Transparency and the sound of a system

[Ron Resnick]

I've heard this statement before. Unless you have the "master tape" at your disposal as well as the machine it was recorded on, speakers that were used for monitoring / mixing, etc., one has no clue as to what it sounds like in its "original" form.

I largely agree, except the tape is what it is; I don’t think we need the studio’s junky monitors to know that the tape can sound better on a good high-end system.

It is a figurative or a mainly theoretical concept, unless one has the safety copy of the master.

 

[PeterA]

What sort of layering are you hearing from the balcony close-stage at the BSO - my guess is none. If you are thinking instrumental separation, that's not the same as layering. This information is of very low importance.

That is a good question, Ack. The layering and depth, and separation for me is presumably enhanced by the visual effect of what I see when hearing live music, so perhaps I am just imagining the layering and depth. When I close my eyes at the symphony, when sitting up in row 7 to 15, I do sense layering and spatial information.

And, at home when listening to a choral group or something like Cantata Domino, or the Planets or Sonny Rollins, an illusion of images, depth, palpable presence, all lead to greater enjoyment for me. As Al says, we all have different triggers which help us suspend disbelief and we have different priorities. You don't seem to value the spatial information at all. That is fine. The important thing is that we get what we want out of our systems. For me, the illusion of depth and imaging and soundstaging is important because it tricks my mind into believing what I hear at home is more real, notwithstanding all the other attributes I value like tone, dynamics, presence, etc.

 

[bonzo75]

That is a good question, Ack. The layering and depth, and separation for me must be enhanced by the visual effect of what I see when hearing this live. And when I close my eyes at the symphony, it

Did you just close your eyes there, mid sentence

 

[ack]

That is a good question, Ack. The layering and depth, and separation for me must be enhanced by the visual effect of what I see when hearing this live. And when I close my eyes at the symphony, it

I can't think of more in-your-face sound than where Al and you sit (though different perspectives), especially Al's. Even more so, where the mics sit.

 

[JayR]

Sorry if this is a dumb question/comment. I just like listening to music on a good system and am not an experienced gear head.

How come nobody has mentioned fidelity to the live performance, the sound of instruments played live, the ambience of the performance venue, the “energy” of the music washing through the listeners etc? Should these factors be included in evaluating transparency?

For me, a transparent system transports me to the original performance. I am not sure if that is even possible.

 

[3rdRock]

Sorry if this is a dumb question/comment. I just like listening to music on a good system and am not an experienced gear head.

How come nobody has mentioned fidelity to the live performance, the sound of instruments played live, the ambience of the performance venue, the “energy” of the music washing through the listeners etc? Should these factors be included in evaluating transparency?

For me, a transparent system transports me to the original performance. I am not sure if that is even possible.

I agree JayR! Transparency should be compared to the original live event, rather than the Master Tape which is flawed from the point where the live sound enters the microphone, not to mention the cables, mixing board, eq and processing that occur before it even gets to the tape machine.

 

[bonzo75]

Sorry if this is a dumb question/comment. I just like listening to music on a good system and am not an experienced gear head.

How come nobody has mentioned fidelity to the live performance, the sound of instruments played live, the ambience of the performance venue, the “energy” of the music washing through the listeners etc? Should these factors be included in evaluating transparency?

For me, a transparent system transports me to the original performance. I am not sure if that is even possible.

If the recording is well done (good recording engineers), than letting that recording show through will transport you to that live event. And the next recording to the other live event not the same one as before. The energy and ambience cues will all be available. Of course it isn't going to be the exact same as the live event

 

[microstrip]

That is a good question, Ack. The layering and depth, and separation for me must be enhanced by the visual effect of what I see when hearing this live. And when I close my eyes at the symphony, it

Peter,

The layering you listen in your stereo system is created using perceptual tricks that fool you - in a completely transparent system you would perceive them and it would spoil your illusion. It is why consumers and professionals have different listening requirements.

 

[microstrip]

(...) For me, a transparent system transports me to the original performance. I am not sure if that is even possible.

It is possible, but it depends a lot on yourself. You do not know how the original performance really sounds, but you can always persuade yourself you are being transported there. Seeing a picture of the recording venue in the CD booklet can help, but we have to be careful - sometimes the recording is carried with a different orchestra disposition than shown.

I once read an interesting article where people were asked to draw a plant of location of the instruments on stage of a of chamber music recording being played in an audiophile system - I think the speakers were the Quad ESL63, known for its holographic soundstage, around ten performers. The differences between the sketches of the participants were enormous.

 

[PeterA]

Did you just close your eyes there, mid sentence

No. Pretty funny. My keyboard ran out of battery, so I had to recharge it. Strange.

 

[PeterA]

I can't think of more in-your-face sound than where Al and you sit (though different perspectives), especially Al's. Even more so, where the mics sit.

I actually don't find the 7th to 15th row very in your face. It is direct and fairly close and it is a similar listening perspective that I hear on some recordings.

In the space of two days, Al and I heard a baritone and piano perform Winterreise. Here we were in the front row of the first balcony. That was pretty far away and an enjoyable perspective. The next night, he, Madfloyd and I were in the first row of an intimate violin and cello performance. That latter one was really in your face. The energy and detail up close like that is just not heard or felt further away up in that first balcony.

I like to experience a variety of locations and perspectives. I agree with you that the mics are usually much closer. I do value a system where these differences can be heard, if that information is on the recording and the system/room is able to recreate it.

 

[Al M.]

That is a good question, Ack. The layering and depth, and separation for me is presumably enhanced by the visual effect of what I see when hearing live music, so perhaps I am just imagining the layering and depth.When I close my eyes at the symphony, when sitting up in row 7 to 15, I do sense layering and spatial information.

