The real truth about recordings


I was trying to post a link to a good article but was blocked. New rules?

It's from Stereophile, called: 

On Assessing Sonic Illusions
Jim Austin  |  Mar 12, 2024

mashif

To summarize, it’s throwing out the baby with the bath water to conclude that accurate reproduction is somehow a false or unattainable goal with all recordings, just because it doesn’t apply to some.

 

The point in the article is not about or against the fact that some recording are less or more natural sounding...

It is about the fact that in live event for acoustic evident reason , the difference in location of the mics ,their chosen type is one event and the ears of the listener located somewhere at a live event is another event , they cannot ever be the same acoustic event...

More than that there is no alleged perfect reproduction by recording being equal to all possible location of the listeners at a live event but add to that the alleged reproduction through a system playback in your room acoustic is in fact an acoustic translation ( an act of creation then in the best case or an act of destruction ) for your specific unique ears/brain... there is no exact reproduction in this chain of events...

High fidelity is a term used in the marketting of gear...

Then you throw the clear acoustics science  baby and keep the illusion of reproduction with  the electronic dirty waters... 😊

More than that there is no alleged perfect reproduction by recording being equal to all possible location of the listeners at a live event but add to that the alleged reproduction through a system playback in your room acoustic is in fact an acoustic translation ( an act of creation then in the best case or an act of destruction ) for your specific unique ears/brain... there is no exact reproduction in this chain of events...

 

I would say that the listener's choice of speaker and other components may be comparable to the choice of where in a concert hall the listener sits/where the microphones are placed.  Some listeners prefer sitting closer to the performers, some prefer more distance/reflected sound, and their high-end systems may be able to render whichever perspective they prefer.  I've often seen gear reviews that say as much, and maybe some people consciously or unconsciously choose gear based on such preferences.

Of course, the more neutral the listening room/speaker interface, the closer the system will be to reproducing the recording accurately, and maybe perfection is too elusive a goal.

I would say that the listener's choice of speaker and other components may be comparable to the choice of where in a concert hall the listener sits/where the microphones are placed. 

 

Not at all ...

You forgot that  all components and the speakers sound such and such in SPECIFIC  room acoustic conditions... ( acoustic material content, geometry, size, treatments and acoustic devices  etc no room sound the same at all  and serve speskers in the same way )

And you forgot how the electronic design gear choices will modify the sound...

Of course, the more neutral the listening room/speaker interface, the closer the system will be to reproducing

 No room is neutral... And no speakers sound the same if we change room parameters... Neutral is a relative convenient word we use for specific ears/brain experience of ONE owner... It will not be neutral on the same level for another users  even in the same room ...

There is a strong similarity between recordings and photographs, as a means of artistic expression. They both are based on a real experience, and both become different by virtue of the media they are expressed in.

Each reproduction has a filter, we may like our choice of filters but I suppose it’s like hamburgers. Lots of range of enjoyment but there are still all hamburgers. Thus there’s no real thing to reproduce, just a version. Yet there’s something brand new you should try, and it’s odd this hasn’t been marketed to audiophiles, but atmos music. Think of all those tracks. Sounds, interactions. They all have to basically be pushed to mono. Yeah even stereo is pretty much mono with tricks to give illusions of space, namely lots of reverb. Atmos is object oriented. There is no mix. It’s computed based on your setup. Reverb is set by your configuration You can have 40 speakers. The mixer just says where things go in a 3d space. For me it’s what remastering kind of implies. Not tidying a stereo mix but opening each part of the recording to be heard in a new way.