main difference between real sound and repro sound

[LL21]

Density works. I just think of it as presence. My system images well. When listening to a good recording, I can easily find the instruments placed across the plane in front of me, and the images are solid and unmoving. When vocals are mixed to center, there are times you'd swear there was a speaker there. But no reproduction system I've heard gives each of the instruments and voices the presence in the room that is there with the real thing. I don't know how to describe it, but I know that no matter how good the recording, it still sounds like a recording. And the more complicated the ensemble/performance the less the illusion works. Simple recordings can come very close to creating the complete illusion, but I'm still sure that if I listened carefully, I'd know when the instrument was in the room. The problem with trying to use that difference as a metric for judging gear, I think, is that you'd always have to have the real thing to compare to the recording on both playback systems to make any valuable judgement. Otherwise, you're still just comparing the sound of two different systems playing an extreme wild card -- the recording.
Tim

Tim
Totally agree with Tim on this one. no matter how good my system is, if i play a solo piano recording, no matter how loudly i play it...it does not produce the weight/density of a live piano in my living room. Having studied piano for 12 years, i know something about what the weight of the hammer strike relative to the note feels like up close and personal...and while my Wilsons can reproduce a portion of the range "realistically", it is not the same as real...and across other parts of the spectrum, it is clearly a recording. hey, that is the pursuit of perfection in audio!

 

[Ethan Winer]

Ethan sometime ago I ran across a video where you compared live music to recorded music.

Here ya go: Recorded Realism

Given you argument that the difference between live and recorded music is due to distortiin, (frequency response variation is a form of distortion) we ought to be able to measure that distortion and fix it. If not there must be something else mgoing on.

There's a lot more going on, mostly echoes due to room acoustics. This is why recording engineers put microphones very close to instruments for some types of music. That gets rid of the recording room's contribution, so when it comes out of your speakers it's like the sound source is from right there at your speaker. This works well for electric guitars and tambourines etc, but not so well for a complete orchestra.

--Ethan

 

[Gregadd]

Thanks Ethan.

I would like to do that with a string quartet or jazz quartet.

 

[fas42]

what you call "real" is what most of us think of as transparency. We reach for it. It is never quite in our hands. And it depends on a lot of things, though clean treble is critical.

Thanks for picking up the pace, Tim.

Fair enough, if it helps people "get" it I'll use the word transparency from now on. So, the aim is improve your system's transparency over and over again, because that will benefit everything else, and, even though you are finding it hard to believe me, that transparency eventually morphs into being "real". Vince knows it, I know it, it would be a shame if not more people could know it ...

noise, flat frequency response, dynamic range (...),

I'm sorry, I have to disagree there. I was certainly floored myself, when I tried putting on a "bad" recording in the first days when I first "got" it. "I'll be damned!!" I said in so many words, when the recording came totally alive, it was amazing to me at the time ...

I go to the fundamentals: Minimalism

And I agree totally with that. That is an excellent approach, because you immediately jettison a whole lot of weaknesses, as you yourself have said many times.

we disagree on is how much any elimination of small distortions in the middle can really do, when the big ones are in the recordings and the transducers.

Yes, we do. And I understand exactly why you say what you are saying, because if I was in your position right now I would be saying the same as you. Everything you say makes sense! Remember, remember, I was never intending to get to this point, it just happened one day, just as it happened to Vince. I'm sorry, it's that blasted red wine analogy, once you've tasted the good stuff you can never pretend it doesn't exist ...

Frank

 

[fas42]

should a tweeter not be hissy if the recording calls for it?

I meant hissy in the sense that people would call noise or distortion. Actually, for me, cymbals don't hiss, they shimmer. There is a marvellous punch of high frequency clout which fades away like a Tinkerbell . No, I am talking about the system's natural level of hiss, say from a valve amp; or an old recording.

People many, many times have stated that a very good analogue system "disappears" all the surface noise crud of, say, an old recording. It hasn't vanished, of course, but what it has done has made it much easier for the ear/brain to tune into the musical message, and to be ignore, reject unrelated noise and distortion. That's why you won't hear the tweeter's "hissiness", and why this illusion I keep banging on about works ...

Frank

 

[fas42]

I think getting the recording to sound "live" is quite achievable; making it match the live preformance, not so much...

