Musicians in your living room vs. you in the recording hall?
When it comes to imaging, soundstage and mimicking a recorded presentation, which do you prefer? Do you want to hear musicians in your living room, or do you want to be transported to the space where the musicians were?
"Glubson, sadly perhaps, is difficult to take seriously."
Do not present your lack of capability to understand as my flaw.
"Rock music is all distortion to begin with? Cut me some slack, Jack! Earth to Glubson!"
Instead of some slack, how about some wah-wah pedal?
You can also find some informational book that will explain what knobs on an electric guitar are for. I have not read this particular one, but I suspect it may have it mentioned.
I, like you, find live music engaging more often than not. In my post, I was, obviously in a very clumsy way, pointing towards my observations of mostly classical music concerts. At times, out of curiosity, I close my eyes and listen trying to compare it with what I have at home (admittedly, mid-fi for many, if not most, of you) and what I have heard on systems way better than mine. Each and every time, I notice that electronic reproduction has more of everything. On a good day, meaning in the right mood, those Bluetooth speakers can present as much "energy" (not in Joules, but in some virtual feel) as some of the actual concerts can, if not more.
Out of curiosity, has any of you heard Pink Floyd Wish You Were Here SACD and that acoustic guitar on the title song? I am yet to have a non-audiophile person hear it and not be impressed by impact. Except that a real guitar, in the same room, does not sound anything like that. Of course, much more goes into that SACD recording and reproduction and it is, in some way, apples and oranges but nobody ever got impressed by the guitar. Everyone got impressed by the recording of a guitar. Real one is much more bland. Crappy of a guitar as it may be, it is a real deal. I tried Jose Marin's Tonos Humanos, too. Same thing.
Once it comes to electrified music, trying to achieve the distortion of a live venue at home to me borders on comical. Don't get me wrong, nothing so far has beaten Chuck Berry at the Duck Room, Queen in 1979, Percy Sledge in Damrosch Park, or a few more, but in audiophile terms, they are way better at home.
There it is prof, the game is making a system recreate that “richness” of what you hear live, from the visceral impact of a rock concert to the timbral expression of a string quartet. Very few systems can do this for a multitude of reasons from bad acoustics, very few of us can afford to build a custom room, to not being on the top rung of a person’s financial obligations. But, it can be done and done for less than luxury hi fi money. Still not cheap though. So the goal is to do the best you can with the money available which has always been the fun part for me. Learning along the way. I know what you are talking about and whole heartedly agree. I’ve been chasing that solution for decades. Given a decent room it can be done.
Like you, I disagree with glupson on this issue. Probably more strenuously.
For me live music is anything but bland in character. Just the opposite, I’m usually overwhelmed by how much richer live music is than any home stereo system produces. An orchestra through any pair of speakers I’ve heard, no matter how expensive, is homogenized relative to the scope of timbral beauty in the real thing.
In fact, I have found even live amplified sound can often sound richer and better than anything I’ve heard from an audiophile sound system, so long as the equipment used is good.
When I played in a band we used to use a really nice sound system and even my keyboards had such attach and sonic richness through the sound system. Same went for the drums, or guitar etc. None of our recordings played back on even the best speakers I had truly re-created this. It was always a disappointment to here the recordings, vs the live sound. That’s the same for a great many live shows I’ve attended - not necessarily the massive stadium shows, but in a reasonably sized venue - a decent concert hall for instance - the sound was amazing. I’m thinking of a Pat Metheny concert where I was just glorying in the kaleidoscope of sound coming at me live - nothing on record ever touched it.
@glupson Concerts, classical music, are not hi-fi. It is much more bland. Two Bluetooth speakers ran by an iPod are more "exciting".
Over the years, I've gone to and enjoyed, in various ways, many live performances, in about every genre and every venue - large and small. While many, probably wouldn't check all the boxes of being an audiophiles idea of acoustic bliss, I don't believe I've found any to be bland and all to be considerably more engaging than anything from an I phone through a small set of blue tooth speakers. Even Live Rock Concerts, even though loud and a bit hectic, can be quite engaging. Of all, I most enjoyed over the years, small venue performances featuring live acoustic instruments. Now, in my senior years, I prefer to be at home where I can (with my feet up and a cold beer or glass of chilled wine) enjoy, to a large extent, the ambiance, fulness, timber and stage of such performances, without the crowds and head numbing volume that is a basic part of most live events.
