Re: Re: Re: Re: Hold on a minute!
Don't take it too seriously Steve. I did get you point and didn't
mean to start a philosophical discussion.
Steve Eddy said:
Don't take it too seriously Steve. I did get you point and didn't
mean to start a philosophical discussion.
Steve Eddy said:
Sorry for making the assumption. I figured that you statements about the "goodness" of WVS implied that you were able to make such assessments and thus have heard them.
As for my position, I don't think I've necessarily devalued the individual assessments of good and bad, just that at some point, a large enough sample begins to generate a pattern with which the group as a whole can begin to rank speakers from bad to good. It is only a popularity contest if the members of the evaluation group are not more highly skilled than average. If we use the entire population as the group, then the average will be somewhat skewed towards the WVS types. If the members are all AES members, then the rankings will be averaged towards the higher end. It's really that simple.
To get into the philosophy of what is good merely muddles the analysis. As with any problem, defining the scope and deciding on the metrics is the key to solution. Centering the discussion on a single individuals definition of "good" merely elevates that individual to an authority when many others can also claim that status. Statistics is more democratic than that.
🙂ensen.
PS: When I was school, I once was offered a pair of WVS. Actually they were black van speakers, but I will group them in as the same type. My instinct told me it was a scam and so.. no sale. Thank goodness, it might have started me on the road to a big consumer-level system.
purplepeople said:
No problem.
Yes, I see what you're saying.
I guess what I'm saying is that I don't quite see the point of such an exercise.
Let's say I'm sitting here looking at such a ranking of loudspeakers. What information would such a list impart that would be of particular meaning and usefulness to me?
Well of course others can also claim that status. And rightfully so. When it comes to each individual's tastes and preferneces, what other authority can there be but each individual for themself?
Democratic? What has democracy to do with it?
Hehehe. But would you necessarily have been LESS happy with such a system?
se
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Hold on a minute!
Now you're really confusing everybody but me 🙂
Steve Eddy said:
Now you're really confusing everybody but me 🙂
Hey Mr/s Moderator
Think you missed a couple of posts that should have come with the others 🙂
http://www.diyaudio.com/forums/showthread.php?postid=254586#post254586
and
http://www.diyaudio.com/forums/showthread.php?postid=254592#post254592
Regards,
Tony.
Think you missed a couple of posts that should have come with the others 🙂
http://www.diyaudio.com/forums/showthread.php?postid=254586#post254586
and
http://www.diyaudio.com/forums/showthread.php?postid=254592#post254592
Regards,
Tony.
after reading through the threads, and looking through some logic books of mine, i have come to a small conclusion, i think..
if a "good speaker" doesnt sound good to your, maybe its not the speaker. its you, or the music, or some other factor. i think the statement regarding that a good speaker would have to sound good to someone is false. which doesnt really make immediate sense, but look at it this way.
an 80-year old lady could hear thrash-metal on the best speakers in the world and not enjoy it. she could then hear the song that was played when she got married, had her first kid, etc.. on a boombox, and would enjoy it immensely (unless she hates her husband, or thinks her kids are crap).
but you get my point? its the nature of whats being played in many instances. although some people things some speakers are too forward, etc... this certainly could be seen as personal preference. i know a guy who likes sterile sounding speakers. he also enjoys sterile music too.
so to modify my definition, maybe its that a good speaker exemplifies (with as much truth to the original recording) that which moves the listener?
if a "good speaker" doesnt sound good to your, maybe its not the speaker. its you, or the music, or some other factor. i think the statement regarding that a good speaker would have to sound good to someone is false. which doesnt really make immediate sense, but look at it this way.
an 80-year old lady could hear thrash-metal on the best speakers in the world and not enjoy it. she could then hear the song that was played when she got married, had her first kid, etc.. on a boombox, and would enjoy it immensely (unless she hates her husband, or thinks her kids are crap).
but you get my point? its the nature of whats being played in many instances. although some people things some speakers are too forward, etc... this certainly could be seen as personal preference. i know a guy who likes sterile sounding speakers. he also enjoys sterile music too.
so to modify my definition, maybe its that a good speaker exemplifies (with as much truth to the original recording) that which moves the listener?
For some reason...while readin this thread...this quote came to mind...
I think this one would be more accurate...
