Live music - what does it tell us ?

[hopkins]

Putting things in my own words, I feel that I get more "realism" from my system when:

- the individual instruments sound "full" - you are getting all the nuances, you are not "missing out" on something (ex: how an instrument resonates)
- you get a sense of "accuracy", which can be felt on any given note and also in time as a sense of "continuity" (this may be more subtle)

When you listen to several instruments being recorded together (or a chord on a piano, for example), you want to preserve the qualities and "individualities" of each instrument/note. Each instrument has to live in its own "space".

Interestingly, I find that this sense of space is perhaps better captured with simple recordings (one or two microphones). A very simple recording process with little mixing, compression, etc, can offer more realism in that respect

Obviously, there are a lot of things that can go wrong. The recording quality is the first one, and all components of our systems only add further distortions. The "noise floor" of microphones can mask details, and you won't here a piano chord resonate as it will when you hear it live. The frequency response of a microphone is never flat. The same is true with our systems. So I guess we are pretty far away from ever being "faked" by a recording.

Listening to a stereo (two speaker) system, you introduce a new challenge - which you don't have when you listen to live acoustic instruments: and that's where speaker placement comes into play (both in terms of how the speakers are placed in relation to each other from the listening point, and how each speaker interacts differently with the room).

I guess there are some differences (between live and recorded music) that you can still discern when listening at a certain distance (or let's say from another room).

 

[vernonwtx]

I agree with Hopkins' points. I much prefer my stereo's presentation to what I hear when I go to live events.

My question is "what is "live" music"? My son plays the piano. We choose a Knabe grand (sounds warm), verse many other brands, example the Yamaha's sounded bright... so the instrument will change the "live" sound. If I set at 90 degrees and listen (as most concerts), the piano sound is in mono; but if i stand behind him playing, it is in stereo; and a stereo mic placement above the strings would be even better... so which is "live". So, if I am at a orch concert, is "live" (1) the stereo microphone setup above the orch pit, or (2) the mic on the instrument, or (3) what the the conductor is hearing, or (4) 3rd row middle seat, or ... starts to sound silly... which is what I normally think when people start talking about "live" sound.

 

[hopkins]

I agree with Hopkins' points. I much prefer my stereo's presentation to what I hear when I go to live events.

I meant that only certain aspects of stereo reproduction could be better. The overall experience of the two being so different it is hard to compare.

 

[morricab]

My thinking on the matter is that the recording is a huge roadblock to realistic sound. The most live recording I ever heard was my own voice direct recorded to a lacquer. Far more realistic sounding than any tape or digital recorder I ever heard my voice played back from. It went from microphone to cutting amp (a tube based one) to cutter on the lacquer.

Another huge roadblock is capturing the full dynamic range of instruments on typical recording media. I have done recordings of my ex playing solo violin in a 30sq meter room that forced me to gain ride (I didn't have a compressor) with a good quality R2R tape deck and a good DAT recorder. That single instrument regularly overloaded the recorder... and the room!! It regularly made my ears pulsate the sound was so powerful. I hear something similar with my daughter practicing her trumpet. The media, without compression, can rarely handle the live dynamics.

On the playback side, assuming you don't use hopeless recordings, it is again dynamics and this is why horn technology has an inherent advantage over other technologies... compression sets in significantly and much higher SPL allowing better dynamic tracking of what is on the recording. Also, natural timbre, lack of obvious coloration, transparency and coherence all matter. If all those are right the soundstage, imaging and resolution usually fall into place. IMO, a convincing 3d image in a 3d soundstage helps realism but isn't necessarily making the sound appear "live".

I am reminded of the time I was in south of Spain in some small alleyways and coming out of a shop I heard faint music. I knew immediately it was live even though it was probably a kilometer away and rather faint. The dynamic envelope was such that my ear\brain just knew what it was. This was of course confirmed as the band came down the small streets to where it got uncomfortably loud.

Recordings ultimately limit the potential but or gear further truncates that realism. Unbridled dynamics of top gear and horn speakers can do the best to preserve what got captured on the recording. Your best bet though are not big orchestral works (as I said even a single instrument overloads recorders) but small ensembles or solo instruments \voices...then you stand a chance at suspension of disbelief.

 

[hopkins]

My thinking on the matter is that the recording is a huge roadblock to realistic sound. The most live recording I ever heard was my own voice direct recorded to a lacquer. Far more realistic sounding than any tape or digital recorder I ever heard my voice played back from. It went from microphone to cutting amp (a tube based one) to cutter on the lacquer.

