Live versus Recorded & Reproduced Music
Why do you all think that most of the time, you can tell whether music is live vs. recorded / reproduced in a second or two even though you can't see the source ? When you walk into a bar or hear music coming from down the street or in a park, you know right away if its live & it s often utilizing less than top quality equipment.
I've heard many fine high end systems w/ top brands (as recently as the 2021 Capitol Audiofest) & in some fine audio stores that are very expensive which sound quite nice, clean, tight, extended on both ends & even image well but not really sound live which I would have thought would be the ultimate goal. High "Fidelity" means very faithful to the source. In some ways, these systems clearly are not.
The systems that I find come the closest to the live music I've heard at The Narrows in Fall River, MA (Intimate venue - rock, blues, bluegrass, acoustic) )or the BSO at Symphony Hall in Boston involve good quality horn speakers & good tube amplification despite their potential shortcomings they might have.
Any thoughts?
In my opinion the only two sounds you can hear outside that tells you it’s live are dynamics and transient response. Which are also two attributes of horn loudspeakers. 📢 😎 Mike
|
The short answer to your question is simply that even the very best audio systems have a long way to go before they’ll be able to reproduce all the nuance in every aspect of the sound of live music; not only in the areas of dynamics and transient response. Your example is a good one and something that I have pointed out many times. Yes, the incredible dynamic immediacy of live sound is one of the things that differentiates live from recorded. However, the wealth of tonal complexity and texture of musical instruments and voice in live settings are also what is immediately obvious by comparison. Even the best sound systems will impart some degree of electronic signature to the sound; often and most obvious in the upper mids and highs. Some gear gets pretty close, but still……… |
I agree! Mike |
Hi-fi systems are typically two speakers systems designed to create a small sweet spot. It does not fill a room with all locations with 3-D sound. If this were the goal then there would be dozens of speakers all over thae place and would require dozens of tracks. Assuming this is not the intent with your question. Then I might use the situation of a symphony hall… which I go to very often. My system does a pretty good job of it. It does not supply sound from the side or back. In the case of live albums… also very good… although because of poor sound engineering and too loud volumes at actual venues… often I prefer my system. Of course also as @fuzztone points out most albums are studio. |
I agree that large venues with giant speaker systems set up in an array generally sound terrible, too loud, hard & annoying. I don’t go to large venues any longer for this reason. I saw the Grateful Dead twice in the 70’s & it was still the best sound I’ve ever heard for amplified rock music; very clear, clean & smooth. It wasn’t their big wall of sound system but it was still pretty substantial w/ 27 - Mac 300 watt / channel amps that I counted. I guess it’s the layers of sound degradation in most recordings that prevent even top systems from having the transient response & dynamics that make live music sound do distinctive. Eva Cassidy - Live at Blues Alley / sounds pretty realistic on my system. Pretty well recorded & quite dynamic.
|
