Live unamplified music v home audio, another thread/perspective

[Mike Lavigne]

For DXD there sure is. Just gimme the file.

I know the NADAC can play it; but there is no commercial distribution for those files. and no business case to develop one.

follow the money. and in this case nothing here to see.

my position is that the promise/tease of multi-channel is formidable. and I respect that you and a few others have embraced it for where it's at. but it's existing off of a format (5.1 SACD) which while very, very, good still comes up short of high level 2 channel vinyl performance after my considerable personal experience and investment in multi-channel sacd including building a room optimized for it. so my comments have some effort behind them.

hard to imagine what it will take for someone to invest enough in higher levels of multi-channel to take it to a clear higher level. it has no limits other than economics......the market is not asking for it. will that change in our lifetimes? unlikely.

 

[bonzo75]

IMHO experience with a Mahler 2 is insufficient to support such claim. I agree symphonic music is particularly well served with MCH, but IMHO is not the unique type of reference music for standard format comparisons and BTW, is not the most exigent sound reproduction in every aspect.

More channels surely means more and better quality direct directional information, but all chamber/ancient music I listened through MCH sounded artificial and less natural compared to SOTA stereo.

I have heard much more than Mahler, that was one example. Otherwise agree with all in Mike's post which was also part of my post

 

[bonzo75]

For MCH
- Compared to the normal 2ch people, they all have well managed subwoofers and bass
- The soundstage and ambience is just there – many 2Ch have problems with soundstage they spend a lifetime trying to get right. Only the very good ones cross that issue
- The details are there
- Due to room correction, there is a very low noise floor (no reflections, boom, etc)
- In Auro 3d, depth is huge. You will usually hear how deep your speakers are placed, and dure, a bit of tweak here and there and you get a bit more depth you rejoice over – but the overhead channel in Auro 3D gives real depth.


So cons? Tone. No vinyl tone, no old classical recordings done that way, you might not be able to get your favorite ribbon tone or horn in MCH.

I recently also heard Vivid G1 MCH and it was far superior to their 2-ch. There was no room correction built into this one. I enjoyed violin concertos, chorals, orchestra much more on this

Fwiw I bought the Verity Leonore with a plan to extend it to MCH, make a SET based or PP valve based MCH, but audiophile boredom kicked in half way and I sold them off to get to Apogee or horn 2ch

 

[Jazzhead]

While on the subject of MCH , the BAACH processor is worthy of a mention here . From what I heard at the Munich show , it may have been a staged demo , but those slim line Focal floor standers with a starter Naim chain had no business of sounding so darned good . Surely worth investigating further .....

 

[spiritofmusic]

Talking about Naim, I'm considering a 4ch surround sound setup, that might provide this live ambience, expand soundstaging
Already have the Naim AV1 processor which leaves front 2ch unaffected, applies a 10-15ms fixed delay and Hafler processing to supply rear 2ch via an additional pwr amp
In effect, a rear ambience mode
I have the Naim and my unused Hovland HP200 amp, would just need to invest in another pr of Zus, maybe Soul Supremes

 

[Jazzhead]

Clearly wasn't the Naim talking , shut of the BAACH and it sounded ordinary mid Fi

 

[bonzo75]

Yes the BAACH too, it sounded much better than the 2ch, the only issue was it was too immersive, and as it reproduces from the mic placed near the stage, you feel you are sitting at the start of the stage while listening to an orchestra. So I left confused

 

[audioguy]

Sit next to a drum kit which I did last week at Ron Carter's show at the Blue Note and you hear how woeful home audio and recordings really are.

I would also add the "blaht" of a trumpet and/or sax or the pluck of a string on a stand up bass. I have noted this previously that on my birthday a few years ago, my wife surprised me by hiring a live 3 piece jazz group to play in our home. Talk about an epiphany!!! It what at that moment that I gave up the chase to try to capture live music (or anything close to it) in my home. Home reproduced music is not even in the same ballpark as live music. I have heard some spectacular two channel systems set up perfectly and tuned by the best. Still not close to live. I was able to finally say that what a great audio system really provides is just another (but very satisfying) way to listen to music in my home. That changed the way I listened to music, what products I chose to add to or change in my system, how I used room treatment, etc. And, much more importantly, freed me (almost completely) from listening to my "system" (which I was actually doing for over 40 years but refused to admit it) and listening to the music.

 

[jfrech]

What's holding most of us back? Is it the recordings, our rooms or the equipment? To Audioguy's point, a lot of us could have hired weeks one end of a live 3 piece jazz group or a small 4 piece chamber ensemble....

I tend to make my equipment decisions what what brings me closer to live un amplified music.

 

[spiritofmusic]

John, I've heard yr Koda preamp in a two week home demo
It's the best amp by far I've experienced for reproducing the technicolor presentation of live music
My NAT SETs and Zu high efficiency spkrs give me the closest approximation to the tonal density of live unamplified
And the restored Apogee Duettas I've heard recently gave me the thrill of live dynamics and speed
If I was at this point going to pick a system that could start to transport me to what I've heard this week, it would be a top analog rig (my money would be on Saskia Ref2 idler), Koda preamp, and active triamped Apogee Full Ranges using darker, earthier SS like Gryphon
Maybe with a pr of Duettas behind me using this Naim AV1 for ambience duties

 

[morricab]

Speaking back to live: I heard a great Flamenco concert in Cordoba 2 days ago and if you think any system can do what I heard live...think again. The dancing was EXPLOSIVE...like machine gun fire and the singing and guitar playing had presence and substance. Wonderful but the dynamics were what set it apart...extreme is the right word. We were situated about 3 meters from the stage and it was in an open (i.e. enclosed but no roof) courtyard. The performers were true professionals and therefore the playing and dancing were at a very high standard (El Cardenal in Cordoba in case any of you want to go there in the future).

