How close to the real thing?

Yeah Physics Genius , I know that physics has changed a lot since 2002.

"BK: Yes. I've heard great recordings that stun me. But every time I go to hear the group live in front of me with no amplification, I think that we are so far away from the live experience that we will never have that experience."

The truth of that use to make me frown, till I accepted that recorded music must be appreciated it on its own terms and its inherent limitations - yet totally satisfying and magical for what it is. I think Katz is 100% right about recorded music versus live, unamplified (critical)music. The gap is obvious and permanent, but no reason not to love and enjoy our home systems.

Edseas2, not only did I read the OP's question, I own a copy of Katz's "Mastering Audio" book.

OK, you got me - I didn't know about his Chesky work, so I learned something there, but if you read his book it is definitely pop music oriented, as is the majority of his work I'm familiar with.

Many variables. Type of music being a very important one. I have never heard any system capabable of reproducing the almost physical low bass energy you experience live in a Jazz club. Thenagain, solo instruments and small acoustic ensembe music can come pretty close in a high end system. Recording quality is also a huge factors. Ironically, the closest to "the real thing" I experience in my system is actually a multi channel surround sound SACD solo piano recording on the Norwegian 2L label (Mirror Canon) - no Chopin though. This is as close as having a Steinway in my room as it gets.

I also remember walking in a show floor and believing there was a live ensemble playing around the corner, only to find out they were playing a studio master tape over JBL monitors - so 5% seems a rather conservative number.

Petrayer,

Coincidentally, the Meyerhoff in Baltimore is one of the venues I have used extensively as a sound quality reference over the years.

You, know the sound quality there as with most venues varies considerably depending on how teh performers set up and where you sit?

Most classical performances tehre from most seats have some of the best sound quality I have heard IMHO.

however, once I heard Steve Winwood there from way up in the top level, slightly right of center and I could not have been more disappointed.

I used to feel very good about my system when I came home from the Meyerhoff and compared to my rig running magnepan mg1cs at the time, in every sense save absolute dynamics and impact perhaps. If I closed my eyes, it cam way better than 5% I would say, enough so that I did not care.

Nowadays, with my newer OHM floorstanders, I think I have upped the ante considerably.

I also run good monitors and they are nice but I have yet to hear a pair of standalone monitors deliver large scale classical convincingly. Chamber music and the like, perhaps...

Mapman,

I agree with you that there is nothing like the sound in good seats at a well designed hall. I don't think I'll ever get my Mini IIs to deliver large scale classical music convincingly or certainly not a rock concert. My room and those monitors are just too small. However, with a great recording and the right music (small scale and acoustic) the sound is pretty darn good and I dare say almost believable. Well, close enough to be emotionally moving.

Sure it's not the real thing, but it's one minute down the hall, available anytime and able to play any of my LPs with a simple lift of the tone arm. Muddy, Miles, Starker, or Arrau. Playback has come a long way.

Someday, I'll invite my buddy Edseas2 back over and ask about that 5% again.

Peterayer:

Yeah, and if you still have the piano in the same room as your stereo system I'll slide the cover off the keyboard, play a single note and say:

"Gosh was I being generous when I said 5%!"

Edseas2

Peter,

Recorded music in most people's homes and live music in a large well designed concert hall are two different beasts that will never be the same. I think realizing this helps manage expectations when experiencing either. Each can have its unique charms that endear themselves. Sometimes it is possible for the two different things to strongly resemble each other.

I think if an experienced listener is satisfied with both on their own terms and in relation to each other, then that is about as good as it can get.

I think I've arrived at that point in the last year or so finally, so I am a very content listener at present.

One truly missing ingredient in the process is the recording/transfer equipment. Mic's are so variable, as to be frustrating, with some real improvements recently...then there's the question of 'how to position and place' performers.
In an ideal world, they'd simply set up as if performing...but how often do we see this?
In another post a couple of years ago, I sent kuddos to Michael Buble for having the guts as a pop singer, to announce that he recorded the group he sang in front of, in a natural setting--without the extraordinary, measures normally taken--with him in LA, them in New York, etc.
Of late, we're seeing a trend toward this--in the Movie, Love Actually, the little girl singing, 'All I Want For Christmas', in the movie's climax, was singing 'live'. The director even commented that they went to great pains to let her breathing (which was a bit loud), be captured, so people would KNOW that it was her singing.
Then,in Across the Universe, the director, in order to gain the sense of reality, had the performers work with a 'live mic', and pretty much did the same thing.

