The question of making a system sound like "live music" often troubles me - perhaps because I've never heard live music sound all that fantastic - per se. Admittedly, I've never been to a symphony but I have seen live jazz as well other various concerts (which often caused my ears to ring).
Most "audiophiles" would agree -- whether one likes the music or not -- that Diana Krall CD's usually sound pretty nice on a high end system. Just this past weekend, I saw Diana Krall in concert at a small venue in Oakland California - the "engineers" who set up the venue used as little amplification as possible to reinforce the performers acoustic instruments and I don't think Diana's Steinway was miked much at all. Diana's vocals were of course amplified -- but she didn't sing much - she mostly played Piano and watched the guitarist do his thang and worshiped her bass player.
I feel the engineers did a good job with this setup as it was one of the better sounding shows I've been to. The Piano was perhaps a bit soft in comparison to the guitar and drums. The bass might have been soft too, when compared to Diana's recordings. And when Diana did sing, she didn't / doesn't "BELT OUT" lyrics. She sort of whispers into the microphone. Keep in mind, this venue is/was being considered as a recording location for Diana's next album (which as of Monday June 2, is underway).
That said, and by audiophile standards, the sound was simply mediocre at best. It lacked many of the qualities audiophiles look for in their systems and had many of the qualities audiophiles DO NOT WANT.... Diana likes to BANG on the piano and ya... that can be a bit bright at a live show. Made me cringe.
Ultimately - I believe the attraction to live music and the perception that it is "so good" is the fact that you hear everything the performers and the venue have to offer -as it was performed -- which unfortunately isn't the case with recorded music. Much of that "you are there feeling" is ambiance that is lost during the recording process - and rarely (if ever) found on CD.
Make sense?
Most "audiophiles" would agree -- whether one likes the music or not -- that Diana Krall CD's usually sound pretty nice on a high end system. Just this past weekend, I saw Diana Krall in concert at a small venue in Oakland California - the "engineers" who set up the venue used as little amplification as possible to reinforce the performers acoustic instruments and I don't think Diana's Steinway was miked much at all. Diana's vocals were of course amplified -- but she didn't sing much - she mostly played Piano and watched the guitarist do his thang and worshiped her bass player.
I feel the engineers did a good job with this setup as it was one of the better sounding shows I've been to. The Piano was perhaps a bit soft in comparison to the guitar and drums. The bass might have been soft too, when compared to Diana's recordings. And when Diana did sing, she didn't / doesn't "BELT OUT" lyrics. She sort of whispers into the microphone. Keep in mind, this venue is/was being considered as a recording location for Diana's next album (which as of Monday June 2, is underway).
That said, and by audiophile standards, the sound was simply mediocre at best. It lacked many of the qualities audiophiles look for in their systems and had many of the qualities audiophiles DO NOT WANT.... Diana likes to BANG on the piano and ya... that can be a bit bright at a live show. Made me cringe.
Ultimately - I believe the attraction to live music and the perception that it is "so good" is the fact that you hear everything the performers and the venue have to offer -as it was performed -- which unfortunately isn't the case with recorded music. Much of that "you are there feeling" is ambiance that is lost during the recording process - and rarely (if ever) found on CD.
Make sense?