In Reply to: I agree posted by M3 lover on July 17, 2016 at 10:12:45:
I'm sure the hall has something to do with it. More familiar with rock, but I know in Cleveland when you went to a concert you wanted to go to Public Hall rather than The Coloseum, the latter being built for basketball. It was much harder to manage sonically and did not sound as good, but it had the capacity. If a band only wanted to do three shows instead of ten that was the venue.
And then there's the studio. Every nuance of the sound can be controlled. I heard from a musician once there is/was a recording studio had a well dug to use as an echo chamber. I consider that going to pretty great lengths (or would that be depths) for the sound.
Many rock bands sounded better in studio, that may apply to artists in other genres, why not ?
So if you got a good hall or studio, good recording engineers, a really good recording and a really good system, It is conceivable it might sound better than a violin playing in a baseball stadium or something.
They had rock concerts at the stadium here before they tore it down. The capacity was bigger than anything around. Being open air it did not pose alot of audio problems except for the need for massive amounts of power.
This post is made possible by the generous support of people like you and our sponsors:
Follow Ups
- RE: I agree - JURB 11:11:47 07/17/16 (0)