In the land of the blind, a one eyed man would be called a liar.
ok...
Steve...I think your exactly right. This whole purity of sound reproduction thing is only a concern to those individuals who are hearing impaired...like us 😉 Hey, it's true. I love music as much as the next guy...and I can enjoy music on my boombox at work (which, by the way, only has one working speaker) But, even tho I can enjoy music on just about any system...I still prefer to listen to good music on my main system.
Which leads me to think that many of us "audiophiles" (even those of us who can't or won't admit we are) are hearing impaired...we want our music reproduced for us a certain way...or meeting certain standards. Sure, many of us can listen and thoroughly enjoy music on any system...but many times there comes that one instant where we think about the same song being played on another system (perhaps our own). This may not happen during every song...or even every day. But I would guess it does happen to every individual at this board from time to time...and would also guess that the "non-audiophiles" rarely, if ever, have this thought cross their minds.
oh sure...we're the lucky ones, to know how good audio systems can sound
What makes me agree so much with your statement
What makes me agree with this, is that audio reproduction really has nothing to do with music. For one to appreciate music they simply need to be moved by the arrangement of tones (or lack of).
This is why I would agree that an individual enjoying their "white van" speakers, may in fact be enjoying the music more than some "audiophiles". But that doesn't mean that an audiophile can't enjoy their music just as much, on their hand picked super hifi audio equipment, as the first individual. They just use a different vehicle to get to the same place. The important thing is that we each find what vehicles we need to use...to get us down that road...down the road to music.
ok...time to duck
later>>>>>>
I think this one would be more accurate...
In the land of the blind, a one eyed man would be called a liar.
ok...
Steve...I think your exactly right. This whole purity of sound reproduction thing is only a concern to those individuals who are hearing impaired...like us 😉 Hey, it's true. I love music as much as the next guy...and I can enjoy music on my boombox at work (which, by the way, only has one working speaker) But, even tho I can enjoy music on just about any system...I still prefer to listen to good music on my main system.
Which leads me to think that many of us "audiophiles" (even those of us who can't or won't admit we are) are hearing impaired...we want our music reproduced for us a certain way...or meeting certain standards. Sure, many of us can listen and thoroughly enjoy music on any system...but many times there comes that one instant where we think about the same song being played on another system (perhaps our own). This may not happen during every song...or even every day. But I would guess it does happen to every individual at this board from time to time...and would also guess that the "non-audiophiles" rarely, if ever, have this thought cross their minds.
oh sure...we're the lucky ones, to know how good audio systems can sound
What makes me agree so much with your statement
What makes me agree with this, is that audio reproduction really has nothing to do with music. For one to appreciate music they simply need to be moved by the arrangement of tones (or lack of).
This is why I would agree that an individual enjoying their "white van" speakers, may in fact be enjoying the music more than some "audiophiles". But that doesn't mean that an audiophile can't enjoy their music just as much, on their hand picked super hifi audio equipment, as the first individual. They just use a different vehicle to get to the same place. The important thing is that we each find what vehicles we need to use...to get us down that road...down the road to music.
ok...time to duck
later>>>>>>
If a neophyte comes to the forum and asks what is the good speaker, there will be 1000 opinions. But if they ask what is crap, there will be much fewer. If they ask what is the best for $$$, there will be only a few speakers that actually fit the bill and most of us will agree on what speakers fit into that small group.
Case in point: My first system was crap. It was an old RCA solid state all-in-one (phono) with single drivers in plastic boxes and a cheap Prosonic cassette deck. One day it got cheap car speakers in the plastic boxes. Then the all-in-one got swapped for a Sanyo boombox. I still have the Sanyo at the office. Sadly, it is better than the desktop speakers all around me. Yet, I wouldn't hesitate to call the Sanyo sound crap! Yet, ,just because the people at the office say that my Sanyo sounds great, doesn't mean it ceases to be crap.
🙂ensen.
Case in point: My first system was crap. It was an old RCA solid state all-in-one (phono) with single drivers in plastic boxes and a cheap Prosonic cassette deck. One day it got cheap car speakers in the plastic boxes. Then the all-in-one got swapped for a Sanyo boombox. I still have the Sanyo at the office. Sadly, it is better than the desktop speakers all around me. Yet, I wouldn't hesitate to call the Sanyo sound crap! Yet, ,just because the people at the office say that my Sanyo sounds great, doesn't mean it ceases to be crap.
