How many recordings are there that are not in category of artificially created soundstage through heavy studio processing and mixing of separately recorded instruments and vocals? Extreme example of such is latest Patricia Barber's album Clique.
Only those recorded with two microphones at the real location, are suitable if one wants to evaluate system performance in recreating the original illusion, that he may be familiar with, from attending live sessions. Such is often mentioned album 'Jazz at the pawnshop'.
However, if I want to check precision and limits of my system in soundstage recreation, 'Amused to death' is perfect. Bonus point is that it always leaves me amused but alive.
Another example of artificial imaging, that is nevertheless suitable for evaluation, is Andreas Wollenweider's album 'Cavena magica'.
That's why I use Redbird for accuracy testing as I know its only 2 mics and no post processing. I was just wondering if you could end up with a system that sounds superb on Q sound recordings and fails on natural accoustics? (note I know people who prefer decca phase 4 to the earlier purer recordings for the sonic wow show).
BTW what happened to Q sound. It seemed to vanish after 3-4 years?
BTW what happened to Q sound. It seemed to vanish after 3-4 years?
Thanks for that. Added to my collection.
Just checked two tracks and it is an excellent recording. One of those where every artist and instrument has firm and distinguished position on stage and real feeling of presence. The band has visited my room and played their part. They were here, I swear.
To work properly requires head-in-a-vice listener positioning. The fragile HRTF effects of Roger Water's Amused to Death is a regular for speaker placement. Great for sorting out side wall reflections, etc.
Nature recordists also experiment widely with DIY quasi binaural minimal 2 mic arrays, often to spectacular effect. At their best - children and bats under Congress street, a morning robin with croaking frogs - solid images appear 10 feet right-of-right and 15-20 feet back in a different room. Unprocessed recordings of common everyday sounds help determine midrange accuracy.
Why not? How can whatever the recording 'is' be a factor in assessing it's or the gear's 'quality'? They are what they are, no?
I don't have the answer to that, but once you add processing you can get some really quite extraordinary sound positioning effects out of some low grade stuff which still sounds rubbish with good natural acoustic recordings. Does it matter that your system images well with material designed to image well on anything? Dunno, which is why I asked.
I only audition equipment using music we like: if I don't like a particular piece or genre of music, I'm not going to listen to it properly anyway.
I use a selection of orchestral, pop/rock, instrumental and jazz tracks which I know well, and of varying recording and production quality.
For example:
Bach Gavotte en Rondeau for solo violin, Julia Fischer
Billy Cobham, Red Baron from Spectrum
The Beatles Don't Let Me Down (studio version)
Miles Davis So What
Verdi Requiem Mass Dies Irae Guilini
Rachmaninov Prelude in C Sharp, Ilana Vered (Decca Phase Four, great sound)
Bob Dylan/The Band Odds and Ends from The Basement Tapes
The Band Up on Cripple Creek
Jimi Hendrix Live LA Forum, 1970 bootleg
Sarah McLachlan Angel
Geoff
I use a selection of orchestral, pop/rock, instrumental and jazz tracks which I know well, and of varying recording and production quality.
For example:
Bach Gavotte en Rondeau for solo violin, Julia Fischer
Billy Cobham, Red Baron from Spectrum
The Beatles Don't Let Me Down (studio version)
Miles Davis So What
Verdi Requiem Mass Dies Irae Guilini
Rachmaninov Prelude in C Sharp, Ilana Vered (Decca Phase Four, great sound)
Bob Dylan/The Band Odds and Ends from The Basement Tapes
The Band Up on Cripple Creek
Jimi Hendrix Live LA Forum, 1970 bootleg
Sarah McLachlan Angel
Geoff
That's my understanding. With coaxial point sources the effect can be well forward of the speakers and approach 90 degrees to left and right of a perfectly centred listening position. Move three inches and the spatial effects collapse. Does that not happen with the Acoustats?
In my experience the effects are fragile, demanding precise speaker placement and attention to side wall reflections, etc.. It's a way of confirming system setup. Think of them as spatial test tones.
FWIW, I was able to get some impressive spatial soundstage regardless of program material or age when I used the center channel in the rear. System at the time (30 yrs ago) was an HH Scott StereoMaster (RCA 7591A finals) with EV model 4 speakers in the rear and University corner horns with EV TRX-12 drivers in the front. I was able to walk around the room and locate each instrument or group of instruments on all the program material I mentioned in my previous post. The experience was mind-blowing the first time. I forgot to mention Deutsch Grammophon recording of Beethovens 3rd, haven't been able to actually find that recording in a decade....
The effect is very stable. There is no "head in a vise" issue at all when moving out of the sweet spot ime with ESLs when properly set up, especially with effects such as Qsound. The unkept secret about flat planars is that absolute symmetry is mandatory. They have to be set up perfectly. When they are, the 'head in a vise' is only pertinent to themselves, in order to experience their best. Off axis they are still very good relative to dynamic drivers.
Much of ‘60s music was mixed w AM radio in mind.
Brings to mind Saturday nite dates, necking and trying to cop a feel in the 1964 Plymouth.