(...) Mike Lavigne once brought up an excellent point (I am paraphrasing): it appears that sometimes video enthusiasts hear not the actual sound of the video but their memory of the sound recorded on the video, from which they fill in while listening to the video. (...)
Well, I have often said the same about reproduced sound and real music ...
It is why using just real music as a reference is extremely subjective and individual, and can lead to disasters. And if we listen hours a day to your own blessed stereo it will even influence the way we listen to real music. IMO we need some solid "audiophile" anchors when addressing system building.
completely? If this is the case, why bother ever to go to a live performance except to socialize?
Another possibility is that you are making the mistake of assuming that an internal iPhone mic is an accurate, full-range, flat frequency response, sound capture device.
I would accept your subjective appraisal that your photo reflects how you look. I would not say that your appraisal that your photo reflects how you look is objectively incorrect. It is your subjective appraisal, so it would make no sense to suggest that it could be wrong objectively.
I would say that your appraisal that your photo reflects how you look is a subjective opinion in your eyes which is not susceptible to any form of objective verification.
This problem -- which appears in many contexts and underlies many discussions and disputes on WBF -- is your mistaken assumption that your appraisal that the photo reflects how you look is objectively correct fact, rather than merely your subjective opinion.
I would accept your subjective appraisal that your photo reflects how you look. I would not say that your appraisal that your photo reflects how you look is objectively incorrect. It is your subjective appraisal, so it would make no sense to suggest that it could be wrong objectively.
I would say that your appraisal that your photo reflects how you look is a subjective opinion in your eyes which is not susceptible to any form of objective verification.
This problem -- which appears in many contexts and underlies many discussions and disputes on WBF -- is your mistaken assumption that your appraisal that the photo reflects how you look is objectively correct fact, rather than merely your subjective opinion.
so you are saying someone else cannot look at my photo and verify what I said was correct or incorrect? And if three others say that it can still be incorrect?
then can it not be so for listening in room? Let’s not discuss what is better than, because your opinion of in room demo is only subjectively yours.
Well, I have often said the same about reproduced sound and real music ...
It is why using just real music as a reference is extremely subjective and individual, and can lead to disasters. And if we listen hours a day to your own blessed stereo it will even influence the way we listen to real music. IMO we need some solid "audiophile" anchors when addressing system building.
Where is your evidence that listening to your stereo biases how you hear live music? This is a strong assertion that requires strong evidence. Given one rarely (if ever) mistakes reproduced for live music this assertion seems rather a stretch at best.
Sheffield Labs did. They used the tape to press subsequent run(s) in their "Treasury" series. A far cry unfortunately sonically compared to the D to D (the repress not the tape). As such I don't have a copy but if I remember correctly they did explain the equipment and implementation. Unaware of any offerings in tape form.
Where is your evidence that listening to your stereo biases how you hear live music? This is a strong assertion that requires strong evidence. Given one rarely (if ever) mistakes reproduced for live music this assertion seems rather a stretch at best.
Even when we listen to live music we only embrace a partial view of the whole reality - it is the difference between hearing and listening. Listening in our high resolution systems creates listening habits and those who educate listening mostly to it will transport such way of listening to real life. See those who claim that they compare their systems with what they perceive with closed eyes, not with their complete senses.
I have found nuances in instruments in real life that probably I would go unnoticed if I did not have noticed them before in my system. It is known that training with sound reproduction, that is commonly enhanced for easier perception of musical instruments, enhances the musical experience.
Even when we listen to live music we only embrace a partial view of the whole reality - it is the difference between hearing and listening. Listening in our high resolution systems creates listening habits and those who educate listening mostly to it will transport such way of listening to real life. See those who claim that they compare their systems with what they perceive with closed eyes, not with their complete senses.
I have found nuances in instruments in real life that probably I would go unnoticed if I did not have noticed them before in my system. It is known that training with sound reproduction, that is commonly enhanced for easier perception of musical instruments, enhances the musical experience.
it’s my clear favourite, which is why I travel to Oxford sometimes for concert. The London halls aren’t an effort, they are easy to fit in to the evening. Sheldonian I have to travel 90 mins each way.
after the concert some of the orchestra members get on the train back to London and I sometimes get to chat with them. One of them herself described the Sheldonian to be rich in tones and Barbican relatively dry. But that is only part of it. Each instrument is distinctly good and you just get to hear more of the music unravelling there. I find myself understanding the melody more at Sheldonian following the intricacies while at other halls it is easier to zone out on unfamiliar passages
it was built in the 1600s and Haydn received his doctorate there
there is a performance of Schubert’s Great in December (with Janine Jansen performing Mendelssohn before). The Schubert symphony in the Sheldonian acoustics will make it worthwhile for people to travel from abroad for that unique experience. Or simply listen to my video later
after the concert some of the orchestra members get on the train back to London and I sometimes get to chat with them. One of them herself described the Sheldonian to be rich in tones and Barbican relatively dry.
no I like Cadogan the least. Not because the tone per se but the sound does not seem to carry as easily. Tried different seats. The only two classical concerts I enjoyed there were Gergiev and his Mariinsky orchestra performing Scheherazade there and there Oxford Philharmonic performing Beethoven 7th last month. But I have heard them perform it at Sheldonian too was much better. And I have heard them perform Eroica both at Barbican and Sheldonian. They were way better than the LSO performing Eroica at the Barbican, though.
That shows to me some orchestras put more effort to adjust to the sound of the hall they visit. The royal philharmonic is Cadogan resident and all their concerts there I attended were disappointing so I stopped.
I would say Wigmore is rich tone. But overall not same quality as Sheldonian even for chamber
Thanks. I'm going to speculate that cartridge had been your 5R instance and it was upgraded to Grand Cru Elite. The name, load impedance range, and optimal impedance appear updated by vdH, maybe the output level - not sure there. I am curious about what makes a MS turn into a GC or a GC turn...
Yes , ones choice of seating can be important at Cadogan Hall particularly with smaller ensembles , less so with others such as the Len Phillips Swing Orchestra last September which was rather fun.
Even when we listen to live music we only embrace a partial view of the whole reality - it is the difference between hearing and listening. Listening in our high resolution systems creates listening habits and those who educate listening mostly to it will transport such way of listening to real life. See those who claim that they compare their systems with what they perceive with closed eyes, not with their complete senses.
it’s my clear favourite, which is why I travel to Oxford sometimes for concert. The London halls aren’t an effort, they are easy to fit in to the evening. Sheldonian I have to travel 90 mins each way.
after the concert some of the orchestra members get on the train back to London and I sometimes get to chat with them. One of them herself described the Sheldonian to be rich in tones and Barbican relatively dry. But that is only part of it. Each instrument is distinctly good and you just get to hear more of the music unravelling there. I find myself understanding the melody more at Sheldonian following the intricacies while at other halls it is easier to zone out on unfamiliar passages
it was built in the 1600s and Haydn received his doctorate there
there is a performance of Schubert’s Great in December (with Janine Jansen performing Mendelssohn before). The Schubert symphony in the Sheldonian acoustics will make it worthwhile for people to travel from abroad for that unique experience. Or simply listen to my video later
www.whatsbestforum.com