As far as enjoying a great performance in the recording studio - it would be a great educational opportunity, but (except for the rare and few actual - in studio, live band recordings or live at event - bring the studio to the performance recordings) most recordings at the studio are mixed, dubbed, mastered and edited, with most performers not even there at the same time. It would sound nothing like what you would hear on the final recorded cut.
My system is capable of transporting me through an obelisk and across the universe to a room where time warps until I grow old and die and am reborn as a star child.
My system is capable of both. I want both, depending on what the musicians and engineers intended. An example of 'up close and personal' is Radiohead's recording of 'King of Limbs', a live recording done in The Basement, with just the band and engineers.
hm1 Transported is the ideal option in YOUR MUSIC ROOM! Your room is not a CONCERT HALL- but the PROGRAM MATERIAL- Speakers and components can bring you a sensory/ audible impression of the hall . Plain, simple and precise!
Reviews for July: The Sound Advocate ( https://www.thesoundadvocate.com DALI Oberon 7 loudspeakers (new) ...Tellurium Q black 2 Speaker Cables...,Peachtree Nova 300 Amp- circa 2019.... CIA passive Preamp/ 200 watt power amp WATCH OUR SITE!!
Transported is the ideal option in YOUR MUSIC ROOM! Your room is not a CONCERT HALL- but the PROGRAM MATERIAL- Speakers and components can bring you a sensory/ audible impression of the hall . Plain, simple and precise!
Anyone who knows about music fundamentals, are aware of the 4 important characteristics necessary for the accurate reproduction of music reproduction, and it’s sounds. These 4 specific qualities are, in no particular order : ( 1 ) Dynamics; ( 2 ) Pitch; ( 3 ) Tone color; and ( 4 ) Duration. Whether in a home environment, an audio system, or actual, playing musicians, or a live venue ( non amplified ), it is wonderful to experience all 4, in order for me, at least, to appreciate the performance. Of course, over time, words such as imaging, sound staging (depth, height, width ), localization, prat, you get the idea, have all been terms created by audiophiles, such as Harry Pearson, and others. I am not questioning the importance of Eric’s initial post, but, with our ear / brain ability to pick up on the direction and orientation of sounds ( and yes, noises, all pressurized vibrations we pick up with our ears ), gives us the ability to hear all of what has been discussed here in this conversation, and so many other conversations. As we are all different and individual from one another, as we all listen and hear differently, as we all have our own " perceptions " as to what is important, and / or real, as we all have different experiences and backgrounds, I have to agree with goeffkait, as to " what is the difference ". We are all correct, as long as we continue on our journey, and can find happiness and enjoyment, with whatever music listening endeavors we experience. Enjoy ! MrD.
In either case, a good audiophile quality surround sound system delivers much more than even the most expensive stereo system. So if you are obsessed with either being there or having them here, get thee to a quality dealer either in person or online.
Jesus, this again. Every musician and recording engineer knows: live and recorded music are two different things. If your musical satisfaction is driven solely by the “having musicians in the room” exerience, you’re missing out.
I would prefer musicians in my room effect in most cases. I must say, that I have not ever experienced either effect to my satisfaction. And as I get older it is becoming harder and harder for me to suspend my disbelief. I am a very frustrated audiophile. ALL recordings sound like recordings to me.
Thanks for your thoughtful commentary and sage advice. Given that you are a new member here, know that despite the impression that may have been created by some of the subsequent posts many of us here value and appreciate sincere, intelligent, and experienced-based contributions such as yours.
"I don’t hear imaging and soundstaging in the concert hall..."
"But in smaller venues there may be like a jazz club, a choir in a church or a symphony orchestra will have wonderful imaging and loads of ambiance."
I would agree with viridian. Concerts, classical music, are not hi-fi. It is much more bland. My experience is mostly in larger concert halls, but mostly front row(s). Two Bluetooth speakers ran by an iPod are more "exciting". When it comes to smaller venues (think juke joints), ambiance is definitely there but imaging is not. Once it is about "rock music", talking about accuracy is a joke. It is all distorted to begin with.