Another huge roadblock is capturing the full dynamic range of instruments on typical recording media. I have done recordings of my ex playing solo violin in a 30sq meter room that forced me to gain ride (I didn't have a compressor) with a good quality R2R tape deck and a good DAT recorder. That single instrument regularly overloaded the recorder... and the room!! It regularly made my ears pulsate the sound was so powerful. I hear something similar with my daughter practicing her trumpet. The media, without compression, can rarely handle the live dynamics.

On the playback side, assuming you don't use hopeless recordings, it is again dynamics and this is why horn technology has an inherent advantage over other technologies... compression sets in significantly and much higher SPL allowing better dynamic tracking of what is on the recording. Also, natural timbre, lack of obvious coloration, transparency and coherence all matter. If all those are right the soundstage, imaging and resolution usually fall into place. IMO, a convincing 3d image in a 3d soundstage helps realism but isn't necessarily making the sound appear "live".

I am reminded of the time I was in south of Spain in some small alleyways and coming out of a shop I heard faint music. I knew immediately it was live even though it was probably a kilometer away and rather faint. The dynamic envelope was such that my ear\brain just knew what it was. This was of course confirmed as the band came down the small streets to where it got uncomfortably loud.

Recordings ultimately limit the potential but or gear further truncates that realism. Unbridled dynamics of top gear and horn speakers can do the best to preserve what got captured on the recording. Your best bet though are not big orchestral works (as I said even a single instrument overloads recorders) but small ensembles or solo instruments \voices...then you stand a chance at suspension of disbelief.

Thanks for your comments. This all makes sens to me.

I am not pursuing the "horns" route at this point, but something that ultimately may come close to it, I will see. I remain interested in alternative solutions.

 

[morricab]

Thanks for your comments. This all makes sens to me.

I am not pursuing the "horns" route at this point, but something that ultimately may come close to it, I will see. I remain interested in alternative solutions.

There are some high sensitivity pro drivers and speciality drivers that can get around 100dB without horns. For example the Pire Audio project speaker is around 96dB and doesn’t have to use a horn (there are multiple versions). Supravox makes a very nice open baffle speaker at 96dB as well.

 

[hopkins]

There are some high sensitivity pro drivers and speciality drivers that can get around 100dB without horns. For example the Pire Audio project speaker is around 96dB and doesn’t have to use a horn (there are multiple versions). Supravox makes a very nice open baffle speaker at 96dB as well.

I have looked at those brands. Right now I am using a line array (as mentioned in another thread) which provides 102db sensitivity with a fairly linear response, and low distortion. There are probably better drivers out there, but there are always pros and cons, and testing drivers can be expensive! The amplification is also important to consider for dynamics (and other aspects). What I am using now has a lot of potential, I really like what I am hearing, but it is work in progress, and the idea is to see how far it can go.

Concerning live versus recorded music, I've cleared my thoughts about this thanks to your comments.

 

[hopkins]

Lovely concert last night in Paris on the occasion of the annual Duke Ellington conference: great music, nice acoustics. Great dynamics

 

[hopkins]

However much I enjoyed this concert, it also reminded me (not that I had really forgotten) how special Ellington and his musicians were. You can recreate his compositions, but there will only ever be one Johnny Hodges, one Harry Carney... Ellington's piano playing is also unique and cannot really be imitated. So I was happy to sit back in my living room and spend time in their company today.

 

[Another Johnson]

I listen to both live orchestral music and live ensemble group music regularly (several times a month). What it nearly always teaches me is that my listening system at home is more detailed, has a better definition of separable layers, and provides a more recognizable sound stage. But the live music, with its many visual cues, and true live visual and audible dynamics, is more dramatic and includes a reinforcing atmosphere.

 

[bonzo75]

I listen to both live orchestral music and live ensemble group music regularly (several times a month). What it nearly always teaches me is that my listening system at home is more detailed, has a better definition of separable layers, and provides a more recognizable sound stage. But the live music, with its many visual cues, and true live visual and audible dynamics, is more dramatic and includes a reinforcing atmosphere.

what is the system you are referring to? Your signature lists Wilson Daws but you mentioned 4 to 5 systems in another post

 

[Another Johnson]

what is the system you are referring to? Your signature lists Wilson Daws but you mentioned 4 to 5 systems in another post

The current main system is what’s listed in my profile and that’s the system I referred to.

