|
General Asylum General audio topics that don't fit into specific categories. |
|
|
|
General Asylum General audio topics that don't fit into specific categories. |
|
In Reply to: Real vs Reproduced posted by Inmate51 on August 20, 2014 at 20:12:34:
Thanks to all of you for your replies! A special thanks to genungo for your lengthy, thoughtful and well-written reply. Andyr - I get what you wrote. :) No offense intended to other posters whom I didn't note!The impetus for my initial post was that I had been listening to some jazz on the stereo, and then had to do some practicing. Turned off the stereo, picked up my trumpet, and within a few minutes, I just HAD to post my thoughts!
This isn't news to me, I just needed to say it, largely because there seems to be so much mis-information and lack of understanding on this topic. Having gotten the sound virus way back in 1968 as a Junior in high school, I've been living and breathing this stuff for a long time. In my early years, I read Stereo Review, Audio, and the occasional TAS. During that time, I kept thinking about and looking for sound equipment which would "accurately" reproduce real musical instruments. Mind you, I was a music major after high school, so live/real instrument sound was around me every day.
It wasn't until I actually got some formal education in audio and acoustics that I realized the folly of my pursuit. This, of course, sent me off on an excursion into the science of microphone choice and placement and the use of multiple (>4) playback channels. This led to my downfall, officially becoming a sound geek. lol Also during that time, I can't tell you how many recitals and concerts I recorded. In Montreux, at the Institute for Advanced Musical Studies (IHEM), I recorded at least five performances a week. During that time, through the dogged efforts of a very smart and talented guy, Bob Minor, to whom I am eternally grateful, I was introduced to the physics of sound, and the works of Harry Olson, Leo Beranek, Howard Tremaine, Cyril Harris, and others. Prior to then, I had no idea that there was such a mature understanding of the science in those fields, but I guess that's part of why we go to college (other than to meet hot girls). So...
I learned about overtone structure, instrument sound dispersion/radiation patterns, room reflections, microphone characteristics, etc. And John Curl was kind enough to try to pound some basic understanding of circuitry into my thick head. That is when I had "the epiphany", and realized that no current loudspeaker or system could reproduce, "mimic", the live sound. And that still holds true today.
I started this thread partly for that reason, and partly because the general topic of "realism" has come up in a couple of other threads recently, so I thought it would be useful to address it head on.
Genungo makes an excellent point about recordings often (usually?!) not attempting to reproduce the actual original sound, but rather to create a new sound which paints a picture that the producer thinks we will like to hear. This is very true. It is very much analogous to painting.
:)
Edits: 08/21/14
This post is made possible by the generous support of people like you and our sponsors:
Follow Ups
- RE: Real vs Reproduced - Inmate51 08:14:39 08/21/14 (2)
- One othr point, a piano sounds very different. . . - jnr 12:11:01 08/21/14 (1)
- RE: One othr point, a piano sounds very different. . . - Inmate51 12:56:46 08/21/14 (0)
Top of Page ]
[ Contact Us ]
[ Support/Wish List ]
[ Copyright © 2024, Audio Asylum, all rights reserved ]