Sound in the concert hall is greatly influenced by the number of bodies present. I am not sure that original designers/architects take that into account.
If you prefer rock CD that has ambiance, I would recommend Hindu Love Gods. It was recommended to me by Michael Green and, despite me not being perfectly aligned with some of his assessments of it, it does have ambiance. If you crank it up, you are right there in the garage where it was recorded. Except that it was not recorded in the garage. Who cares?
Dyslexic geofkait? Viridian, If you get yourself the right seat at an acoustic jazz concert there is great imaging. The problem with any electrified concert is you are listening to the speakers not the musicians. You are only going to perceive imaging at acoustic venues jazz or classical. I have a 113" Steward screen between my speakers. I'll take watching a Blu Ray before going to a stadium concert any day. I have front row seats at a reasonable volume. There are a few semi outdoor amphitheaters that have great sound if I can get good seats. I am seeing King Crimson at Wang Center in Boston soon and that will be special. I'll do almost anything to see Gavin Harrison play the drums. Live recordings frequently give you a better image of the instruments than the actual live performance. The sound is taken off the sound board and then mastered later. Waiting for Columbus is a great example.
Easy answer,.. BOTH! And why not? We'll honestly for the masses it may or may not be practical or financially viable or both. Some lack the right room dimensions, others the right speakers or the money to fill the room with the right speakers or gear. Still others may not be/are not aware that speakers and technology exist and have existed a very long time and are within very reasonable cost if certain ideas are adhered to.
With 5 decades in this hobby, both in high end home audio and mobile audio, I've learned many tricks along the way, as well as good common sense as it applies to our hobby. The biggest revelation I discovered or was taught by my dad early on which stuck to for all these years is this. Your speakers are the key to the entire conundrum.
You should pick a speaker type, design and size your ear and brain equate with overall sound qualities you hear and prefer. Much of this c bean also dependent on the room dimensions and speaker placement within swaid space. Then there are multiple speaker types. Some listeners prefer one of the many differing types of vented cabinets. Others, such as myself desire tightly sealed and separated individual drivers. For others still its a Folded Horn, Isobaric or Infinite Baffle. I find in home environment it is far easier to control bass response within given space or room using Acoustic Response sealed cabinets with separated drivers in each enclosure, adhering to universal, fundamental, carefully measured placement parameters.
All things being equal, amps and preamps should sound alike and will minimal coloration of the digital or analog signals they reproduce. Reality is quite often the opposite. Your choice of Digital or Analog Front End are even more manifold and varied when it come to overall sound they are asked to decode then transmit to the preamp, amp and speakers. Neutral and uncolored can be difficult and expensive to obtain in the real world. The media being played back is the only thing harder to quantify in a meaningful and affordable way. People often believe all Digital formats sound the same as do all Analog Types and nothing can be farther from the truth. Same goes for Digital and Analog themselves, being lumped into love-hate categories depending on who you speak to. Getting and setting up speakers to sound neutral and accurate while not boring is the big trick. We all hear different, so what I feel sounds over the top good and like the best live sound performance may be boring or annoying audibly to your ears.
I play guitar, piano/keyboards, bass, and percussion/drums, therefore I know what these instruments should sound like in a real setting, together and alone. This is the sound I attempt to reproduce in a home setting. I use large line array speaker, 7 1/2 feet tall, with 2 12" woofers, 1 8" midrange and 26 tweeter mounted vertically. Better to my ear than a point source speaker, the sound comes to the listener as infinite vertically, wide and deep in all forward/side dimensions, as well as behind my seat. IN most cases a subwoofer is unnecessary, other than when each of the channels are broken down such as in Dolby Digital 5.1, DTS surround etc.
Room measurements must be taken and real world active adjustments made, in my case with Room Perfect and an active EQ for each channel which allows component changes to be made thus altering the sound, not the typical consumer EQ with slides between 30hz and 18Khz. Room size is smaller than one would equate to these larger speakers 16' X 20' X 9' tall with 750 watt mono block amps for each channel. Power is not used to make things loud although that is easily possible, more so there is pressure and reinforcement through musical dynamics starting at the first portion of each watt to full power if called upon. An amp running out of steam is a huge problem when trying to make your system sound live and the way you like it. bass eats watts, speakers are damaged more often by under powered amps clipping than over powered amps with double the power the speakers are rated for. Getting measurements and crossovers set to optimal, sprinkleing in room treatments if needed ( they dont need to be expensive, you'd be amazed where most often less if often better) you can fashion your own out of every day material.