🙂ensen.
Okay, here's a not so theoretical question: On your last or next or current shopping trip, how many of you would even consider listening to a pair of bottom line speakers? Answer honestly. Would you even pause for the white van?
I'll wager that none of us would. Certainly not me. Why, not? Because our experience has somehow changed our view of what is good. If our own measurement system changes over time, then how on earth do we frame our current opinions? Easy. The "good" is elusive. We are always searching for better than what we have. Better car, better speaker, better wife... (wait, bad example!). Our experience in these matters is only valuable in that we know what is NOT good. Which brands to stay away from. The cars that tend to lemon tartness. The tarts to drive away from... (wait , bad example!).
🙂ensen
Addendum to previous post: Strangely, I am happy with the Sanyo. Just because I think it is good for the office, doesn't mean it ceases to be crap!
I'll wager that none of us would. Certainly not me. Why, not? Because our experience has somehow changed our view of what is good. If our own measurement system changes over time, then how on earth do we frame our current opinions? Easy. The "good" is elusive. We are always searching for better than what we have. Better car, better speaker, better wife... (wait, bad example!). Our experience in these matters is only valuable in that we know what is NOT good. Which brands to stay away from. The cars that tend to lemon tartness. The tarts to drive away from... (wait , bad example!).
🙂ensen
Addendum to previous post: Strangely, I am happy with the Sanyo. Just because I think it is good for the office, doesn't mean it ceases to be crap!
I think the context and situation matters a lot. It has happened
that I woke up to hearing music on my clock radio that sounded
just fantastic, although it probably had a lot to do with the
music itself being so good that sound quality didn't even enter
my mind.
Since a lot of people on the forum like to discuss wines, I think
there is good analogy. Suppose you're on vacation with your
wife/girlfriend/some good friends or whoever. The weather is
nice and your having dinner at a nice, but not spectacular
trattoria in Italy. You go for the house wine, which usually
doesn't cost much, and you are prepared to swear that it is
the best wine you have ever tasted. Now, if you drank the same
wine at home, you would probably find it, possibly decent, but
nothing to talk about or buy another bottle of. On the other
hand, drinking a chateu LaTour at that trattoria would probably
have been just a waste of money under the circumstances,
while you might enjoy it immensely at home.
that I woke up to hearing music on my clock radio that sounded
just fantastic, although it probably had a lot to do with the
music itself being so good that sound quality didn't even enter
my mind.
Since a lot of people on the forum like to discuss wines, I think
there is good analogy. Suppose you're on vacation with your
wife/girlfriend/some good friends or whoever. The weather is
nice and your having dinner at a nice, but not spectacular
trattoria in Italy. You go for the house wine, which usually
doesn't cost much, and you are prepared to swear that it is
the best wine you have ever tasted. Now, if you drank the same
wine at home, you would probably find it, possibly decent, but
nothing to talk about or buy another bottle of. On the other
hand, drinking a chateu LaTour at that trattoria would probably
have been just a waste of money under the circumstances,
while you might enjoy it immensely at home.
Since I do live sound, I think I have a totally different definition of
good speakers" than most of the others on this forum--good speakers are able to play loud with extra-loud bass, but not much below 30-40hz (because in a dancehall it starts to sound like mud) and slightly less response in the treble range, particularly around 2-4khz, because that's where the most annoying harshness is.
As far as audiophiles go, I am pretty cynical--It seems to me that the only requirement for "good sound" is a humongous bottom line. While I've heard my share of decent speakers, and I will say for sure that once you get into the "flat passband +/- 1dB" it sounds absolutely wonderful, I don't see the difference between speakers that are $500 a pair and $5000 a pair. I won't even mention cables. (Oops. Forget I mentioned them. I don't want to have that discussion again...)
My current PA system was patched together from spare parts; a couple of $3 Radio Shack full-rangers on clearance, some 10" bass amp drivers that ended up in my lap, a 15" theatre organ speaker... all spare parts, and yet, I get so many compliments on how good it sounds, and how much better it sounds than the other DJs, who have spent hundreds or thousands of dollars on boxed-system type speakers that, by the numbers, should blow my system away completely. Why do people like mine more? Some unmeasurable, subjective adjective like "it's more fun" or more "personal"? Perhaps the sheer number of drivers in play gives it more "presence" or "punch" or "air"? Maybe I should go freeze a photo of my sound system before the next gig. I bet it would help.