IMHO, the true missing ingredients are, flat Frequency Response, (the greatest predictor of TONAL ACCURACY something the brain REALLY catches quickly), and possibly the key, DYNAMIC CONTRAST. The brain knows, what the dynamics SHOULD BE...and if we don't hear that, we simply know immediately that its a recording and not real. When we can do this consistantly, we'll be much closer.

IMHO.

Larry

Last time I listened to a live concert on my system I stood on my couch with a cigarette lighter for the encore. The next day my wife asked why there were burns on the ceiling. Oops.

I think that too many assume that if we hear live music that is the goal of this hobby but there are big variations in live music. With only limited experience, I think most would agree that some venues sound better than others.

I still remember when CES was still in Chicago, we were eating at Bergdoff's where there was a small jazz group going from table to table. When they came to our table, I noticed that the bass was boomy when the bass player was only about five feet from me, but had not been when he was further away. Some real is good and some is not.

I am convinced that my "realism" has greatly improved in the last several years, but I would never make an estimate of how close it is to a live performance in my room. When I am startled by a new instrument coming in or involved in the emotions of the music, I am happy.

One final comment. Long ago I had a friend who was a concert pianist. He had heard my system often and had often requested some classical piano performances and seemed to enjoy them. Finally, while at his home, I asked what he listened to. He took me into his study and showed me an old Webcor portable record player!! I must have looked shocked as he said he listened only to the performer's choices in the piece and other than that paid little attention to what he was hearing. He said he heard it all in his head.

Most performing musicians seem to spend as much time and money on home stereo as your friend, they tend not to be audiophiles - hmmmm.

That's true but they are listening for the notes, not the sound. Its an entirely different portion of the brain that is used. Try sitting in front of a keyboard and see if you can work out the notes of a favorite melody and you will see what I mean.

If you want a recording of a piano in the home to sound as real as an actual piano in the home, you have a real challenge. The problem is that the sound of the piano exists in the room- if you try to record and play back in the same room, you will have double the room signature. It won't sound right. That's why I stress that understanding the model of stereo is the first step to appreciating how real it can really sound, because if it really is sounding real, it will sound like the musical event, spliced on to the end of your room.

I have friends that perform in the Boston symphony, a best friend that builds guitars for some of the top classical and flamenco performers around the world, friends that dance the clubs in London and Manhattan.

None of them are at all interested in sitting on a chair and listening to a pair of speakers. They have the real "rhythm that is music" and don't care if it's an ipod or a five hundred thousand dollar system. They have the talent to feel the music under any circumstance.

I guess this may be more of being drawn into music. If you have music in your soul you can listen through a tin can and feel the spirit. If you need a certain cable to get interested you might think about finding another passion because music is too much for you to handle. At this point it's the gear you want.

Generally IMO the test of a system is if you love to sit and listen to it. I have a friend with a pair of M5's in a great room. They sound slightly bloated to me but we listen to them at concert levels for hours each week. I have another friend with the Wilson Maxx 3's. Very different from the M5, perhaps more transparent, but I never want to listen to them for more than an hour. Great stage, etc. but man, maybe if was a little older I would need all that intense information placed for me.

I don't think playback can be the same for any two individuals. Sure we can agree on a set of principles, or try to talk about what is real, but we can never trade our very slight preferences if it is real to us.

Bjesien wrote :

I don't think playback can be the same for any two individuals. Sure we can agree on a set of principles, or try to talk about what is real, but we can never trade our very slight preferences if it is real to us....

Weseixas:

Bravo , bravo ... An Audio truism, if there ever was one..

Bjesien, I fully agree that playback satisfaction varies greatly. I suspect that for performing musicians listening to recorded music is not relaxing and staying at their best entails much practice. My friend used to read a great deal within a silent study.

I do find it valuable not withstanding that we share our experiences, but to assume any consensus is beyond us. I have some friends whose options I greatly respect, that is the best I can do in guiding my buying decisions.

Once I allowed myself to think that I was hearing 90% of what was real. Shortly after that I got something new and thought it was a very great improvement suggesting that before it I was only at about 50%. I decided that this was a waste of time. Sometimes when I leave my music room with something playing, I close the door and while descending the stairs, ask myself whether it sounds like real music being played. My answer always, thus far, is no.

Tbg, Have you ever had a live musician in your music room?