Me too. What's more, if I sit close I can't see the back of the orchestra. Yet I still can clearly *hear* which instruments are further back by the audible spatial layering. So in this case there is not even a chance that a visual effect would help with an illusion.

 

[PeterA]

Sorry if this is a dumb question/comment. I just like listening to music on a good system and am not an experienced gear head.

How come nobody has mentioned fidelity to the live performance, the sound of instruments played live, the ambience of the performance venue, the “energy” of the music washing through the listeners etc? Should these factors be included in evaluating transparency?

For me, a transparent system transports me to the original performance. I am not sure if that is even possible.

Excellent post. The energy of live instruments in one's listening room is fantastic if one can get it from his system. Al M., Madfloyd and I all went home and played solo cello and violin after that performance we heard the other night in an attempt to hear that energy in our listening rooms.

I agree with you that that is part of transparency. The raw energy of the live instrument has to come through for a system to be considered transparent to me.

 

[PeterA]

Sorry if this is a dumb question/comment. I just like listening to music on a good system and am not an experienced gear head.

How come nobody has mentioned fidelity to the live performance, the sound of instruments played live, the ambience of the performance venue, the “energy” of the music washing through the listeners etc? Should these factors be included in evaluating transparency?

For me, a transparent system transports me to the original performance. I am not sure if that is even possible.

Excellent post. The energy of live instruments in one's listening room is fantastic if one can get it from his system. Al M., Madfloyd and I all went home and played solo cello and violin after that performance we heard the other night in an attempt to hear that energy in our listening rooms.

I agree with you that that is part of transparency. The raw energy of the live instrument has to come through for a system to be considered transparent to me.

 

[bonzo75]

Excellent post. The energy of live instruments in one's listening room is fantastic if one can get it from his system. Al M., Madfloyd and I all went home and played solo cello and violin after that performance we heard the other night in an attempt to hear that energy in our listening rooms.

I agree with you that that is part of transparency. The raw energy of the live instrument has to come through for a system to be considered transparent to me.

I think energy and transparency are mutually exclusive. You can have energy in a non transparent system. Obviously no one is saying you should lose it in the quest for transparency

 

[PeterA]

Peter,

The layering you listen in your stereo system is created using perceptual tricks that fool you - in a completely transparent system you would perceive them and it would spoil your illusion. It is why consumers and professionals have different listening requirements.

I understand that the layering is created during the recording process. And it does fool me, to some extent. When I'm in a large church, the singers on stage or in the choir loft do not sound flat and coming from the same space or plane as the organ pipes. Nor do the violins sound next to the timpani on the orchestra stage. That is not an illusion, though I guess I may be imagining it. The music in my home sounds more real when that illusion of space is created. Especially the illusion of the distance between me and the performers. Some people don't value that. Others do.

 

[bonzo75]

I actually don't find the 7th to 15th row very in your face. It is direct and fairly close and it is a similar listening perspective that I hear on some recordings.

In the space of two days, Al and I heard a baritone and piano perform Winterreise. Here we were in the front row of the first balcony. That was pretty far away and an enjoyable perspective. The next night, he, Madfloyd and I were in the first row of an intimate violin and cello performance. That latter one was really in your face. The energy and detail up close like that is just not heard or felt further away up in that first balcony.

I like to experience a variety of locations and perspectives. I agree with you that the mics are usually much closer. I do value a system where these differences can be heard, if that information is on the recording and the system/room is able to recreate it.

I have been to winterreise many times, seen both Ian Bostridge and Roderick Williams. Love the latter. Also watched a good mezzo perform it, but it was a disaster (i have liked other performances done together by Angelika Kirkschlager and Julian drake). This one is just not written for a woman. In terms of recordings, I have compared the collectors favorite Gerald Moore and Dietrich fischer dieskau (it is too studio and closely miked for me), and the Peter Schreier and Richter which I love. For that, there are pressings from eterna, Philips digital, and Melodiya. Melodiya is the best imo. Or I lucked out on that one. Not expensive at all.

 

[Al M.]

and the Peter Schreier and Richter which I love. For that, there are pressings from eterna, Philips digital, and Melodiya. Melodiya is the best imo. Or I lucked out on that one. Not expensive at all.

But it's a friggin' digital recording!

 

[bonzo75]

But it's a friggin' digital recording!

Yeah as is the Phillips and I think the eterna as well. They are all different.

 

[PeterA]

I have been to winterreise many times, seen both Ian Bostridge and Roderick Williams. Love the latter. Also watched a good mezzo perform it, but it was a disaster (i have liked other performances done together by Angelika Kirkschlager and Julian drake). This one is just not written for a woman. In terms of recordings, I have compared the collectors favorite Gerald Moore and Dietrich fischer dieskau (it is too studio and closely miked for me), and the Peter Schreier and Richter which I love. For that, there are pressings from eterna, Philips digital, and Melodiya. Melodiya is the best imo. Or I lucked out on that one. Not expensive at all.

Thanks. Based on some of your other recent recommendations, I'll check these out.

Regarding transparency and layering, when I was sitting up in the balcony, I only sensed the distance between me and the performers. There was not much distinction between the placement of the piano and the singer, nor would I expect there to be. However, when I heard Winterreise years ago at the BSO from my usual row 7 seats, there was a very clear spatial relationship between the singer and the piano. Of course, my perception may have been influenced by what I saw, which is why I want to "see" this relationship on a good recording, even if it is manipulated by the engineers to trick me into believing something.