Agree 100%. I couldn't care less what the live performance sounded like, all I want is for it to sound real, sorry, sorry, transparent for me. At least, as far as I'm concerned, if the reproduction makes me FEEL that I have been transported to a good seat where everything is going on, I don't worry about how accurate it is!

And I'll throw in another bit here, that I have repeated many times already. For me, when the illusion, the universal sweet spot , is happening, LINEAR distortion is completely irrelevant. That is, frequency response, phase response, are completed ignored by, mine at least, the ear/brain. I am using a speaker with what I am sure has the most appalling response curve you could imagine, and it can do the job! BUT, and a mighty big BUT, too much NON-LINEAR (everything else) distortion and the illusion is doomed ...

Frank

 

[amirm]

Nicely done video Ethan!

 

[fas42]

Totally agree with Tim on this one. no matter how good my system is, if i play a solo piano recording, no matter how loudly i play it...it does not produce the weight/density of a live piano in my living room. Having studied piano for 12 years, i know something about what the weight of the hammer strike relative to the note feels like up close and personal...and while my Wilsons can reproduce a portion of the range "realistically", it is not the same as real...and across other parts of the spectrum, it is clearly a recording. hey, that is the pursuit of perfection in audio!

You're in luck, lloydelee21, you will be able to get there and I am not joking. We have a reasonable piano 3 feet away from my currently extremely crappy setup, and I regularly put on a Vanguard recording from the 60's of Brendel doing Schubert sonatas. A foot away from the speaker it sounds right to me, I go to the other end of the house, it still sounds as good!

When I first got the effect, I was still going to live concerts and I remember thinking, gee, the (acoustic!) piano on stage sounds a bit thin and gutless. The difference between the acoustics of a large theatre and an intimate studio, I guess.

Frank

 

[fas42]

This is why recording engineers put microphones very close to instruments for some types of music. That gets rid of the recording room's contribution, so when it comes out of your speakers it's like the sound source is from right there at your speaker.

Guess what! The microphones are cleverer than the sound engineers! They HAVE picked up some of the acoustics, the reverberent sound field, the echos, whatever you want to call it. Or, maybe they are dumber: they didn't realise that they were only supposed to "look" at the instrument, they got bored, and looked over the chap's shoulder and to the sides as well !

Again, mics are amazing. I have put on a Michael Jackson mixed to the max, where there's, say, 2 dozen instruments and effects going on, and easily "look" at each one, each very clearly captured in its own little acoustic. (Yes, I know many of the sounds have artifical echo and reverb, no mic at all. The point is, you can easily differentiate each as a "performance" in its own right). You really appreciate the effort that went into getting his sound ...

Frank

 

[Phelonious Ponk]

it's that blasted red wine analogy

More likely, I think, that it's just that blasted red wine.

Tim

 

[fas42]

More likely, I think, that it's just that blasted red wine.

By gum, I can tell you're gonna be real hard work, Tim, but, hey, I can take it!!

Frank

 

[Phelonious Ponk]

Guess what! The microphones are cleverer than the sound engineers! They HAVE picked up some of the acoustics, the reverberent sound field, the echos, whatever you want to call it. Or, maybe they are dumber: they didn't realise that they were only supposed to "look" at the instrument, they got bored, and looked over the chap's shoulder and to the sides as well !

Again, mics are amazing. I have put on a Michael Jackson mixed to the max, where there's, say, 2 dozen instruments and effects going on, and easily "look" at each one, each very clearly captured in its own little acoustic. (Yes, I know many of the sounds have artifical echo and reverb, no mic at all. The point is, you can easily differentiate each as a "performance" in its own right). You really appreciate the effort that went into getting his sound ...

Frank

Frank, a uni-directional or cardioid mic, properly placed close to a singer or an instrument, does not get bored and look over anyone's shoulder, it only picks up the pattern it picks up (which is pretty limited) and if it did look over shoulders, it would often have nothing to look at but the walls of a small isolation booth or a large isolation panel. Close mic'ing is more about picking up detail and raising the signal-to-noise ratio than it is about isolating instruments from "the room." There are booths and panels for such things, and if they were not being used, and used well enough to keep the mics from getting bored and looking over performers' shoulders, you wouldn't be hearing each instrument's "own little acoustic" you would hear other instruments bleeding into the primary instrument's "own little track" smearing the hell out of the imaging. When you play these individual tracks back in the control room prior to mixing and mastering, their own little acoustic space is, more often than not, quite small and very, very dry. There are, of course, exceptions - recordings, usually classical or acoustic audiophile recordings, that deliberately capture the room's ambience with the instruments, but I assure you that Michael Jackson is not on the list.

