Placing Instrument Separation of Large Ensembles in Recordings

That sucks. What What normally influences the type of presentation you describe are overly warm components and cables and how all that stiff interacts with your listening space. Can you list your components, cables and describe your room and speaker placement? That would help us help you. 

@audphile1 I don't have warm components. The post should pertain to the inconsistencies regarding orchestral recordings. Some are great, some are poor and there's a lot in between.  Here's a list of my components; Ayre QB9 Twenty DAC. Bryston BDP 3 renderer, ASR Emitter II Exclusive amp, Quad 2912 ESL's, Hi Diamond speaker and interconnect cables, Wire World USB cables, PS Audio line conditioner Akiko tuning sticks, etc..

@goofyfoot you’re posing a question in your post 

So is it my equipment, or is it the quality of the microphones and their placement?

As you haven’t listed your components, without knowing your system it’s difficult to answer this question.

I haven’t run into the issues you’re describing in my system. One thing worth mentioning is that when you’re listening to a symphony orchestra live you don’t exactly experience tremendous instrument separation. You won’t hear every violin and cello in the string section as separate entities. It’s possible you’re used to the sound of your system so much that you started analyzing the sounds instead of listening to music and you’re nitpicking. One other thing that can play a part in how the recordings are presented is your room acoustics. And yes the recording quality is equally important. 
Any albums you can list as an example? Also, are you using the Manic Moose or Roon? What streaming services are you using?

@audphile1 Most of my files are from an SSD, local rather than streaming. I prefer Manic Moose to Roon where sound is concerned. Actually my point of comparison comes from live venues. Hearing music in a good sounding concert hall. This is where I can zone in to hear each instrument or take in everything as a whole.

@goofyfoot sounds like you have all your bases covered!

You have a well setup, high quality system and you are a discerning listener.  What you are hearing is the effect of different microphone recording techniques. 

For a number of legitimate reasons the engineers/producers may utilize 2 microphones, 3 microphones, 5 microphones, 11 microphones or even 20+ microphones when recording.  There's also a mixing stage in the process where the sound can be modified and even reverb is sometimes added.  Do an internet search on orchestral recording techniques and also give some thought to the logistics involved with recording a full orchestra.

The recordings and mixing are all different and thus will always deliver a different presentation.  This can even be heard on the same record.  Keep in mind that a small trio is relatively easy to mix vs. a full orchestra with so many more things making sound in a relatively small space.  Also, the soundstage for a full orchestra is much larger than your listening space which must "shrink" the stage to fit in your room.  Looking forward to hear what others have to say.  Cheers

@onhwy61 What you’re saying makes the most sense. I’m just surprised that there is such a difference between how ensembles are mic’d and that recording engineers don’t recognize the lack of separation themselves.

Achieving instrument separation in recordings of large symphony orchestral performances requires a combination of thoughtful microphone placement and effective mixing techniques. This process will involve understanding how different instruments interact within the frequency spectrum and using EQ to carve out space for each instrument. For example, one can boost certain frequencies while cutting others to minimize overlap and enhance clarity. Also, adding delay or reverb to create sense of space and enhance spatial separation like the other gentleman said, etc...

Now it comes down to your system. While your system may not create additional spatial information, it should be capable of preserving and reproducing it satisfactorily in your room. By carefully selecting high-quality recordings with properly captured spatial information, you can play them back on your system and cross-check against video footage (if available) to assess if your system is able to meet the following (but not limited to) aspects:

1. Instruments are properly positioned.
2. The width and depth of the soundscape are consistent with your listening experience.
3. The volume levels of each group of instruments are reproduced properly.
4. The notes from each group of instruments are clearly defined and well-articulated.

Keep in mind that spatial separation may be less pronounced in orchestral performances, as many instruments are often playing simultaneously.

A great example is the 2024 Grammy Award-winning album Contemporary American Composers, performed by the Chicago Symphony Orchestra under conductor Riccardo Muti, with renowned recording engineer David Frost. Listening to tracks 3 and 4, and cross-referencing with available video or images, can serve as an excellent benchmark to evaluate your system’s performance.

You're not supposed to hear individual instruments in orchestral pieces unless they have a solo part.  You want to hear the first violins as a group, not individual violins.  I believe that what most composers, conductors and engineers are aiming to achieve.  Chamber pieces are a different situation.

