Videos of Acoustically-Coupled Audio Recordings

[PeterA]

In this proposal we would be forfeiting the video, but that really is superfluous anyway.

I don’t think the video is superfluous at all. When trying to understand system set up through a video to improve performance, being able to see the room, what’s on the walls, the speaker locations and orientations and where the listening seat is located is all extremely useful information.

Videos are a tool. The visual aspects are sometimes very meaningful.

 

[Ron Resnick]

I don’t think the video is superfluous at all. When trying to understand system set up through a video to improve performance, being able to see the room, what’s on the walls, the speaker locations and orientations and where the listening seat is located is all extremely useful information.

Videos are a tool. The visual aspects are sometimes very meaningful.

Let me elaborate by saying that I think we would gain so many multiples of accuracy and understanding from a semi-professional recording set up than we would lose from the video pointed at the speakers. Most of these videos are just the phone facing the system in a largely fixed position.

The visual aspect and information you are referring to easily could be provided with a still photo and with a detailed description of the dimensions of the room and the acoustic treatment or natural materials in the room.

 

[Argonaut]

I don't think any of these videos represents accurately any system -- unless, at least, possibly, maybe if the video is played back on a big stereo.

Stating the obvious I think that whilst one might gain a greater sense of scale and some sonic cues through the additional db generated, one will still be evaluating a compressed version of the aural event in ones room.

 

[Tim Link]

The only thing I feel I can have some certainty about from the videos is the lower bass response. You can hear if it is extended and smooth at the microphone position. What's happening in the mids and highs is complicated by reflections sounding very different in person as compared to how the microphone picks them up. A dummy head or similar system like MF is using is the best hope. That at least might tell you the strength of the stereo separation and give your brain a little information that will help separate direct from reflected sound. Ear shape ends up being important, so the mics in his ears won't translate necessarily well when we hear the result through headphones or in-ear monitors. ideally there would be a mold of your head and ears used for the microphone. David Griesinger had a bunch of copies of his head made when he was working for Lexicon so that he could record and later analyze the sound from many different seats in a concert hall. Otherwise the orchestra would have had to have played over and over again as he moved from seat to seat with his in-ear microphones.
Considering all the problems with recording speakers in a room, it surprises me how good some of these recordings come out. My attempts sound like I'd expect - very roomy. If I record someone's voice from 8 feet away it sounds roomy too.

I've been told that if the room is diffuse enough and the reflected frequency response smooth enough, then the sound you hear in person and the sound picked up by the microphone can be extremely similar. I heard a story about a famous musician being recorded in a well treated room. The method involved one close mic. and one distant mic. placed near the corner of a room. The second track is specifically to give the mixing and mastering guys a strong representation of the room's sound so they can mix it back in a little if they want. This room was so well treated that the mastering guys were having a hard time distinguishing the close mic. from the far field mic. Another anecdote involves musicians trying to record and having to stay very still. In poorly treated rooms the sound will change a lot if they move and get animated while singing. In well treated rooms they can move more freely without obvious and distracting changes happening. That helps them perform better. Singers also report that what they hear while they are singing and the resulting sound on the recording is similar enough if they are in a good recording space.

Having said all that, a good recording space is not necessarily a good listening space, so we should not expect to get a stellar result using standard microphones to record a high end system in an optimized listening room.

 

[PeterA]

i'm saying that Michael Fremer can agree his video represents what he hears, and posters here can denigrate his system based on the video, and both can be right....according to their perceptions. it's an opinion.

I do not see anyone denigrating MF's system based on the video. Ron dismisses the video outright citing his dogma. I describe the sound of the video to be consistent with what I have gathered MF's preferences to be from his reviews of his gear and other gear, and by his own statements. He describes the sound he likes, and I hear it on the video which he states represents the sound of the system. There is no denigration.

Michael saying the video represents his system is not proof for other listener's perceptions of that video are valid.

and Michael is in a better position to know how his system actually sounds.

I am not suggesting there is any proof. I am simply accepting MF's own words at face value. I give him the benefit of the doubt. Of course he is in the best position to know how his system sounds and how it compares to the video. He is the only one who is making the comparison. Well, Ron is commenting on the comparison without having heard the actual system and Al seems to agree with his comments based on their biases about videos and what this reviewer's reference system presumably sounds like. I am presuming the system sounds like the video because MF tells us it does. And this makes sense given that those who know him, say he is honest and has integrity.

 

[PeterA]

Let me elaborate by saying that I think we would gain so many multiples of accuracy and understanding from a semi-professional recording set up than we would lose from the video pointed at the speakers. Most of these videos are just the phone facing the system in a largely fixed position.

The visual aspect and information you are referring to easily could be provided with a still photo and with a detailed description of the dimensions of the room and the acoustic treatment or natural materials in the room.

Sure, but that is not a reason to exclude the visual from a video and only include the aural. I watch videos of people moving the camera around and then dropping the needle, moving to the seat, and playing music from the listening seat. Then spinning the camera around to show the room.