Frank, you have a rich imagination and it is serving you well. Don't ever go to a studio and watch records being made. It will ruin your system. Better, I think, to just have that glass of wine and enjoy the illusion.

Tim

 

[fas42]

their own little acoustic space is, more often than not, quite small and very, very dry.

Yes, their own acoustic is often small, but sometimes it's not as you say, if the engineer has decided to play with it to some degree. Again, I am not interested in what the engineer has done precisely, only if whether the end result pleases me. If I want to I could listen to the recording and try to work out exactly what the engineer did, with no trouble at all, but that would bore the hell out of me! I have a CD I picked up for a buck in an opportunity shop, Ike and Tina Turner. I can hear why that recording ended up there. On most systems people would run screaming from the room, or kick the drivers in to stop the pain! However, the studio recordings on it are massive, they have been engineered for maximum "presence" boost, huge reverb and echo, dense mix, everything a gung ho sound engineer could do to pump up the sound. But it works, and works beautifully when your system is right. These tracks are intermixed with the band at a live gig somewhere with obviously crappy mics, and a recorder that's been dropped on the ground by the roadies too many times. Totally, totally different sound, the band are way back in the soundstage, but the acoustic, the presence of the audience has all been picked up. In spite of the fact that these tracks are about the sludgiest you will ever likely hear, you can still enjoy them, because all that the ear/brain needs to make the illusion happen is there ...

There are booths and panels for such things,

Again, guess what? Those bits and pieces are not perfect at their job, they have contributed to the acoustic, and the mics have picked up the "air" they've added ...

Frank

 

[JackD201]

Frank I am thoroughly enjoying your enthusiasm. I am also enjoying trying to figure out exactly where you are coming from because you can go from direct to oblique to esoteric at any given time. I have to commend you on something though. So far, in the history of this forum, you are the only one that has made statements that both Tim and I disagree on and for exactly the same reasons.

 

[fas42]

Tim, my wife and I just had a good laugh on that post!

Where I am coming from I would have thought was obvious . For nigh on 25 years I have been struggling and wrestling with this "thing" of mine, firstly to make it happen on queue, and secondly, to get others, like yourself to understand!

Some might say, why don't you just take a finished setup somewhere and show it off. Virtually all of you know that just can't happen; I've tried getting people to the house, they put on their crucial audiophile test disk, it doesn't sound EXACTLY like they've decided it's supposed to sound like, and of course, the dreaded lurgy strikes at that moment, the system is off colour when they come. This illusion is very, very fragile, the slightest thing (at the moment) throws it off, and that is part of the frustration of it.

I am enthused, just like Vince is enthused, because when it's humming I can put any recording, ANY RECORDING, and thoroughly enjoy it. For some reason, that sorta appeals to me ...

I am trying all these different approaches, trying to find out how to get through to you guys. You are all in a huddle in a room, murmuring and exchanging pleasantries, totally assured and knowing that the world is the room, and I am on the outside of this huddle, saying, "Guys, hey, guys, you can go outside into the sunshine", and some of you are saying, "Frank, don't bother us, we're talking about the REALLY important things here, like how to change the light bulb"

So far, in the history of this forum, you are the only one that has made statements that both Tim and I disagree on and for exactly the same reasons.

Well, at least I have achieved SOMETHING, so I can now go and die in peace ...

Frank

 

[Phelonious Ponk]

Tim, my wife and I just had a good laugh on that post!

Where I am coming from I would have thought was obvious . For nigh on 25 years I have been struggling and wrestling with this "thing" of mine, firstly to make it happen on queue, and secondly, to get others, like yourself to understand!

Some might say, why don't you just take a finished setup somewhere and show it off. Virtually all of you know that just can't happen; I've tried getting people to the house, they put on their crucial audiophile test disk, it doesn't sound EXACTLY like they've decided it's supposed to sound like, and of course, the dreaded lurgy strikes at that moment, the system is off colour when they come. This illusion is very, very fragile, the slightest thing (at the moment) throws it off, and that is part of the frustration of it.

I am enthused, just like Vince is enthused, because when it's humming I can put any recording, ANY RECORDING, and thoroughly enjoy it. For some reason, that sorta appeals to me ...