A quality multi format digital player as well as quality analog players are important here. If you like vinyl or tape, there are so many great deals out there which are very affordable. I advise spending a giid chunk of budget on your turntable if thats what your primary media is, 1-2K will secure your plenty of table. Spend 50% or better on your cartridge, as well as phono stage. I bought and built my own. Kits are fairly easy to follow there is plenty of help online to assist you in choice and construction. Picking a cartridge is the harder task, do research, try to demo or purchase where if you don't like the sound, your can exchange for something else the company carries. Analog Tape is well, tape and second generation prerecorded media for open reel starts at about 300$ and rises. However, the sound is the ultimate, you get to hear what is on the master, even Digital media may not get you that close to the real mix. Speaking to digital, today picking a multi-player that offers 25/96 and up resolution at a reasonable price is like shooting fish in a barrell. Securing a new player that streams, does internet radio, DVD, BluRay audio/video, plays CD's SACDS and more is easier than ever. Do your research, there are players out there are now practically upgrade proof, designed to be upgraded to the newest emerging formats as time passes us by.
Try to do as much research as possible. Educate your ears, find a sound you like. Remember, you don't have to buy everything new, buying previously enjoyed with warranty allows you to keep much more money to spend on the medial of your choice. After all it matters not how expensive or impressive your rig is if you cannot afford and do not have anything to listen to on it. Used media is another area to save your $$$ on, allowing you to buy more. I budget about 50$ per week for music or to save toward a new component or upgrade/repair if needed. Knowing your budget and how it will change is important. This hobby continues to evolve and your choices as well as desires and want's will change as time passses and your ears become more refined and educated. I started out with Sony Marantz and Pioneer. Today it's VPI,McIntosh, Studer Sumiko and Audio Research. I kept the better of my older gear while upgrading, relegating it to other rooms or areas, even something for my work office to enjoy.
Keep it fun and affordable. If it's not fun, you're doing something wrong. It doesn't matter what it sounds like to others. Your ears are the ones that must be satisfied. Impress yourself, don't worry about what the others hear.
This is why I like speakers that tend to throw a distant soundstage, one which extends to the front wall and ideally beyond it. This helps to give the perspective of a concert hall.
@viridian - Yes; imaging and sound stage are different, but- related. I don’t believe anyone, to be trying to say that kind of image specificity, is available in every instance/venue. Yet- when in any GOOD halls(not to mention, GOOD SEATING), I’ve never had a problem, locating Woodwinds, Strings, Tympani, etc, within the venue/acoustic. Nor(especially), had a problem locating a soloist, by ear, within that space. Yet- I have no doubt, the vast majority seated around me, weren’t trying(paying the least attention to such things), but- simply enjoying the music. We all heard/enjoyed the same music. Some listened differently.
For rock concerts and orchestra I prefer my home theatre system. I put on Thunderstruck by AC-DC in the Live at Donington blu-ray the other day with the receiver set on DTS Neural X and about blew the windows out. I'm sure my L shaped living room colored it somewhat but who cares. It's about as close to a wall of sound with 3-D imaging as I can manage. I prefer my vinyl system w/ELAC B-6's and small subwoofer in a smaller room for acoustic guitar or jazz in small club or other acoustic music.
From my explanation (with help from May and Peter Belt) of how the Clever Lil Clock works,
Time is Relative The Clever Little Clock addresses an esoteric but fundamental problem that occurs when playing an LP, CD, DVD or any other audio or video media. This problem also occurs when watching taped programs on television or listening to recorded programming on the radio in your car or at home. In all of those cases the observer is confronted - subconsciously - by time coordinates that are different from the Present Time coordinates he’s been using his entire life to time-stamp sensory information. What are these interfering time coordinates, where do they come from and why are they a problem?