I hope I haven't misunderstood your point.

I listen exclusively to classical and I am familiar with your streamer.  I don’t know the amp and the 

Orchestral Music is difficult to reproduce.  My own system improved when I added DSP and added a sub.  The DSP help correct for room modes and the way that you describe the blackness of orchestra reproduction in your system this may be an issue.  And Quads are notoriously bass shy speakers so a musical sub will probably help a lot

Consumers are at the mercy of record producers and engineers. As @onhwy61 and @rick_n stated, there are a number of different recording philosophies and techniques, each with it's own resulting sound characteristics.

If you ever come upon any ARK Records LP's, snap 'em up! They were engineered by loudspeaker designer Robert Fulton (Fulton Musical Industries, a/k/a FMI), who recorded local (Minnesota) church choirs and organists. The LP's feature startling-alive sounding recordings, with amazing inner detail. You can hear each individual voice in the choir, for instance. Liquidly-transparent sound, almost as good as a direct-2-disk LP.

Pinpoint separation of instruments in an orchestra doesn't exist in real life. So, arguably, the recordings with the least separation are the most accurate.

@bdp24 Thanks, is there a website URL for ARK recordings? I looked but I’m not finding what I think you’re referring to. 
I have to expand a bit on my post. When I buy CD’s (yes I still prefer the archaic CD unless it’s a DSD download) I research it first by reading reviews online. I believe I am buying quality. If you were to look at my fairly large collection, I believe you would find that most titles have been given awards of some sort. But I still find that there are sometimes patches in the recording that don’t sound like I would expect. The idea that individual instruments cannot be heard in large ensemble playing because each section is playing the same section of the score is not correct. Conductors have this responsibility to evaluate each player to make sure that phrasing, intonation, etc… are consistent and reflective of the performance practice intended by the composer (in most cases). There’s also the matter of idiosyncrasies in the players technique and the sound of the instrument itself. I think it could be said that no two violins sound exactly alike. 
While I have faith in my equipment, I’ve been disenchanted by some new recordings. 

@onhwy61  +1

Your description re orchestral recording is correct. It is unclear why OP is trying to hear each individual violin whether they are 1st or 2nd violins. One hear these as a group, not as individual instruments.Similarly for cellos and double bass. One can hear solo wind instruments. OP should try chamber music, string quartets, quintets, piano trios, quartets and quintets (Schubert's, "trout")

@pwerahera Alright, you don’t hear what I hear. But I have to wonder how much ear training you’ve invested in? And whether you grew up attending concert halls to hear large orchestras, vocal recitals, chamber groups? I am around professional musicians on a regular basis. I had family members that were soloists with major orchestras. Telling me that I am naive and that I don’t know what I’m hearing as absurd.

It’s possible to hear lone double bass players at a concert, and occasionally snatches of individual string players.  Usually the strings are playing as a choir; for example all the first violins have the same music; but a really good player will stand out.  Robert Chen is one of the Chicago Symphony concertmasters, and from my first balcony seat I can clearly distinguish his tone from the others.

  The OP is asking how do you get this kind of realism in your system, without it sounding unnatural (spotlighting).  It’s one of the most challenging tasks for a system.  I think it is much easier to reproduce smaller ensembles, pianos (which are very difficult), and all pop music.

  I would again suggest adding a musical sub (REL) and DSP at least with digital.  I think it’s impossible to get that kind of concert hall realism with analog 

@mahler123 I am using an ISO Regen that has been an asset to the digital front end of my stereo.

I’ve never understood what the IsoRegen was supposed to do-apparently it is no longer manufactured-but as I understand it it recooks and supposedly cleans up the usb signal.  That is not the same as DSP, which analyzes your room and attempts to correct for room related problems.  DSP systems come with microphones and a device to emit tones which then get analyzed by software, usually on a computer but potentially on a phone. Changes are then made in digital output, particularly in the LFE.

  Consider this: No ones listening room can ever approximate a concert hall.  DSP attempts to create the illusion that you are in a hall.  Like every thing in audio one can debate endlessly how successful it is.  I find that when done correctly it gets me one step closer to the real thing 

Treat your room if it's not and don't forget the ceiling, then change what needs to be changed from that point of reference.