Irvrobinson, I was thinking the same thing. I noted above that I do sound quite often for live music. You think audiophiles are subjective, you should hear musicians talking about EVERYTHING changes the sound of their instruments. Stings, different brands of horns sound different, piano, piano strings, drums and different skins...... It does not have to be exact to sound live. I've had a celloist in and pianist seperately in my home, they both commented that they could have been fooled. I truly believe that if we are listening to excellent recordings where the scale of the venue is close to our living room that it is possible to come very close to the live experience, if any variables change we lose that live charm very quickly. My system doesn't fool anybody on larger scale music, but I still enjoy it. Somewhere in the above thread, it was mentioned of a live/recording comparison of a small group called Misty River. After I read that, I ordered this recording. On a couple of their songs (not all) you can hear the order of the girls placement when they sing, you can hear very specific intstrument placement and the tonal balance and mic work on this recording is quite good... Honestly, I would not be fooled on this recording, but It comes closer than I thought it would and as I made reference to before as single cello or piano can fool alot of people.
good listening, Tim

Agree in general with Timlub.

To build on what Timlub says about musicians preferring different strings, etc.

I know a luthier who flies around the world to choose all his own sustainable wood stock. He looks closely at different internal bracing for different sounds and player preferences. He might choose Honduran Mahogany or Cedar for a neck. Brazilian Rosewood is his preference for bridges. Saddles, soundboards, fingerboards all the more complex. Some of his finest guitars sell for 30k. So many details and such artistry.

Have to say I'm leaning more toward 40% when I really think about it. We are all blessed with the ability to even experiment with audio and I'm happy to have the ability to squabble about it.

Irvrobinson, I had a jazz band in my kitchen but the only musician playing music has been a guitarist. He liked the room and said he liked classical guitar played on my system. I asked him if it sounded real. He hesitated but said no. I fully agreed with him.

Live musician in my House?

Yes, my daughter plays, my friends play and teach music. A mini grand being played in your house cannot be matched by an hi-fi system, IMO not even close.

There are many errors in playback (HI-FI) reproduction, the ones with the least amount of errors tend to get the highest marks, but it is nothing like live music.

"A mini grand being played in your house cannot be matched by an hi-fi system, IMO not even close."

Weseixas, Isn't it amazing though; just how much a great system can fool you into thinking it can reproduce the sound of a piano, until you actually have one in the room? Then, you're right, not even close.

'Isn't it amazing though; just how much a great system can fool you into thinking it can reproduce the sound of a piano, until you actually have one in the room? Then, you're right, not even close."

I wonder if a properly miked recording played over a good pair of omni speakers would push the edge for this?

I think it might in that the sound dispersion pattern of the omnis in the room would be more like that of the piano.

BTW, does anybody with a nice piano in their house do wall treatments the way some audiphiles do to keep the room from mucking with the sound?

"Isn't it amazing though; just how much a great system can fool you into thinking it can reproduce the sound of a piano, until you actually have one in the room? Then, you're right, not even close." Precisely -- on all counts. What %, who knows, the thing is you know it's not a baby grand in your room (or horn, or drums, or voice....), if you could compare them in the same space. Close? Not close? I don't know, but almost always a discernable difference that you could pick "real" almost 100% of time, unlike figuring out if it is a tube or SS amp you are listening to.

i love photgraphy and looking at pictures. i have been to the grand canyon. i think i'll vote for standing next to the rim for the real thing. since i,m not there right now the pictures will have to do. i would not want to be without my experiences or the pictures. i,ve never had tom petty drop by the house and play a set.

"Yeah, and if you still have the piano in the same room as your stereo system I'll slide the cover off the keyboard, play a single note and say:

"Gosh was I being generous when I said 5%!" "

Very profound statement indeed!

Hotmailjbc, your photo versus reality is right on. I was just on the Serengeti plains with thousands of animals all around. I took many high quality photos but none could capture what I saw.

Today I tried a new H-Cat dac and got clarity and imaging that thrilled me, but sorry not real like being there and Frank is dead.

We have a Steinway. You guys are exaggerating. I'm guessing none of you have ever recorded your own piano and replayed the recording on your system? If you're using a recording made in a huge venue it won't sound as dramatic. Also, have you used a sound meter at a given distance to see if you're playing the recording at a similar volume? If you haven't, you'd be shocked at how loud a live piano is. If you're using speakers like Thiels, or something else with limited cone area, forget it.

Somehow my original question: Are we making progress and how close are we? has prompted people to write things like "my stereo will never sound like my piano." Though I don't know how we could ever presume to know something with such certainty about the future, I do tend to agree with the sentiment. Even under the best of circumstances, I've never been really fooled, but I'm still wondering if the industry is making progress.

I had a gentleman over the other evening to hear my system. He explained that he has gone full circle in this hobby and after 50 or so years of owning many of the latest designs, he has ended up with a system that is very similar to what he had thirty years ago - very high efficiency cone/horn speakers (Altec), a vintage tube integrated amp (modified Heathkit) and a Japanese DD table (Technics). Sensing his excitement while describing his system, I think he likes his current system as much as anything he has owned. He emphasized the sense of dynamics as being very lifelike. So I ask, have we really advanced the state of the art in say the last 30 years?