I am trying all these different approaches, trying to find out how to get through to you guys. You are all in a huddle in a room, murmuring and exchanging pleasantries, totally assured and knowing that the world is the room, and I am on the outside of this huddle, saying, "Guys, hey, guys, you can go outside into the sunshine", and some of you are saying, "Frank, don't bother us, we're talking about the REALLY important things here, like how to change the light bulb"


Well, at least I have achieved SOMETHING, so I can now go and die in peace ...

Frank

Frank, what we're talking about in that room is physical reality. What you're talking about is psychology. Think about it. The illusion is fleeting, evasive. It's there, like that noise that disappears at the mechanic's garage, until someone comes in to hear it, then it runs away. The system doesn't change. The recordings don't change. The room doesn't change. What is the variable? Mind. Mood. Expectations. Perception. You are the variable.

Sitting in front of my little near field system, I can sometimes imagine that I'm at a center table, in a small club, with really good acoustics. Imagine is the operative word in that sentence.

Enjoy. Oh, and thanks for giving me some common ground with some of these other guys. It seems that most of us have a line between perception and reality; you've helped quite a few here find it.

Tim

 

[Ethan Winer]

I would like to do that with a string quartet or jazz quartet.

Me too. I think I mentioned in the video that I almost hired a local professional quartet to perform one of my own pieces. But I balked at the high cost. I'm pretty sure my home studio is large enough and good enough to pull it off!

--Ethan

 

[mep]

The system doesn't change. The recordings don't change. The room doesn't change. What is the variable? Mind. Mood. Expectations. Perception. You are the variable.

Tim-I mostly agree with everything you said and Frank is driving us all together as Jack pointed out. I do believe the system can change from day to day and for a number of reasons. Thankfully for you, I don't think your system (a digital based system) will change as much as those that involve turntables and R2R decks. First of all, if you don't warm up your gear for the same amount of time before you sit down to listen, cold gear will sound different. Back in the days when I had all SS preamps and poweramps, I never turned them off. I didn't care how much extra it ran up the electric bill. I am firmly convinced that SS sounds better if left on all the time. Obviously if you have a pure Class A amp, you can't do that. Even my Denon AVR receiver which has been in my upstairs home theater system for over 8 years has never been turned off except for when a really bad thunderstorm strikes. Temperature and humidity can also have an effect on phono cartridges.

My point to all of this is that if you just flip your system on from a dead-cold state and start to listen, it won't sound like it will after it has been on for awhile and everything has reached thermal equalibrium/temperature stability.

 

[Phelonious Ponk]

Tim-I mostly agree with everything you said and Frank is driving us all together as Jack pointed out. I do believe the system can change from day to day and for a number of reasons. Thankfully for you, I don't think your system (a digital based system) will change as much as those that involve turntables and R2R decks. First of all, if you don't warm up your gear for the same amount of time before you sit down to listen, cold gear will sound different. Back in the days when I had all SS preamps and poweramps, I never turned them off. I didn't care how much extra it ran up the electric bill. I am firmly convinced that SS sounds better if left on all the time. Obviously if you have a pure Class A amp, you can't do that. Even my Denon AVR receiver which has been in my upstairs home theater system for over 8 years has never been turned off except for when a really bad thunderstorm strikes. Temperature and humidity can also have an effect on phono cartridges.

My point to all of this is that if you just flip your system on from a dead-cold state and start to listen, it won't sound like it will after it has been on for awhile and everything has reached thermal equalibrium/temperature stability.

Fair enough, Mep. There is also the widely-held belief that power can change the sound of a system and that sensitive systems often sound better late at night when the grid is less busy. My system often sounds better late at night, though I suspect it is the wine. But we're picking nits. Frank is placing his hear inches from the tweeter and is unable to locate the driver. He is making his worst recordings sound good and making tweaks in electronics that render the limitations of speakers a moot point. Different stuff, I think.

Tim

 

[LL21]

i have found my system sounds better at nite, though i am not sure if that's the quiet of the rest of the neighborhood which allows me to hear only my system or something else relating to grid. As for leaving the system to warm...all day long that is my system. the Zanden hits its stride at almost 4 hours after initial turn on every time. i work throughout the weekend, with my system running...sure enough i hear a cello string or a voice that suddenly sounds completely better than what i've been listening to...even when i am immersed in my work, the sound quality will surprise me...and sure enough, i look at the clock and its been more or less 4 hours.