So, now that I've muddied the water a bit more, I'll repeat the question: what is good sound?
good speakers" than most of the others on this forum--good speakers are able to play loud with extra-loud bass, but not much below 30-40hz (because in a dancehall it starts to sound like mud) and slightly less response in the treble range, particularly around 2-4khz, because that's where the most annoying harshness is.
As far as audiophiles go, I am pretty cynical--It seems to me that the only requirement for "good sound" is a humongous bottom line. While I've heard my share of decent speakers, and I will say for sure that once you get into the "flat passband +/- 1dB" it sounds absolutely wonderful, I don't see the difference between speakers that are $500 a pair and $5000 a pair. I won't even mention cables. (Oops. Forget I mentioned them. I don't want to have that discussion again...)
My current PA system was patched together from spare parts; a couple of $3 Radio Shack full-rangers on clearance, some 10" bass amp drivers that ended up in my lap, a 15" theatre organ speaker... all spare parts, and yet, I get so many compliments on how good it sounds, and how much better it sounds than the other DJs, who have spent hundreds or thousands of dollars on boxed-system type speakers that, by the numbers, should blow my system away completely. Why do people like mine more? Some unmeasurable, subjective adjective like "it's more fun" or more "personal"? Perhaps the sheer number of drivers in play gives it more "presence" or "punch" or "air"? Maybe I should go freeze a photo of my sound system before the next gig. I bet it would help.
So, now that I've muddied the water a bit more, I'll repeat the question: what is good sound?
I've never seen a US$500 pair that were +/- 1dB over a reasonable frequency range. Even with studio monitors, which are generally excellent value, the specs are usually +/- 3dB until you get over US$1000 for the pair. Finally, the difference between two monitors that measure flat is generally found at the extremes - the transients and the long notes. I find that more punch and smoothness usually requires an extra grand or two that I don't have.
As for whether your system sounds good to the dancing crowd or is a good FOH system is not the issue. Your audience will naturally have lower expectations than you or I. I don't expect to be able to evaluate a car like Danica Patrick or even Jason Priestley. Similarly, I don't expect Joe Schmoe to give as credible an opinion as you.
Still, the fact that you're a DJ gives me pause due to my own preconceptions. In almost all cases, whenever I get a peek at the board, the faders are over unity, the EQ is up well over 6dB in a typical smiley face and the clip lights are as active as the disco ball. Maybe your system will surprise me in person, but as has been said earlier about a general pattern...
In any case, I'd be interested to know how it reproduces other musical styles. That is how I test drive speakers. None of this audiophile only stuff. I want to know what happens when it clips. Or I swap from jazz to techno. I've had audiophile store people looking worried when travelling set of CDs start to go in the player.
🙂ensen
Who buys his wine by the number. Cheap at less than Cdn$20 and tasty at number of 85+ by some "expert."
As for whether your system sounds good to the dancing crowd or is a good FOH system is not the issue. Your audience will naturally have lower expectations than you or I. I don't expect to be able to evaluate a car like Danica Patrick or even Jason Priestley. Similarly, I don't expect Joe Schmoe to give as credible an opinion as you.
Still, the fact that you're a DJ gives me pause due to my own preconceptions. In almost all cases, whenever I get a peek at the board, the faders are over unity, the EQ is up well over 6dB in a typical smiley face and the clip lights are as active as the disco ball. Maybe your system will surprise me in person, but as has been said earlier about a general pattern...
In any case, I'd be interested to know how it reproduces other musical styles. That is how I test drive speakers. None of this audiophile only stuff. I want to know what happens when it clips. Or I swap from jazz to techno. I've had audiophile store people looking worried when travelling set of CDs start to go in the player.
🙂ensen
Who buys his wine by the number. Cheap at less than Cdn$20 and tasty at number of 85+ by some "expert."
The real performance cannot be accurately reproduced in the home listening environment. This is an undisputed fact.
What the artists and engineers hear in their final evaluation of the recording is what they want us to hear. This now constitutes the "new performance" and this is what we have to reproduce. The original performance is now kitty litter.