Regarding how close we are to the real thing, let's forget percentages. That was a futile suggestion. How about something like this:

1. The best system I've heard sounds absolutely nothing like a real piano.
2. The best system I've heard allows me to recognize that it is in fact a recording of a piano.
3. The best system I've heard sometimes sounds a bit like a real piano.
4. The best system I've heard sounds pretty much like a real piano.

Judging from the responses to this thread, I think there is little consensus. Perhaps we should leave it at that and go and enjoy our systems.

Happy Holidays!!!!

I'll go out on a limb and say I think my system is up to the task about as well as anything I have heard in a home system.

Anybody have a grand piano I can borrow to check for sure?

I feel about as good about it as I can having heard a lot of pianos over the years but not actually owning one currently to compare.

"Also, have you used a sound meter at a given distance to see if you're playing the recording at a similar volume? If you haven't you'd be shocked at how loud a live piano is." IrvRobinson

"Agreed - very few home audio speakers can do a grand piano realistically. This is a very loud and dynamic instrument. Ditto a drum set, trumpet or trombone. Most non-musicians have no idea how loud these things go." Shadorne

From 90+ percent of the systems I've heard, higher volumes, (read real-world sound pressure levels) prove more challenging than reproducing the dynamics and timbre of most instruments, and certainly symphonic scale performance. Piano, cello, dulcimer and mandolin are stand-out exceptions, in part, I believe, due to the complexity of their harmonics.

What's an audiophile to do?

Go to more live performances, play an instrument and accept the challenge, and the present-moment fact, that reproduced music is just that. Nothing more, but also nothing less. Being satisfied with the options we have is the road to [audio] nirvana.

Peter, I had to tweak you with a percentage.

David

I think quite a bit has been accomplished here... By sharing experiences, each of us has put that together and at least have a much better idea of what it takes to come closest to reproduce live as closely as possible.
I have come to believe that only recordings done in a venue of a small scale can be reproduced fairly faithfully in most homes, unless you have a very large room I have come to believe that it takes a reasonable amount of cone area to come close to faithfully reproducing some instruments, as mentioned above, large piano and drums. I believe that the recording is critical in reproduction.
I disagree with a few statements, I've been around alot of live productions and I've have heard recorded piano that came very close to live... We were using alot of cone area (Legacy Focus), Big tube amps, etc, etc. But in general, I feel like if we all put together our experiences that this has been a beneficial thread and I have enjoyed and appreciated hearing from everyone. Good Listening, Tim

Comparing sound pressure from a live instrument in your room,at home,is not accurate for this comparison.Sure these instruments have a lot of volume,but when you listen to them live,figure the room volume of the building,and compare it to your listening room volume.The volume difference is huge.Who would want the actual drums in your home?The smart drummers use headphones,when performing.A lot of the other musicians wear ear plugs too.My neighbors Baby Grand gets to loud,in an(approx),40x25x12ft high room.A violin gets extremely loud.These live instruments do cause hearing damage.At home,we can control this.Another plus, for listening at home.Correct what you can,that's wrong with your system. Anything that draws attention to itself, especially anything offensive.The weak link I mostly find now is,the quality of the recording,not the system.After you've done corrections,get some good recordings,sit back and enjoy.

I agree cone area in addition to overall driver quality and build, optimal power delivery, and ability to pressurize air as a result is key to getting dynamics out of a playback system that can compete with the original instrument(s) in a similar room configuration.

This is one of the reasons I am a big fan of Walsh drivers. Drivers applied using the Walsh principles where sound is emitted from the rear of teh cone omnidirectionally benefit from effective application of available driver surface area, and the omnidirectional aspect results is a sound dispersion pattern more like that of a real, un-amplified, acoustic instrument. To get similar results with conventional driver technology generally require much larger designs and drivers that bump up the cost to deliver substantially.

Hi Hifihvn,
Drummers wear headphones because they are mic'd and are using the headphones as monitors. Drums get very loud, up to 110db. I have not heard any strings that can cause hearing damage. Granted most of my live listening is to cello and violin & piano and it is in a venue capable of seating 600 people, but as I stated earlier, I run a sound board fairly regularly. I have never been subjected to threatning levels from these instruments.. and I do tend to duplicate spl's at home vs live(non amplified) venues. The peaks are short term and is required to really get the dynamics that have been discussed here. I completely agree that the wink link is the recording. Good Listening, Tim

"I completely agree that the wink link is the recording. Good Listening, Tim"

The recording being the weak link is where a good audiphile wants to be. That is one thing that is not in his/her control.