Dynamics of even good Flamenco recordings are muted by comparison...now whether this is still recording limitations or system limitations is not totally clear but it is possible that the gear could deliver what the recording failed to capture...or vice versa.

 

[spiritofmusic]

I'm going to throw a curveball here
I actually don't want the live experience at home
Yes, true
Just been binging on Antonio Forcione catalog in the last 48 hrs
Fantastically recorded, and I can only imagine how thrilling it would be to have him play at the chapel where I live, either on the balcony overlooking the creek below, or in our amazing historic 35x30x20 space
It would send my pulse racing, endorphins surging, every hair on my neck and arms would be up
But it would also be uncompromising, harsh in places, messy, and might shred my nerves having a constant diet of it
Similarly, I wouldn't necessarily have loved to have been a fly on the wall on the set of any classic film watching a scene be enacted in real time than watch it in the cinema or on my Barco CRT PJ home cinema
There have been times I've binged in live theatre, but I find it can be overkill
So, I've split my brain to gain as much perspective on the limits of "live" at home, and actually find many things about the home experience superior to live
But undoubtedly it's the reference comparison to make, and Im so glad I've made the decisions I have in choosing my gear, and getting the most out of my music from my room esp re tonal density, timbre and centre of gravity twds the darker/lower mids (rather than the more usual treble spotlit)
I come away from live classical and jazz w more things at home ticked than not ticked

 

[audioguy]

Dynamics of even good Flamenco recordings are muted by comparison...now whether this is still recording limitations or system limitations is not totally clear but it is possible that the gear could deliver what the recording failed to capture...or vice versa.

While I don't think any single piece of gear should get the "blame" for the inability to reproduce "live" in our homes, speakers would be my second guess at the most guilty --- the first being just using two speakers. While multi-channel done right, to my ears, gets a lot closer to live than does any 2 channel system, we are still have a very, very long way to go. While the very best 2 channel systems can provide a very holographic "3D-ish" presentation, multi-channel done right still beats it.

This album (cover shown below), has a version recorded with Auro 3D technology. If you have access to a multi-channel system with Auro, give it a listen and then listen to the 2 channel version (exceptionally well recorded). Not even close.



I recognize, however, that most others who post on WBF have opposing views.

 

[PeterA]

Yes the BAACH too, it sounded much better than the 2ch, the only issue was it was too immersive, and as it reproduces from the mic placed near the stage, you feel you are sitting at the start of the stage while listening to an orchestra. So I left confused

That is interesting: the conductor's perspective.

 

[morricab]

That is interesting: the conductor's perspective.

Best Piano concerto I heard was in the second row...best Jazz concerts were when i sat right next to the band.

 

[Kal Rubinson]

I know the NADAC can play it; but there is no commercial distribution for those files. and no business case to develop one.

You questioned whether there was a format for it and there is. Whether there is sufficient interest to justify commercial support is another matter.

my position is that the promise/tease of multi-channel is formidable. and I respect that you and a few others have embraced it for where it's at. but it's existing off of a format (5.1 SACD) which while very, very, good still comes up short of high level 2 channel vinyl performance after my considerable personal experience and investment in multi-channel sacd including building a room optimized for it. so my comments have some effort behind them.

I tend to ignore vinyl for many reasons although I must acknowledge its continued popularity. It is simply not relevant to me.

 

[Kal Rubinson]

Talking about Naim, I'm considering a 4ch surround sound setup, that might provide this live ambience, expand soundstaging
Already have the Naim AV1 processor which leaves front 2ch unaffected, applies a 10-15ms fixed delay and Hafler processing to supply rear 2ch via an additional pwr amp
In effect, a rear ambience mode

Not multichannel at all.

 

[spiritofmusic]

Sure Kal
That's why I ended up calling it a rear ambience mode

 

[Mike Lavigne]

You questioned whether there was a format for it and there is. Whether there is sufficient interest to justify commercial support is another matter.

no one is claiming 2" 8/16/24 track analog tape has any sort of viable playback delivery system but it exists too. it's not relevant to home audio. neither is 8 channel dxd digital. it just a mastering tool....like the tape.

maybe someday it could be more than that.

I tend to ignore vinyl for many reasons although I must acknowledge its continued popularity. It is simply not relevant to me.

Kal, I totally respect what you do and your approach. and at modest levels of vinyl playback I would recommend many to choose MCH digital if the musical choices for that are relevant to their listening. especially those with Home Theatre's already in place. no doubt it has it's attributes that are attractive.

but the market has embraced vinyl, and one big reason is it's performance ceiling is superior. and the broad based media (billions of them) is out there to enjoy.

on a slightly different but relevant subject; it would be very interesting to directly compare dxd 2 channel, to 5.1 dsd MCH on a system optimized for both. my opinion based on my time with multi-channel in my 2 channel system would be that many times (but not all times) the higher rez of dxd + just 2 channels might serve the music better than the dsd 5.1. but that is just my hunch.

mixing analog/vinyl with the MCH digital question blurs the issues since the fundamental musical message of the different formats is so different.

 

[bonzo75]

on a slightly different but relevant subject; it would be very interesting to directly compare dxd 2 channel, to 5.1 dsd MCH on a system optimized for both. my opinion based on my time with multi-channel in my 2 channel system would be that many times (but not all times) the higher rez of dxd + just 2 channels might serve the music better than the dsd 5.1. but that is just my hunch.

mixing analog/vinyl with the MCH digital question blurs the issues since the fundamental musical message of the different formats is so different.

Channel classics CDs which have both 2-Ch and 5.1 sound better in 5.1 on the same system, and sound best upsampled to Auro 3d (which there was 14.4). Not all 2 Ch respond well to upsampling but these MCH CDs do