Why does rock concert sound suck?


I have been to two rock concert in the past year : Brit Floyd in Bridgeport CT and Eric Clapton at Madison Square Garden, NYC (last Monday)

For Brit Floyd I was about 40 feet form the stage and treble end was an ear-splitting distorted sound - the soprano solo on Dark Side of the Moon sounded like a chain saw running at 5x speed.

For Eric Clapton I was sitting at floor level about 20 rows behind the mixing desk - i.e., the opposite end from the stage. In this case the high top end was not so distorted, but the voices were still very harsh - seemingly a massive response peak at ~1500hz. Imagine AM radio with the treble turned up 20db.

I knew a lot of the words form the songs ahead of time of course, and just about recognized them, but otherwise the lyrics were unintelligible. The only exceptions were when he sang a quieter song - e.g., “Tears in Heaven” . Clapton moved back from the mic rather than place his mouth right next to it. Then the sound was quite listenable .

Of course managing the acoustics in such a big venue is no doubt a challenge — but does it have to be this bad?

oliver_reid

Showing 2 responses by teo_audio

One big mistake at the pro level is to think that electronic manipulation of the actual room acoustical problems will somehow fix them.

Never has, never will. Mitigate to some small degree, yes. but turn it around and make for a ’higher quality in the same scenario than without electronic manipulation?’ No.

They tell you to fix the room (acoustics) first, for some very important fundamental reasons and no amount of electronic measurement and subsequent purely electronic manipulation will ever change that. Mitigate some of the greater issues, with regard to our immediate realization/sensitivity of said problems? Yes. But... fix? No, not at all.

Electronic manipulation of acoustics is an ill conceived badly applied sometimes half-trick pony, at best.

the modern version of pro sound has this electronic manipulation of concert and venue acoustics ’repair and/or mitigation’ as being quite prominent, it has ’gone mainstream’.

so now we have the combined problem of ’overpowering the room with volume/power’ which was the prior norm before the extreme levels of digitization that are currently in use (in fix attempts), combined with electronic manipulation fixes.

Just...Great. The worst of both worlds.

I guess they never got the memo on acoustics as good acoustics is more difficult to achieve. It’s probably that the money and the ease of the idea (lazy or incapable, or some combination thereof) was just too darned appealing.

"Thinking is difficult, therefore let the herd pronounce judgment!" ~Carl Jung. Or, as said in Monty Python.. "Very small rocks!"

’electronic manipulation’, wolf, in this case...means ’dsp based acoustic redress’, or some similar meant set of words. But the paragraph,and half the post’s intent was that it as all about DSP based attempts at acoustic manipulation so for me to say it in that specific sentence was not required.

You CHOSE to quote it out of context.

When others say something you don’t have to go out of your way to misinterpret what they say, so you can put a chip on your shoulder about them, and then attack that thing you created. It’s disingenuous. then you proceed to lambaste that person as uninformed an an idiot in a smarmy round about condescending way.

Grow up child. You attempt to appear as an adult; Then show yourself to be one.

IMO it’s a large part of why your commenting PO’s a notable number of people. It’s missing critical aspects of human integrity in the idea of sharing space on a forum and relating.

I PO people for different reasons. To each their own ability to PO, I guess.