Sat front row at the symphony...

@viber6 

regarding Szeryng, or any violinist on recordings, I find it hard to listen to many violin recordings because the soloist is overmiked, imo.  The perspective is unnatural, in that they sound so loud compared to the rest of the Orchestra

@viber6 , my friend.....as always, your personal listening experiences are yours, and that is all....yours. Your system, as good as you feel it is, would not satisfy me, the way my system satisfies me, as I look for and appreciate other important characteristics than you. I accept that we are " different ", and I understand you play violin. This is all well and good, but you continue to feel, your perspective of the " listening thing ", is the correct thing. The fact that you are admitting to everyone here, that you would rather listen to your system, than to be in an audience of a fine hall, listening to a fine performance, tells me what I have stated many times before about you on another thread ( which is no longer here ). You have allowed your " audiophile life ", to put more emphasis on the " sound of instruments ", than the performance characteristics of the " playing of the instruments ", and the many musicians I personally know, listen the way I do, and enjoy similar things as I do. I am not suggesting right or wrong here, but as you try to defend yourself, as being " right ", as being a " more experienced listener ", has not changed since we have been communicating. Your perspectives and your experiences, are just that....yours. I respect you...you know that. And I accept all this from you. But what is good for you, is exactly that..... good for you. And me ? I always state what is good for me, and understand the " me ". Music listening, whether live, or through our systems, reaches us all in different ways. I am happy to say, I know what I like, as you know what you like. Some have not reached that plateau, and are still trying to figure that out. As always, I wish you my best. Your comrade in arms....MrD.

Mahler123 is correct that violin recordings with orchestra are just about always overmiked. Unfortunately, the live reality is that the 1 violin soloist is competing with at least 20 players in a small chamber orchestra in Mozart concertos, e.g. For big concertos like Brahms, the orchestra has 100 players, so the ratio is even worse. In addition, the violin SPL is fairly soft, and winds and brass are much louder. The orchestra is told to play softer in order to let the violin soloist be heard better, but it is still a losing battle for the soloist who is vastly overpowered. I have been frustrated by how the violinist often has to play louder than he wants in order to just be heard over the orchestra. This live experience is certainly natural, but so are rotten apples that taste bad and poison mushrooms that kill you. Piano concertos with orchestra have much better live balance, since the piano has very loud natural capability, and its unique percussive character enables much better natural balance with the orchestra. The bottom line for hearing violin concertos with orchestra live, is that only the first few rows let you hear the violin soloist’s details at reasonable volume, say 60 dB. Further away, at 40-50 dB, the live violin is certainly natural, but micro details and nuances are mostly missing, compared to the 1st row.

This is one reason I gravitate towards chamber music such as string quartets where there are only 4 string players and they are easy to balance. Recordings mike all the players equally, so these better balanced recordings are a much better likeness to live reality than violin or flute concertos with orchestra.

There are many examples of small orchestra pieces that have been performed by string quartet (SQ). Mozart’s Eine Kleine Nachtmusic is very popular for orchestra, but have you heard it played live or on recordings as a string quartet? I love my Budapest SQ recording from about 1960. In the SQ, the details and individuality of each player are showcased and the ensemble has great balance--the best of everything, and not too loud, which prevents fatigue. Whereas in a string orchestra, all the players in each section are blended together so you can’t hear the true greatness of each musician.

There are perverse examples of the other way around--string quartets arranged for orchestra. Mahler did this, but all he did was multiply the string quartet with many players on each part. Leonard Bernstein was a great artist conductor who made a recording of late Beethoven quartets on DG. I like his interpretations, but there is still more sensitivity and detail heard with almost any professional quartet playing these works.

I suggest to music lovers who love sound that they pursue whatever means is needed to get more knowledge and appreciation of the music. Live unamplified sound is the most natural, but there are compromises with that. Far away balcony sound has good balance, but there is so much detail missing compared to the close seats. Very close seats have much more detail but some balance is sacrificed. The gold standard on an intellectual level is the score, which contains details that almost nobody in the hall hears. A reasonable combination of good attributes is the 5th row. I make a personal choice to emphasize the details, which gets me closest to the score, which is why I get the most thrills from performing on stage. Another poster told of his thrills hearing Gidon Kremer the violinist from the 1st row, compared to his usual more distant seat.  So enjoy those violin and other recordings that are close miked with unnatural balance.  At least you get the details with the fullest appreciation of the sensitive nuances of the soloist.

If I get to age 100, I expect to be nearly deaf. I might still be able to perceive live natural balance from a distant seat, but it will be so faint as to not matter much. At age 105 with total deafness, I will seek musical pleasure from reading scores and "hearing" it in my mind. I believe this is possible, even when the hair cells in the ear cochlea are gone. Even now, I can elicit tears from my memory of great music I know, when it is silent in the room. Beethoven "heard" his late music when he was totally deaf, and these are among his great masterpieces. I fantasize that one day we will have media that electronically stimulate the auditory cortex of the brain, so we can play a recording direct to brain and hear it that way. Maybe some offspring of the producers of direct-to-disc.

@viber6 Why do you expect to “be nearly deaf if (you) get to be 100”? Honest question and no judgment implied, but the comment made me wonder if that is tied in to your need for a lot of “detail” in your music.

You are clearly a music lover and the bottom line is that this is all that really matters. You are also a musician. I am a musician. I generally prefer to not write about that when posting on audio forums, but we disagree so much on the issues discussed that it has to be mentioned for context. I am an orchestral musician and regularly play in major symphony orchestras, Needless to say, I have also attended countless live performances, That it is “a losing battle” for a violin soloist to be heard above an orchestra is simply not true. I am intrigued by how someone with your experience could form that impression. Good violin soloists have huge sounds that easily keep the sound of a fine orchestra from overwhelming. My goodness, violin works were composed before there was any kind of electronic sound “enhancement”/manipulation or recording.  Did all those great composers waste their time?

I got a real chuckle out of "Mahler 123's" comment :   "Hearing the spit clog a horn player's instrument is interesting, but ultimately distracting."   Years ago, when my wife was still my girlfriend, I took a real chance when I pointed out to her that the water that accumulates in brass instruments is condensation --- not spit !  The remark has never been forgotten !  All of my trombones work that way.

    The basic law of physics that states that no two objects can occupy the same space at the same time can be expanded to encompass the dilemma in which we find ourselves as the number of performers increase in an ensemble.  No listener can be in two listening positions at the same time either.  If you are close to one performer in order to experience intimate detail of their sound you will necessarily preclude experiencing the same intimate detail from the other performers in the ensemble. It is a reality with which we must deal that increases with the size of the ensemble. Normally, we would say that we heard the "??? Orchestra" last night, not that we heard the first row of the "??? Orchestra" last night.  Another problem that must be faced is when a large ensemble is being recorded and the recording engineer chooses to use multiple microphones.   The resultant phase distortion, as sounds from different instruments hit different microphones at different times creates a blurred image of what is really going on because the process is unintentionally attempting to emulate the impossible idea of a single listener in two [or more] different places at the same time.  In a symphonic setting, a person cannot be next to the concertmaster, the first clarinetist and the tympanist at the same time except in the magic world of the recording engineer and the twist of a knob.  Experiencing a live symphony concert from a position from which all instrumentalists can be in visual contact is the best compromise and has the added benefit of minimizing the natural phase distortion that such a large ensemble presents to the listener.   Smaller ensembles are best for clarity and perception of presence.  It is just Nature's Law.