The alien time coordinates are contained in the recording (or videotape). The time coordinates (of what was then Present Time) of the recorded performance, millisecond by millisecond, are captured inadvertently along with the acoustic information. When a recording is played, the time coordinates from the recording session (which are now Past Time coordinates) are reproduced by the speakers along with the acoustic signals of the recorded event. Those Past Time signals become entangled, integrated in the listener’s mind with Present Time signals. Because the listener is accustomed to using Present Time signals to synchronize his chronological memory, he subconsciously perceives the confusing, interloping Past Time signals as a threat. This perceived threat produces the fight-or-flight response, which in turn degrades his sensory capabilities. The reason that live television broadcasts, like the Superbowl and the 2010 Olympics, are generally observed to have superior audio and video compared to taped broadcasts is that they don’t contain Past Time signals, only Present Time ones.
It's also worthy of note; every great venue, in history, was designed/constructed with reverberation/Sabine effects/ambiance in mind, even before the builders knew what to call it. Whether good or bad, every room/venue has a sound. One will hear reverberation outdoors, as well, in areas with trees, buildings, mountains or cliffs, nearby(and- given a loud enough source). If one wants to accurately recreate an event: ambient sound recovery = realism(and, as mentioned, "ESSENTIAL", regarding that goal). Again- tastes may vary(facts don't).
Not sure there is an option. My system recreates what was on the recording. If it is a live recording I can hear the hall and the people there, if it is a studio recording I hear what is on it. Hand claps are the key for me to hear and see how they sound on the recording. IMO I listen to the backing vocals and instruments to see if they are "real sounding". Many times when I hear a system, the bongos, drums and cymbals don't sound real to me because system recreates them better. The bongos and drums sound like they are made of cardboard and I don't hear the actual skin flex, or the effect of the body of the drums. Piano has to sound right also. I need to hear the body of the piano, the string thickness, size, how the hammers strike the strings, etc. Most people I do not think actually hear and can distinguish what a real piano sounds like in different systems or even care. But what do I know?
**** I am not sure any composer (or few) wrote their music with a view to judging it in a concert hall ****
They certainly did! Composers did/do, in fact, make orchestration (instrumentation) choices and make dynamic level indications taking into consideration how the blend of certain instruments or groups of instruments will be affected by the distance to the listener. A simple and common example of this is the difference between the sound of, for instance, a flute and a clarinet playing a unison line as heard from a seat in the hall vs the sound of same as heard by a mic a couple of feet away. That unison line, when well executed and heard from a seat in the hall can have a unique character and color; as if one single (and different) instrument is playing, introducing a new instrumental color to the orchestral palette. When heard up close that same unison musical line will sound like two separate and discreet musical lines at least to some degree no matter how well executed by the players. The musical effect will be very different. Great composers (orchestrators) are keenly aware of these effects.
What happened to the idea of striving to have our systems reproduce what is in the recording? If we setup and tune our systems with the goal in mind of the musicians always sounding as if they are in our living rooms, what happens when the recording was deliberately made to sound with a mid hall perspective? Would we not, by equipment choice and setup, be suppressing the ambient cues in the recording; iow, a distortion? The reverse would also be true.
There are four dimensions for a given space. The three physical dimensions - length, width and depth x, y, z are determined for a live recording by reverberant decay, room reflections, echo and other acoustic properties of the recording space picked up by the microphones. The fourth dimension - time - allows the human brain to integrate the physical parameters to calculate velocities and locations, dx/dt, etc.
Squirrels, by contrast, have very poor integration skills.
If time was not real man would have to create it. 🤗
Directionality is a really complex thing. Definitely useful. I can walk around in the total dark and sense walls (not very accurately but I can manage at a snails pace) - small obstacles are beyond my hearing acuity.
Below 2000 Hz we use the time arrivals of the sound at each ear to work out left right position. Above 2000 Hz we use the relative loudness of the sound (as the head blocks out frequencies above 6000 Hz very effectively (even for small angles off axis like 30 degrees). For the above reasons I believe phase is very important. If high frequencies are delayed by your typical Minimum phase filter or MQA then imaging won’t be as precise because location cues arrive later than they should.
Front, back and up down directionality is more complex. We use the floor reflections which cause comb filtering to work out height. We also use the phase distortion caused by our pinea to work out front and back and to a less extent up down.