@mahler123 I’ve had this system in three different environments and only needed to treat one of them. Currently, I really have no need for treatments but may consider some things just out of curiosity. The biggest advantage has been carpet under the speakers but these large electrostatic speakers are very forgiving. 

@goofyfoot 

You don’t seem to understand what DSP is.

It isn’t room treatment.

It isn’t reclocking a usb signal.

  I attempted to explain it in a previous post but I failed to explain it to you in a way that you can understand.

  I suggest you read up on it yourself.  The 2 companies that I use are Anthem, where ARC is included with their receivers, and Dirac, which in my 2 channel system with a MiniDSP.  I would take the time because I believe it will help with your problem.

You could of course also try changing every component in your system-one at a time- and see what happens there.  Starting with DSP would be easier and probably cheaper.  Good Luck

@mahler123 Sorry I confused your post with jdub39. The frequency range of the Quads are 32Hz-21kHz(16dB) 28Hz-21kHz (useable). And I've never been a fan of adding a subwoofer to an electrostatic speaker but if I did, I can see where a DSP would help with tuning and adjusting the timing of the sub woofer. Anyway, not sure what DSP would be suitable for a 50,000 plus dollar stereo but it can't be inexpensive and I'd want to try using it before making the purchase. Thanks for your suggestion.

@goofyfoot 

Apology accepted.

I think that some of your prejudices, or pre conceptions, are going to interfere with your goals here.  These prejudices aren’t unreasonable but let’s explore them.

  The price of a product such as Minidsp relative to the price of the rest of an expensive system does lead to skepticism about potential merits.  Would it make a believer if they increased the price of the identical product 100 fold?  Many high end components bundle Dirac or ARC in so I guess many buyers don’t realize how inexpensive the RC actually is, and therefore don’t have the cognitive dissonance that you are undergoing.  

  DSP isn’t the first Digital Product that is relatively inexpensive to produce but is then inflated by the manufacturer.  I won’t name the company but a few years ago I was going to purchase a DAC that was loudly promoting a “Femto Clock” as the reason for purchase, and the new DAC cost twice the manufacturer’s previous top model.  An online reviewer pointed out that the Femto Chip, which they sourced from a third party, cost them $10 each, and the power supply for that chip about the same, yet the manufacturer was charging around $1000 for the DAC.  As you probably know Femto chips are now standard in most DACs.  The point is that due to the fact that many Digital Devices have been used and developed in the IT world, it doesn’t cost a fortune to apply them to the HEA world.  This should be a good thing but it does seem counterintuitive because we are use to a paradigm where quality is directly related to cost.

  Regarding using subwoofers with Electrostatics, I suspect that if you were to successfully implement one, most of the issues in your OP would improve.  The key is successfully implementing the sub.

  I didn’t want to add one to my two channel system either, but when I did it was one of those ear opening moments.  I use REL subs-and only one- because they are the most musical that I have encountered.  The depth of the sound stage took a major leap, as the percussionists and double basses now seemed to be in their proper location (namely, behind the rest of the orchestra, stage right and left, respectively).  I could easily distinguish when a conductor was dividing the seating of the first and second violins.  And that old canard that a good sub should even make a solo flute sound better, which I always thought was nonsense, was revealed.

  Most importantly were the low level percussion effects that composers such as Mahler and Shostakovich use in their symphonies.  There are all kinds of reinforcement with tympani and snares and other percussion that isn’t meant to be highlighted.  I used to think that the only was to really feel that viscerally, even though it’s meant to be low level, was to hear live performances.  Live is still the Gold Standard but the sub and DSP at least get me part of the way.

  Subs come with their own DSP , but yes I prefer the DSP that Dirac provides.

Electostatics are great for chamber music, solo piano, guitar, and most piano recordings.  If they are going to adequately attempt to reproduce a large orchestra, in the most demanding repertoire, they need help

@mahler123 I will then stay open to adding a sub at some point. Unfortunately right now, the amount of space is limited not to mention the cost involved. I never understood why people add only one sub when they use two speakers.

Yeah the sub number is a controversy in and of itself.  The dogma used to be that bass is unidirectional and one sub would do it.  Now the prevailing trend is one sub per speaker.  I have room limitations in my 2 channel and one sub does it for me.  It makes more sense to have more than one in my 5.1, but I just haven’t gone there