At a live performance you are at the mercy of the house and your seat. At home you enjoy someone’s best efforts to mike and capture the performance, you control the room and your seat.

 

[PeterA]

I listen to both live orchestral music and live ensemble group music regularly (several times a month). What it nearly always teaches me is that my listening system at home is more detailed, has a better definition of separable layers, and provides a more recognizable sound stage. But the live music, with its many visual cues, and true live visual and audible dynamics, is more dramatic and includes a reinforcing atmosphere.

Another Johnson, I like your excellent observation and distinction between live music and what most systems attempt to do at home. I think the detail, images, soundstage etc are efforts to make reproduced music at home "seem" more like what we experience in the concert hall or chamber when we able to see the musicians and the space in which they are playing. Is that the "reinforcing atmosphere" to which you refer? Those visual cues reinforce our impression of what listening to live music is like. We lack those cues at home.

When I try to learn and assess for myself what I am actually hearing at the live performance, I close my eyes and try to focus only on the sound. I agree with you that it is usually not as detailed, images and staging are not as defined as we might hear at home. For me live music is more about clarity, scale, and the sounds created by the musicians playing their instruments as that energy surrounds and washes over me. It is more holistic, more of a gestalt live in the concert hall. It is the flow of the performance and the timbre of the instruments and the dynamics that define the experience for me.

I have tried, often unsuccessfully, to identify these differences in the experience of listening to live music and comparing it to reproduced stereo sound. These efforts are what my system thread "Natural Sound" is all about. I think you articulate well the differences between what we experience from hifi stereo reproduction and live music performed in real spaces.

We choose what kind of performance we want from our systems based on our values and our goals.

 

[Kingrex]

I agree. When listening to live music either to an orchestra or to a small ensemble in a room, imaging and soundstage are never on my mind. I notice clarity and dynamics, and a sense of the whole. Scale, the impression of physical presence, and the way energy is projected and remains are also important indicators. Systems have a difficult time getting these things right.

The more I listen to live music, the less important things like soundstage and imaging are. They can be fun effects at times, but I don’t hear them when listening to live music the way they are often presented in audio systems.

This is one of the reaaons I have not jumped at a BACCH. I'm not that into soundstage. I'm far more into, does it sound like a real piano or reed intrument. That is part of my frustration with amps. My Dartzeel is hands down beautiful to listen too. Its amazingly quiet. Yet my 845 is with no doubt more like the real thing in the room. Yet the 845 comes with lots and lots and lots of noise. Annoying hum issues. Its a piece of Sxxt that sounds real good.

 

[Gregadd]

SXXXT never smells good.

 

[morricab]

This is one of the reaaons I have not jumped at a BACCH. I'm not that into soundstage. I'm far more into, does it sound like a real piano or reed intrument. That is part of my frustration with amps. My Dartzeel is hands down beautiful to listen too. Its amazingly quiet. Yet my 845 is with no doubt more like the real thing in the room. Yet the 845 comes with lots and lots and lots of noise. Annoying hum issues. Its a piece of Sxxt that sounds real good.

Get a different SET. You don’t have to have lots of noise and then you can appreciate the more realistic sound without the SXxT.

 

[Another Johnson]

I’m at a club listening to a jazz duo (double bass and piano). They’re into their second set. I’m into my second martini. The calamari and clam chowder are finished. They just brought the prime rib and asparagus.

On this particular day live music is teaching me that it can be delicious.

 

[Another Johnson]

FWIW, I am seated about 4 m in front of the nose of the grand piano and the bass is directly behind the piano bench to the pianist’s right.
There is no audiophile sound stage. It is just an engaging bit of music that I happen to love.
Live music and home stereo music are different animals.

 

[Another Johnson]

New group. Female vocalist proficient in scat. Double bass. Keyboard. Drum kit. And Sax.

When you move out of the sweet spot, it does become homogenized.

They’ve put this ensemble in an alcove so that the music comes to most tables as reverberant field, or at least multiply reflected field. I’ve move to front and center.

There is a lot of ambient conversational noise here, as is always true in a supper club.

Home with a good setup sounds like we wish live would sound.

 

[Kingrex]

Get a different SET. You don’t have to have lots of noise and then you can appreciate the more realistic sound without the SXxT.

A friend wants to sell me his Deja Vu 300B. I wrote the company in VA and asked it they made it and could tell me more. He wants $6000 with Western Electric tubes. It takes 4 of them. I am not sure if the amp is PP or Parallel Single ended.