Anyway, like a dog, we will obviously tilt our head or move side to side to better deploy our location capabilities especially as high frequencies are so heavily attenuated or blocked by our head.
I would say we can detect the direction of a sound to within two or three inches from 20 feet away given enough sonic info (won’t work for a 100 Hz tone where directionality is challenged)
@prof1- Back when directionality in our hearing was a survival skill, there were no symphony orchestras. Had there been, chances are: they wouldn’t have eaten too many audiophiles then, either. Then again, if an orchestra’s hitting one, with fff or ffff(ie: Firebird Finale), that’s also an, "attack"(Semantic Gymastics, just for fun). Happy(and safe) listening! ;-)
@tatyana69- Thank you, for so concise an explanation, of sound stage/sound space. ie: "Backing vocals or whatever coming from a DIFFERENT PLACE IN THE ROOM is ESSENTIAL to add to the DIMENSIONS of the music." That’s exactly what most of us desire("want to extract") from our music. As mentioned, so many times: providing that’s what’s been recorded/intended.
Can I disagree with many here. I am not sure any composer (or few) wrote their music with a view to judging it in a concert hall or "pop" venue. They wrote it as an artistic (hopefully) piece, that was constructed to satisfy their own "minds eye", which of course is quite unique. Don't tell me that Tchaikovsky wrote intricate scores including effects and sounds that 99.99% of the audience would never hear, because he actually thought they would hear them. It is part of his content that is best engaged with within the orchestra itself. I used to play in an orchestra (violin) and was happy to become immersed in what was going on, not sitting in a false position many yards away missing so much of what was going on. Hence I favour surround sound which goes some way to recreating the concept of what the writer wrote. One of the best concerts I have been to was Dire Straits. Please nobody tell me this was due to a live "soundstage" presenting the different sound aspects clearly - it was just raw and yet refined music just comin' at ya, which would be impossible to recreate in the recording of that same event that I have heard. Was the lead guitar coming from stage left or right? Who knows or cares? But in the privacy of my own home I Iike to hear what was written in as much detail as possible and immerse myself in the same way I would imagine the writer did at the time of writing. Another concert which stays in my memory was Roy Orbison, who basically stood on stage, didn't move much at all, but captivated the audience totally. That was basically a single noise source supplemented by subsidiary noises where no soundstage is necessary. Again though, at home I want my system to present him in front of me as though he were "live", and Leonard Cohen to growl at me in my living room from a few yard away, which it does. Backing vocals or whatever coming from a different place in the room is essential to add to the dimensions of the music. So as usual- it all depends on what each person wants to extract from the music. I look for detail written in, others just want a bass beat presumably.
I like to come home after driving around the block pretending to be looking for a parking spot, then pretend to stand in line outside my house...I come in and sit in the corner of my listening room and imagine there’s a loud couple talking behind me, and then put on some music I don’t care about so I can imagine a crappy opening act followed by what I planned to listen to in the first place...then I leave.
Depends on the music. Acoustic duos or trios (violin-piano sonata or tenor sax-drums-bass) sound great in small spaces. I think that’s why a lot of people, as they get deeper into audiophile life, get increasingly interested in small-ensemble acoustic music w/vocals: that stuff operates on a scale that can, convincingly be in your room, IRL. Rock and Roll sounds best to me 700 to 1500 seat theaters. I’ve been at a million practices in bedrooms and hosted living room punk shows, of course they don’t sound great. Huge concerts, especially outdoor shows turn a real live band’s sound into what sounds like a CD playing out of a giant Boom-Box...not a fan.
I like jazz by small groups. If the recording is supposed to be live in a venue, then I want to feel that -- it's fun being transported to a different place. If the recording is a studio performance, then I prefer to imagine them in my listening room. I like the latter more. I often find audience sounds distract from my enjoyment of the music, like someone tinkling a coffee cup at the next table in Jazz at the Pawnshop. I would rather not hear it.
I wish every recording could provide the illusion that I was at the event.Recordings of small ensembles come very close sometimes.When I'm in the mood for loud rock music and I move into the next room, it actually sounds like the band is in there playing.Like I arrived at the concert late and am still in the lobby:)
You must have a verified phone number and physical address in order to post in the Audiogon Forums. Please return to Audiogon.com and complete this step. If you have any questions please contact Support.