We cannot reproduce the "new performance" unless we duplicate their evaluation environment and speakers. This is not possible because of the many variations. We are saddled with a single pair of speakers in our own listening room.
The closest we can reasonably hope to get is to have a listening room and a pair of speakers which are composites of all those used in the evaluation of recordings.
This isn't going to happen and so we are left chasing our tails and endlessly debating the merits of speakers and rooms.
On the overall, the evolution of speakers tends to go in the right direction. Ultimately, for the serious listener, the weak perish and the strong survive.
The best DIY speakers, I believe, will most accurately mimic the characteristics of commercial speakers, regardless of cost, with which most serious listeners are happy. This, as long as their happiness is based on the speakers real rather than perceived capabilities, is probably the most practical and reliable yardstick of a speakers's ability to do it's job.
A "good" speaker is then, to me, that which most serious listeners declare as good. If I had a pair of these good speakers and didn't "like" them, I would blame it on something other than the speakers - probably my room, possibly my mind.
What the artists and engineers hear in their final evaluation of the recording is what they want us to hear. This now constitutes the "new performance" and this is what we have to reproduce. The original performance is now kitty litter.
We cannot reproduce the "new performance" unless we duplicate their evaluation environment and speakers. This is not possible because of the many variations. We are saddled with a single pair of speakers in our own listening room.
The closest we can reasonably hope to get is to have a listening room and a pair of speakers which are composites of all those used in the evaluation of recordings.
This isn't going to happen and so we are left chasing our tails and endlessly debating the merits of speakers and rooms.
On the overall, the evolution of speakers tends to go in the right direction. Ultimately, for the serious listener, the weak perish and the strong survive.
The best DIY speakers, I believe, will most accurately mimic the characteristics of commercial speakers, regardless of cost, with which most serious listeners are happy. This, as long as their happiness is based on the speakers real rather than perceived capabilities, is probably the most practical and reliable yardstick of a speakers's ability to do it's job.
A "good" speaker is then, to me, that which most serious listeners declare as good. If I had a pair of these good speakers and didn't "like" them, I would blame it on something other than the speakers - probably my room, possibly my mind.
http://home.hetnet.nl/~geenius/
Quote:
I've never seen a US$500 pair that were +/- 1dB over a reasonable frequency range. Even with studio monitors, which are generally excellent value, the specs are usually +/- 3dB until you get over US$1000 for the pair.
The studio monitors were, when they were built, +/- 3dB from 45-20k, and IIRC, they were US$600/pair. ($32349 CDN 😀 ) I'm looking, though, at the Auriga above, thinking, how much would that be to build? And could I build it? (I've never successfully built a sealed box before...)
I have been a typical DJ before; I was for a long time! I even applied my bad habits to my FOH skills in high school! People still thought I was god! (I never clipped anything. That must explain it.) Now that I'm getting into recording engineering, I'm learning a lot about all kinds of sound science and my bad habits are almost nonexistent... though I really look down my nose at people who insist that the faders are *ALWAYS* *EXACTLY* at unity. I say, set your gain so peaks are around 0, then use the faders to set relative level!
And about EQ, while I'm being off-topic: it's much better, IMO, to make your EQ work by removing things, than by adding them. After all, it's better to have a crowd of humble actors on the soundstage, than a bunch of passband-primadonnas. But you already know this. 😀
Keep your stylus on the vinyl....
Quote:
I've never seen a US$500 pair that were +/- 1dB over a reasonable frequency range. Even with studio monitors, which are generally excellent value, the specs are usually +/- 3dB until you get over US$1000 for the pair.
The studio monitors were, when they were built, +/- 3dB from 45-20k, and IIRC, they were US$600/pair. ($32349 CDN 😀 ) I'm looking, though, at the Auriga above, thinking, how much would that be to build? And could I build it? (I've never successfully built a sealed box before...)
I have been a typical DJ before; I was for a long time! I even applied my bad habits to my FOH skills in high school! People still thought I was god! (I never clipped anything. That must explain it.) Now that I'm getting into recording engineering, I'm learning a lot about all kinds of sound science and my bad habits are almost nonexistent... though I really look down my nose at people who insist that the faders are *ALWAYS* *EXACTLY* at unity. I say, set your gain so peaks are around 0, then use the faders to set relative level!
