open rehearsals just about every Thursday at the BSO.
BTW, there are open rehearsals just about every Thursday at the BSO.
Unfortunately many people assume that "the absolute sound" as defined by Harry Pearson and many TAS contributors is a well defined firm concept, carved in stone with a short sentence. Nothing more wrong. It was an evolutionary concept, described along many long essays and reviews along the years, that show that is was not absolute at all, but just a description of the type of sound preferred by a group of people with great expertise and dedication to this hobby.
These articles were often contradictory and would cause an never ending debate, as should result from an extremely subjective definition stating they were aiming at“the sound of actual acoustic instruments playing in a real space.” IMHO the search for a defined subset of sound reprodcution characteristics that manages to make us believe systematically and universally that we are facing reality is challenging but unrealistic.
Bruce B
WBF Founding Member, Pro Audio Production Member
I traveled to Japan with Winston Ma to record the Tsuyoshi Yamamoto Trio. This was a pure DSD recording captured in 3 formats.. DSD, PCM and Tape. The engineer was at the SSL mixing board and Winston and I would go into the room and move mics and such. We were able to match the live sound and recorded sound as closely as possible.
Attachments
Yes, but one thing is totally clear no matter where you sit...it all is unmistakeably live music. If they were then to play a recording through the house system I see in the photo you would never ever mistake it for the musicians on the stage. This is the absolute sound! It is that which allows our complex brain processing to say, "no matter where I sit, no matter how much the sound changes with where I sit it always, always, always sounds like live music and is unmistakeable".
I had an interesting experience in the south of Spain in 2017. We were in some town on the southwestern tip of Spain and there was some religious festival. We were in a shop looking around when I started hearing music coming from down the street. It wasn't very loud but it was immediately obvious it was not recorded. Now the sound was somewhat indistinct and bouncing back and forth off the buildings that lined the small alleyway but it didn't matter...it sounded LIVE...and as the band got closer and much louder it was confirmed then visually but long before I heard it there was that instant recognition.
IMO, your mentor is wrong...there is an absolute sound and it is live, regardless of how well you can separate musicians or how clear or how muddy it is...especially purely acoustic music will not be mistaken for recorded regardless of how close or far you are away. There are just too many differences in the pattern that your brain recognizes and is not fooled for long if at all.
I think this is what HP really meant with his ramblings about "real live instruments in real space"...our ear/brain processing just knows when this is real or not and it doesn't matter if the space is familiar or not..it is hard wired from evolution and experience from birth of real sound in real space.
Even live amplified is hard to mistake for recordings played back. I have heard many loud outdoor concerts where long before you actually see the performers you just know its live and not recorded...doesn't matter how close or how far or even around how many street corners it is coming from.
This past Monday hearing an amplified jazz concert in Zürich just reinforced this idea and to me also debunked this idea that most of the live sound is lost at the microphones...this is really not true from what I hear. Good sound reinforcement can sound very live and again often unmistakeable from recorded playback through the exact same sound reinforcement system.
We have to keep in mind that recordings are nearly always made up close compared to where we would often sit in an audience. This helps the illusion when listening to playback because we don't have a visual placement of the performers like we would when watching a live show. But it also has the effect of making every performance like you are very close to the performers because as your rightly pointed out things get rather indistinct spatially at a distance from the performance. Since most people don't sit up close all the time then it makes the recorded experience not the same as the live one. Have you ever sat close? When you do THEN it sounds more like what is on a recording from a spatial perspective (but still not close in other realms of realism).
So what is going on then'? Well, recordings seem to be a pretty big bottleneck and I have a few that illustrate how much better you can get. Also, the perspective of up close bothers a lot of live listeners who are sitting mid hall and want that more diffuse immersive sound rather than the upfront perspective. I have one recording where I know all the details and it was made about 6 meters from the front of the stage and it is a single stereo ribbon microphone. It has minimal compression and no eq. It is of Prokofiev Romeo and Juliet and it sounds very much like a slightly diffuse midhall live sound...if the gear can handle the absolutely huge dynamic range on the recording...most fall apart...really. When it is done right it has that midhall sound and is immersive. I saw the same piece performed in Zürich Tonhalle where I sat dead center in the 10th row. Despite being in a totally different hall with different orchestra etc. It sounded VERY similar to the recording played back (at that time) through my Acoustat system (I played the recording again as soon as I got home).
One thing I have noticed about live sound reinforcement is how it is nearly always with compression driver/horns and huge woofers with gigantic voicecoils...even in small venues where the average levels are not too high (but the peaks are really high). These kinds of speakers will fail with regard to flat FR and the like but they won't compress the live dynamic signal, at least relative to typical home speakers and this seems to be where the livenes is maintained when they are fed a really big transient from a live rimshot or sudden horn blat. When you compare the live sound through them vs. the recorded sound through them you realize a lot is lost in the recording. A LOT. BUT it doesn't seem to be the microphones or the mic preamps...it must be in the storage and processing of the signal...
What is interesting is when you can have that "jump factor" where the music startles you because for some instant your recorded playback actually sounded "live", usually it is only for an instant but it keeps us hooked...
Hi Peter
Rather off topic but BBC Radio 3 have just been playing a Handel and Haydyn Society of Boston recording of Handel's Concerto Grosso in G conducted by Christopher Hogwood.
Delightful. Apparently the society is about 200 years old.
The power of music !
Thanks Barry. I would like to spend some time learning more about the Handel and Haydyn Society. Thanks.
Morricab, I think there is little to dispute about live v. recorded music. It is usually obvious that one is not the other. I think what my mentor was telling me is that there is a range of sounds from an instrument or an orchestra rather than "one" sound. He was the long time archivist and librarian for the Vienna State Opera. He listened to live music in that massive building for six hours a day, in the main hall, in the rehearsal halls, in the small rehearsal rooms. As long as what one hears is within that range of different live sounds, then what we hear through our systems can be convincing or believable because it reminds us of what we have heard live.
If you want to define the absolute sound as "live" sound, I could go along with that. My point was only that there is not just "one" live sound, but many, or a range, of live sounds. I suppose one could consider them all absolute if they are live, so there are many absolute sounds, all live.
Thanks for sharing your experience with recording live music.
If you want to define the absolute sound as "live" sound, I could go along with that. My point was only that there is not just "one" live sound, but many, or a range, of live sounds. I suppose one could consider them all absolute if they are live, so there are many absolute sounds, all live.
Thanks for sharing your experience with recording live music.
There are as many "absolute sounds" as there are people absolutely happy w their sound.
Similar threads