Written descriptions and photographs are also helpful. I improved the sound of my former system in this way. I am helping someone else improve the sound of his system in this way right now. You are critiquing a tool which you are biased against and do not fully understand its value or how people are using it. No one is saying you have to watch these. I am curious why you and others are so critical of others who find them useful tools. Some simply want exposure to systems they can't enjoy live. For these members, it is about learning and entertainment. Why must they be criticized and told how to change their methods?

 

[Mike Lavigne]

I do not see anyone denigrating MF's system based on the video.

how about Ked's words here from post #222?

nothing wrong with details. it is the bad timbre, lack of coherence, lack of balanced weight, fake midrange. Details in his system are fine

does that sound a bit like 'denigrating'?

i'm fine with Ked having his opinion. i'm not fine with using Michael's comments as proof Ked is right.

 

[bonzo75]

how about Ked's words here from post #222?


does that sound a bit like 'denigrating'?

that system’s poor - just another Wilson system. Very typical sound of standard bad hifi

 

[PeterA]

how about Ked's words here from post #222?


does that sound a bit like 'denigrating'?

Ked seems to be denigrating the video. He has not heard MF's actual system. I thought you were suggesting people are denigrating his system based on what they hear from his video.

EDIT: Correction. Ked does seem to be describing the sound of the system based on the video. You are right. Ron and I were not doing so.

 

[Mike Lavigne]

that system’s poor - just another Wilson system. Very typical sound of standard bad hifi

note to self, don't keep asking Ked about Michael's system.

 

[bonzo75]

note to self, don't keep asking Ked about Michael's system.

It's about videos posted especially the ones signed saying this represents the sound of the system

 

[andromedaaudio]

I don’t think the video is superfluous at all. When trying to understand system set up through a video to improve performance, being able to see the room, what’s on the walls, the speaker locations and orientations and where the listening seat is located is all extremely useful information.

Videos are a tool. The visual aspects are sometimes very meaningful.

If discussions about taste dont end up having a satisfying result .
Video " Proof " is then often added into the mix .
An example regarding taste :

People can bombard me with 150000 good sounding videos of a JBL M9500 transducer but i m never gonna buy it .


I think vids are entertaining though and keeping it easy works so Samsung and I phones etc are fine.
For me its absolutely not something i would go by in buying gear .
How ever it got me interested in KARAN amps for example after hearing them paired with a kharma playing Nina simone extremely well , but that had also to do with the fact i know the speaker well

 

[Al M.]

People can bombard me with 150000 good sounding videos of a JBL M9500 transducer but i m never gonna buy it .

What's wrong with it in your view?

 

[andromedaaudio]

What's wrong with it in your view?

No bass / coloured / coherance issues .
The opposite basically as to what i would call high end audio , same goes for Westminster .
People who like such sound are on a completely different planet soundwise then i am.
However some JBL s sound good on video though .
Same goes for some small 2 ways i know very well and sound great on YT , but have very limited bass reponse / limited SQ in real life

 

[Al M.]

No bass / coloured / coherance issues .
The opposite basically as to what i would call high end audio , same goes for Westminster .
People who like such sound are on a completely different planet soundwise then i am.
However some JBL s sound good on video though .

Thanks. No bass sounds hard to believe with such a woofer.

 

[PeterA]

If discussions about taste dont end up having a satisfying result .
Video " Proof " is then often added into the mix .
An example regarding taste :

People can bombard me with 150000 good sounding videos of a JBL M9500 transducer but i m never gonna buy it .


I think vids are entertaining though and keeping it easy works so Samsung and I phones etc are fine.
For me its absolutely not something i would go by in buying gear .
How ever it got me interested in KARAN amps for example after hearing them paired with a kharma playing Nina simone extremely well , but that had also to do with the fact i know the speaker well

Have you heard a video of the JBL M95000 speakers? Can you forward it to me or post it in the thread? Thank you.

I heard the speakers driven by two different amplifiers. It was perhaps the single best rendition of Ella Fitzgerald and Joe Pass performing together that I have ever heard.

 

[andromedaaudio]

I heard the speakers driven by two different amplifiers. It was perhaps the single best rendition of Ella Fitzgerald and Joe Pass performing together that I have ever heard.

You re talking vocal rendition only .
And on other music / more demanding music ?

 

[andromedaaudio]

Also great vocals this system but when it started playing other material it wasn t that great anymore , whether this was due to show / speaker room interactions, i dont know.

Just an example

 

[PeterA]

You re talking vocal rendition only .
And on other music / more demanding music ?

Well, Ella Fitzgerald was singing and Joe Pass was playing guitar. So more than just a vocal rendition. I also heard Beethoven’s violin concerto, some Vivaldi, some choral music, and a cello Concerto. This was vinyl only with my own very familiar records. All sounded superb. One amplifier was the Lamm M1.1 and the other was the ML2. Of course the rest of the system was superb. There were absolutely no bass issues or problems with coherence. Timbre and tonal balance were very realistic.

Thank you for posting the video. I will listen to it later on my computer. Bryston is not Lamm.

 

[andromedaaudio]

Mine on vocals / tape not bad ( although i put in some absorption recently )
Plus they play Tiesto/Rock as well.

Id love to try your Lamm gear gear though