And about EQ, while I'm being off-topic: it's much better, IMO, to make your EQ work by removing things, than by adding them. After all, it's better to have a crowd of humble actors on the soundstage, than a bunch of passband-primadonnas. But you already know this. 😀
Keep your stylus on the vinyl....
Something I often wonder is how much does a persons musical
taste affect the impression of speakers (and other equipment).
For instance, I listen almost only to classical music. For this,
there is a reasonable well-defined standard to measure against,
a live performance in a concert hall. The acoustics of the hall
matters, and maybe a few other factors, but since it is purely
acoustical music not going through any kind of electronic or
other equipment, I know how it should sound. However, many
of you listen to music from instruments that are always
electronically amplified, and maybe processed, and heard
through speakers even at a live concert. I always wonder,
is it even possible for you to agree on how a recording should
sound or does this boil down more to personal taste? (People
may not always agree on reproduction of acoustical music
either, but at least, it is much easier to have reference).
For instance, I and friend who both listen to classical music and
had the same speakers, which we found to be quite good for
classical music, tried an experiment. There was a friend of my
friend, let's call him X, who listened only to pop music, but did
care quite a lot about sound quality. He had Jamo speakers
which we thought sounded terrible. So we brought in our
speakers into his flat and made listening comparisons, using
both pop and classical. X agreed that, perhaps our speakers
were better on classical music, but for pop music, he clearly
preferred his JAMO speakers. This was many years ago, not
done with any high-end equipment, yet, it was an interesting
experiment.
taste affect the impression of speakers (and other equipment).
For instance, I listen almost only to classical music. For this,
there is a reasonable well-defined standard to measure against,
a live performance in a concert hall. The acoustics of the hall
matters, and maybe a few other factors, but since it is purely
acoustical music not going through any kind of electronic or
other equipment, I know how it should sound. However, many
of you listen to music from instruments that are always
electronically amplified, and maybe processed, and heard
through speakers even at a live concert. I always wonder,
is it even possible for you to agree on how a recording should
sound or does this boil down more to personal taste? (People
may not always agree on reproduction of acoustical music
either, but at least, it is much easier to have reference).
For instance, I and friend who both listen to classical music and
had the same speakers, which we found to be quite good for
classical music, tried an experiment. There was a friend of my
friend, let's call him X, who listened only to pop music, but did
care quite a lot about sound quality. He had Jamo speakers
which we thought sounded terrible. So we brought in our
speakers into his flat and made listening comparisons, using
both pop and classical. X agreed that, perhaps our speakers
were better on classical music, but for pop music, he clearly
preferred his JAMO speakers. This was many years ago, not
done with any high-end equipment, yet, it was an interesting
experiment.
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Hold on a minute!
OK, so now when you have done that experiment we talked
about, posting in Swahili instead of English, how are we to
evaluate it?
On the negative side, nobody answered your question.
On the positive side, for once, nobody complained about
your question. In fact, nobody even complained about not
understanding you!!!??? 🙂
As for the question, since I assume you are at home or in the
vicinity, I am afraid I cannot give an answer that is useful to
you. The closest I've been to you is San José, where I might
make a few suggestions from memory, but I suppose that is
too far away. Maybe SY can help you out, but it is probably
too late now anyway. 🙂
Steve Eddy said:
OK, so now when you have done that experiment we talked
about, posting in Swahili instead of English, how are we to
evaluate it?
On the negative side, nobody answered your question.
On the positive side, for once, nobody complained about
your question. In fact, nobody even complained about not
understanding you!!!??? 🙂
As for the question, since I assume you are at home or in the
vicinity, I am afraid I cannot give an answer that is useful to
you. The closest I've been to you is San José, where I might
make a few suggestions from memory, but I suppose that is
too far away. Maybe SY can help you out, but it is probably
too late now anyway. 🙂
Hmmmm I was thinking the same thing.
I think Christer and I must be on the same wavelength today.... I was thinking pretty much along the same lines earlier today. How can you know what a particular recording should actually sound like. Normally anything done in a studio, has been mixed and modified way beyond what the original performance(s) was/were, so it is very difficult to say whether one speaker reproduces it more faithfully than another, they will just reproduce it differently you will never get studio sound at a live gig. I reckon most pop/rock music is eq'ed to make it sound better on the average persons speakers anyway, which may mean that certain recordings may actually sound better on lower end speakers.