Hi Timlub,A lot of musicians have been aware of themselves being at risk for hearing loss.Schools of music teach them about this also.The headphones and plugs I was referring to,were the passive ones that they can hear what they need to,without amplified headphones,or plugs.It depend on the situation as you most likely know dealing with recording,or mixing for amplified music.A violin can reach 110 db at their ear.Wind instruments can get high also,plus a lot of others.It depends on the instruments too.But instruments used for concerts are the ones that are chosen for volume, along with their sound quality.There are some that say some of the lesser wanted instruments,may sound better, but just can't produce any volume,to qualify for a concert quality piece do to this.Some wear those plugs with holes in them(I think),that claim to let enough frequencies through for them to perform correctly.A couple of links for sound pressures.I'm guessing the music schools might have accurate info on this,plus Google.I like live music,we need it for our recordings,but we can do fairly good at home listening,for great enjoyment also.The last one may be conservative for db ratings in certain cases.Links.[http://www.hear-it.org/page.dsp?page=1662][http://www.sengpielaudio.com/TableOfSoundPressureLevels.htm][http://www.gcaudio.com/resources/howtos/loudness.html]

Well Hifihvn, you just enlightened me, I didn't even consider the violin at the ear, nor am I experienced with any large scale concert type instruments.
and yes, we have headphones that allow some hearing. We do have a sound chamber that drummers can use(we tend to allow the drums on stage), it uses speakers as monitors and the drums are mic'd and sealed from the outside world, so the drums are completely by mix. Thanks for the info, i'll check it out. Tim

Timlub,Only the one link shows 110 db for the violin.There's a lot for over 100 db.Maybe the players/owners of those pricey pieces don't want to be bothered with measuring it. Just playing them might be their priority.Still,over 100 db can be bad.I think it was a Michigan State band director that said they get over 120db at 100 foot during practice(I think).
I was Googling Musicians and hearing loss,plus decibels for instruments,when I ran across that one.

Michigan State???? Thats a whole bunch of musicians playing as loud as they can, but 120db...@ 100 foot back??? 121db is our threshold of pain. 100 ft back?... it would have to be near 130db at the instruments.... I would have to question that one. In the past, I was a sanctioned IASCA judge(car stereo), I've owned my own store and have built several VERY loud systems, (160db) I remember being in a vehicle that hit 154. I wore ear plugs and sound deadening headphones over those. It moved so much air that it sucked the air out of your lungs. Ok another story. I just can't see non amplified instruments getting that loud in an open area. Never say never, I'm not questioning you, I'm sure that you read it, but I have to question the validity of the source. If you had 100 players of various instruments all playing @ 100 db, the total encompased sound pressure level would be 121db @ the instruments..... I have no idea of what that would be 100 feet away.

Michigan State? Lets get the right mic's, get the perfect recording and play that one in your living room! Maybe I don't play at live levels.

That was out of a talk forum like this one.Thats why I put the (?) there.[http://www.thumpertalk.com/forum/archive/index.php/t-476991.html]

Here it is.Post #11 "Bowler Hat"[http://www.maestronet.com/forum/index.php?showtopic=321036]

Michigan Technological University 300 person pep band conductor.Not Michigan State,but correct quote from the man.125db at over 100 foot away.Take it for what its worth.
Link.[http://www.maestronet.com/forum/index.php?showtopic=321036]

I cannot give a percent but Tidals come very very close when associated with good gear and good recordings in decent rooms.

Thanks for the links, he quoted even higher for the marching band, 125db @ 100 ft away. With a starting point of 100db per instrument, it would take 256 players to make 124db @ the instruments or 1024 players to make 130db... I don't have any idea of how spl falls off in an open outside area, Lets just say that they did it... That is much easier and its over. Now Peterayer, can your system reproduce the marching band with better than 5% accuracy?

Interesting, Timlub, the speakers that led me to believe I could come close to accurately reproducing piano were the original Legacy Focus (circa 1996). My previous A/D/S/ M15s could not. I also have to admit that the Legacy's proficiency on piano was a leap of faith for me, since the only way to buy Legacy speakers back then was factory direct. I actually talked with Dudleston at the time, asking him about piano reproduction, and after what I remember as a very long conversation he personally convinced me to place the order. I wasn't disappointed.

For you recording nerds, I used to use a Calrec Soundfield microphone (which I found used for $500 in a newspaper ad) and my absolutely mint Crown CX822 running Ampex 456 at 15ips. Modern digital recording sounds significantly better, but it's nowhere near as cool.