@g2the2nd We are on the same page regarding soundstaging of acoustic, in amplified live performances. Recorded and reproduced music is getting closer, but it cannot capture the “presentation is part of the whole flow of the music as it washes over you rather … a point on the soundstage”. See my previous comments on staging, secondary harmonics, and hall ambience effects and their diffusion of images that creat the effect you describe and record labels coming closer than others in engineering that captures this.
There Is Nothing Like the Real Thing - Our State of the Art
This is a long expose’. My apologies in advance. Perhaps you will find it enjoyable or thought provoking. Perhaps you will find me in need of therapy.
I am lucky to live in the NYC suburbs that provide multifarious venues for all genres of music, dance, and theater within the inner city and beyond. There are the large venues (Carnegie Hall, Koch Theater, Metropolitan) but many smaller venues where ensembles perform. This weekend I attended a Fever Candlelight Concert of seasonal music at the St. Mark’s Episodical Church in Mount Kisco NY performed by the Highline String Quartet sitting about 25 feet from the performers in a warm acoustic environment. Much enjoyable. Vivaldi L’inverno evoked a tear. However, every time I come home from a live performance, I reflect on the state of the art of musical recording and playback, with feelings that as far as technology has advanced in the past 10 years, we are far off from the real thing. I have spent much time with $1mm systems at dealers and have curated a system within my means that focuses on timbre, dynamics, and image density, at least to my ears. But after listening to the real thing, I have the following observations:
1. Organic nature of reproduced music cannot approach the sweetness, liquidity, and palpability of the real thing. The real thing is detailed but never with harsh artifacts that I still hear even in $1mm systems. Massed orchestral strings is the best example of where the state of the art is getting better, but still far off from the sweetness and liquidity of the real thing.
2. Imaging and staging of reproduced music cannot approach the real thing. I find systems homogenizes the sound field and some separate the sound field images in excess compared to the real thing. When in a live venue, there images are distinct but the secondary harmonics from the instruments and the reflected sounds from the venue mix and diffuse the images in a manner that recorded and reproduced music cannot capture.
3. The dynamics of recorded and reproduced music have a different quality than the real thing. Dynamics is where the state of the art has much improved. Macro and microdynamics of systems I like are well reproduced. The difference I hear is that the leading edge of the real thing is powerfully evident but never harsh. It’s forceful and relaxed at the same time.
4. Many systems today produce vivid detail but in a manner different than the real thing. The way the bow, strings, and sounding board/body of the instrument develops and ripples out into the venue in an integrated manner is getting closer, but not yet there. This, combined with my comments on imaging/staging produce detailed sound that progresses from a point source outward in three dimensions. As an analogy, the detailed sound wave images progress into the venue like the visual image of a fireworks exploding in the sky. Recorded music playback is getting closer, but it’s not the real thing.
I believe the recording technology is most at fault. This belief stems from the fact that some recording labels consistently come closer to the real thing. For example, certain offerings from Reference Recordings, 2L, Linn, Blue Note, and Stockfish produce timbre, staging/imaging, and dynamics closer to the real thing. I do not understand recording engineering to understand why.
What are your observations on the state of the art compared to the real thing? For those technical competent, any explanation why we are not closer?
- ...
- 67 posts total
@jsalerno277 ...Precisely, +10.... Ones' space and equipment can only strive to recreate the IRL experience; you can't expect on a practical level the wattage involved and the speakers flown at stage sides....not unless you're located outside of city limits with acreage about you.....not to mention 440vac mains... ;) One experience of interest at a show in North Houston, the venue having an 8' ish tall CMU wall at the back of the lawn area.... Taking a moment to get a handle on some refreshments, I backed up to that wall. What seemed to be a dip in the mix disappeared, likely due to cancellations and 'infill' of the effected frequencies.... I chalked it up to the audience 'soaking up' said fq's.... 🤷♂️😏 Another + on live vs. studio is the performers 'riffing' with each other and/or the extended plays of a fav bit. It's always a kick to experience a group giving the crowd a treat, even if the roadies have to OT a tad... 👍😎❤ |
@fleschler, I currently play violin in a small orchestra in a church. Vocal soloists are on a small stage near me. It is thrilling to hear the soloists and my fellow orchestra players at a close distance. There are no ambient acoustical effects to smear their tone quality and detail. But the chorus is placed beyond the last row of orchestra. They are far away. With the curved ceiling projecting them, the chorus is smeared worse than any low-fi audio system. Similar problems were evident at a concert including the Prelude #1 of Wagner's Lohengrin. I sat in the audience in the 1st row. This piece has 8 (eight) divided violin parts. The first 2 rows of the string section were gorgeous with detail. But further back, the winds, brass and percussion were badly smeared. The concertgoer for large works has an untenable situation. Sit in the 1st row center, get excellent detail for the players in the front of the stage, but bad smearing for players further back, a schizophrenic situation. Sit further back in the hall, get more uniform balance, but with uniformly muddy detail from all musicians. |
@viber6 100%. That's why a fine recording can outperform a live performance for the audience/listener. |
@fleschler, right. The only exception is if you are lucky to sit very close to a small chamber ensemble in a small room. In summer of 2005 before Hurricane Katrina, I went to Preservation Hall in New Orleans. For $6 I got to hear a jazz band for 30 min. There were 3 benches, room for 20 listeners in a cave-like room with the performers on a small stage with an upright piano. Crackling hot and live!! I don't see why most audiophiles crave the mid hall muddy sound--they need to go to Preservation Hall and wake up to real excitement. Forget Carnegie and other famous halls. Forget soundstage audiophile BS. Preservation Hall is still around at $40 a seat. $400 seats at Carnegie are for society conscious people who are there to be seen but don't know anything about raw sound and hearing as much as possible of the written score. |
- 67 posts total