Even with the classical music, how do you know where the mic's were when it was recorded, granted you know what instruments generally sound like, but do they sound the same when you are right in front, off to one side, behind the orchestra I ask the question, as I have only ever been in the cheap seats behind the orchestra, and have never really thought about whether it would sound different from another point in the room.
Regards,
Tony.
I think Christer and I must be on the same wavelength today.... I was thinking pretty much along the same lines earlier today. How can you know what a particular recording should actually sound like. Normally anything done in a studio, has been mixed and modified way beyond what the original performance(s) was/were, so it is very difficult to say whether one speaker reproduces it more faithfully than another, they will just reproduce it differently you will never get studio sound at a live gig. I reckon most pop/rock music is eq'ed to make it sound better on the average persons speakers anyway, which may mean that certain recordings may actually sound better on lower end speakers.
Even with the classical music, how do you know where the mic's were when it was recorded, granted you know what instruments generally sound like, but do they sound the same when you are right in front, off to one side, behind the orchestra I ask the question, as I have only ever been in the cheap seats behind the orchestra, and have never really thought about whether it would sound different from another point in the room.
Regards,
Tony.
Re: Hmmmm I was thinking the same thing.
That is the point. I don't want to know or even be able to
figure out where the mics were.
It does not matter much to me if it sounds like
sitting in front of the orchestra or at the back of the
third row, as long as the sound gives me a reasonable
impression of being in the concert hall. If you have been to
a number of concerts, in different halls, sitting in varios places
you have a general idea of how it should sound. If I can hear
from a recording that it was made at the Stockholm Opera or
at Covent Garden, then that is an added bonus, but it is not
important, to me at least, unless the recording gives the
impression of a hall with bad acoustics.
As for manufactured sound on classical recordings, that is a
common and serious problem. I am always hesitant, thinking
at least twice before buying anything recorded later than,
say 1965 or so. When they started to use multitrack tape
recorders, put close-up microphones everywhere in the
orchestra and trying to mix this to a coherent stereo image,
it all went wrong. I guess the 70's and 80's were the most
problematic period. It seems many companies have realized
the problems and try to get back to simpler microphone
techniques etc. to get a more natural sound. I don't you if
will believe me, but many mono recordings from the 1930's
give a much better impression of natural acoustics than many
modern stereo recordings do.
I should add, though, that my main reason for buying mostly
old recordings is the musical aspect, not the sound quality.
Although I prefer good sound if possible, I can put up with
almost anyting if the musical merits are high enough. Or,
on second though, I can put up with almost any bad old recoding,
the bad modern ones are often harder to stand soundwise.
There are excellent modern recording too, of course.
wintermute said:
That is the point. I don't want to know or even be able to
figure out where the mics were.
It does not matter much to me if it sounds like
sitting in front of the orchestra or at the back of the
third row, as long as the sound gives me a reasonable
impression of being in the concert hall. If you have been to
a number of concerts, in different halls, sitting in varios places
you have a general idea of how it should sound. If I can hear
from a recording that it was made at the Stockholm Opera or
at Covent Garden, then that is an added bonus, but it is not
important, to me at least, unless the recording gives the
impression of a hall with bad acoustics.
As for manufactured sound on classical recordings, that is a
common and serious problem. I am always hesitant, thinking
at least twice before buying anything recorded later than,
say 1965 or so. When they started to use multitrack tape
recorders, put close-up microphones everywhere in the
orchestra and trying to mix this to a coherent stereo image,
it all went wrong. I guess the 70's and 80's were the most
problematic period. It seems many companies have realized
the problems and try to get back to simpler microphone
techniques etc. to get a more natural sound. I don't you if
will believe me, but many mono recordings from the 1930's
give a much better impression of natural acoustics than many
modern stereo recordings do.
I should add, though, that my main reason for buying mostly
old recordings is the musical aspect, not the sound quality.
Although I prefer good sound if possible, I can put up with
almost anyting if the musical merits are high enough. Or,
on second though, I can put up with almost any bad old recoding,
the bad modern ones are often harder to stand soundwise.
There are excellent modern recording too, of course.
- Status
- Not open for further replies.