I, as a consumer, just want to hear what the artist intended for me to hear, without spending an arm and a leg.
I completely agree but how can we know what that is? The best we can do, I believe, is to hear exactly what's on the released recording.
At least some mixers take their 2ch versions back home for listening, before release. Sound studios and living rooms are so different acoustically, that this comparison is needed at least in the beginning of career.
Symphonic music gets it's sound mostly in recording venue - placement and type of microphones and the specific hall. Small groups and jazz is often recorded in studios with also close mics.
In analog years even record labels had typical sound and legendary recording engineers Decca, Deutsche Grammophon, RCA/Victor, EMI
Story of Decca Sound The Decca Sound: Secrets Of The Engineers – The Polymath Perspective
More about these can be read from eg.
Session Notes: Classical Vocal & Piano Ensemble |
Orchestral Recording - Mixonline
Microphone Technique Basics For Musical Instruments - ProSoundWeb
Symphonic music gets it's sound mostly in recording venue - placement and type of microphones and the specific hall. Small groups and jazz is often recorded in studios with also close mics.
In analog years even record labels had typical sound and legendary recording engineers Decca, Deutsche Grammophon, RCA/Victor, EMI
Story of Decca Sound The Decca Sound: Secrets Of The Engineers – The Polymath Perspective
More about these can be read from eg.
Session Notes: Classical Vocal & Piano Ensemble |
Orchestral Recording - Mixonline
Microphone Technique Basics For Musical Instruments - ProSoundWeb
I'm quite confident that what most people would prefer is accuracy, which implies strongly attenuated early reflections, combined with late arrival lateral diffuse energy. This gives the best of both worlds, but it does require a room that is large enough and acoustic treatment.
Given the option, I'd choose controlled then I could have it wide if I thought the material sounded better that way in my room.
I'm there.
By the way, am I the only one who can accept "wet" for a few instruments, and wants "dry" for orchestra?
Doesn't it depend more on the venue/recording/mixing and any other unknown variables?
I hesitate to use descriptions like "dry" and "wet".
What I am describing combines accuracy without being dead. It's both accurate and with a high level of "energy" and liveliness. However, very few have heard such a setup done correctly. Hence, most don't know what it really is. Those who have, are basically blown away.
I was talking to an artist yesterday, they said art is open to interpretation by the receiver and the artist has no right to dictate the meaning or perception.
Having been lucky enough to be at several recording sessions, both in live venues and in studios, it was always remarkable to me that what I heard after the event on playback was far better balanced, clearer and more engaging than that I heard "out front" just before: Competent recording and mastering remain skilled engineering roles.
The notion that you hear a performance as the performer hears it is folly. The notion that you could hear a performance as if you were in the audience is limited to those performances captured with coincident microphone arrangements - although many such arrangements also add "room" mics to the mix. The notion that you hear what the producer and the mastering engineer intended is nearer the mark, but subject to at least (in stereo reproduction) the distortions I mentioned in my previous posts.
In short, if you seek the experience of being there, buy a ticket. But if you seek to hear every nuance that the mastering engineer made available to you, build a shuffler and stay at home.
The notion that you hear a performance as the performer hears it is folly. The notion that you could hear a performance as if you were in the audience is limited to those performances captured with coincident microphone arrangements - although many such arrangements also add "room" mics to the mix. The notion that you hear what the producer and the mastering engineer intended is nearer the mark, but subject to at least (in stereo reproduction) the distortions I mentioned in my previous posts.
In short, if you seek the experience of being there, buy a ticket. But if you seek to hear every nuance that the mastering engineer made available to you, build a shuffler and stay at home.
I am practicing my English here. Happy to delete those two words. What about "dead"? Is it a tonal distortion or an anechoic but balanced listening?
That's good to know. I haven't talk with Floyd for a long time, but back when I did my impression was that classic music was his thing.
An admirable aim. Pretty much my ideal as well.
Agreed
I am not sure that "most" people do want "accuracy". I think that many many want the playback to be enriched in some way - beyond what's on the recording. Surround sound and lots of the effects that people add are contrary to accuracy.
To me two channel studio work is "perfect". It is exactly what it is and it is this medium that the producer is working with. It's their "pallet" and what they paint with it should not be altered in any way. But I don;t think that "most" would agree with this. What they want is "It sounds good to me, I don't care if its accurate."
It's a piece of cake to get accurate from the recording to the speaker terminals, then all bets are off (and the fun starts 🙂)
AbsolutelyIt is. I think the attention to pop/rock is due to his current fascination with DSP tools to improve the experience with stereo recordings. The tracks he demonstrated impressed me and motivated some experimentation when I got home.
One thing I know is I've given up on the whole detail dynamics obsession. My ears ring just from looking at something like klipsch speakers with the metal woofers.
Seems speakers with more direct sound tend to be more detailed and dynamic but also are not as good for long term listening or listening to recordings that aren't great. A lot of recordings are tipped up in the midrange and that's exactly the spot when these speakers get directional.
Seems speakers with more direct sound tend to be more detailed and dynamic but also are not as good for long term listening or listening to recordings that aren't great. A lot of recordings are tipped up in the midrange and that's exactly the spot when these speakers get directional.
I think we can do better:
Have the exact same kind of speakers and acoustics that the artists have available.
Of cause this is a fantasy until we get standardisation in the audio industry.
- Status
- Not open for further replies.