|
Audio Asylum Thread Printer Get a view of an entire thread on one page |
For Sale Ads |
86.211.108.140
In Reply to: RE: Some Recent SACD Acquisitions posted by Disbeliever on June 21, 2014 at 01:49:54
I did post a comment on a Takemitsu SACD (How Slow the Wind) back in the day.On one BIS CD I do seem to have a rather strange dynamic range but can't generalize it. I mostly have a problem with the overall tone of their recordings which I always find wrong. I actually have more CDs than SACDs from Bis but to me, they share the same basic sound.
As I said, I admire their catalogue and musical choices, but definitely not their engineering ones. Glad it's at least two of us, I feel a bit less lonely now :)
Edits: 06/21/14 06/22/14Follow Ups:
I am also not a BIS fan, I tend to avoid them.
I have not yet heard a BIS recording that has too much dynamio range and I have hundreds of them. The quiet passages are quiet because the musicians played them that way. I can think of a few reasons why someone might not like the wide dynamic range:
1. They are listening as background music while multitasking.
2. They have no clue as to what live classical music sounds like while sitting in a good seat of a good hall at a good concert.
3. Their domestic situation precludes listening at natural concert levels
4. Their system is incapable of reproducing orchestral sound at a natural row 10 concert volume.
If a system is incapable of producing undistorted sound peaks of at least 115 dB at the listening position then will be inadequate for reproducing large scale classical music in a natural way, except for a few recordings that are made with a more distant perspective, in which case 105 dB might suffice. It will be necessary to find a volume control setting at which a recording sounds "correct". This will require setting the correct playback level within about 1 dB and will be impossible with some equipment that has larger volume control steps.
I find the sound quality of BIS recordings to be mixed, with some of the recordings having a bit of a grainy sound. Their tonal balance is fine on a system that has been voiced so that the vast majority of recordings sound natural.
Tony Lauck
"Diversity is the law of nature; no two entities in this universe are uniform." - P.R. Sarkar
I only have one BIS CD where dynamic range is an issue. I have to turn the volume much higher than any of my other CDs to get any sound. Granted, it's strings played pianissimo but still.Mostly my problem with BIS is with their inability to make natural sounding recordings. But then I dislike Alia Vox too, which everybody else seems to celebrate. Though not sounding like BIS at all, I find them totally unnatural for different reasons. So it could just be that I'm weird.
I have countless Bach's cantatas by Suzuki and love them, but it's certainly not because when I close my eyes, it's like being there.
Edits: 06/21/14 06/21/14 06/21/14
And don't like simple coincident stereo.
How much live music do you hear each month?
Warmest
Tim Bailey
Skeptical Measurer & Audio Scrounger
Never been very excited about Jordi Savall and his Viola da Gamba stuff myself, but that has nothing to do with the record label's SQ.
BIS?
Stuff sounds plenty good to me and I have any number of their CD's and SACD's in my collection.
You do or do not have a problem with the dynamic range of BIS recordings?
To me, it's insane to claim that BIS's dynamic range is too wide, whatever else one may think about their SQ.
Chris
You're right I wasn't very clear. My main problem is NOT with dynamic range but when Disbeliever broached the subject, I realized he was describing something I was experiencing with ONE of my BIS CDs. I can't generalize it. I've amended my original answer to reflect that.What I can generalize is that I do not care at all for their sound for reasons exposed above. They sound like too much work has gone into the recording, too much processing... unnatural.
On a final note I'd like to add I do not buy CDs for their sound quality but for the music (otherwise I would have very few DG...). That's why I have quite a few BIS as I think they are great musically.
Edits: 06/22/14
Strange most people seem not to like DG recordings, ok I tend to be
a 18th century music fan and I have some fantastic sounding Archiv recordings.
Some Archiv maybe (I have a beautiful sounding version of Jean Gilles Requiem by Herreweghe), but overall, DG's not exactly a treat compared to other major labels. Of course there are exceptions within their output.
JB
I see that there is 2 different versions of "Gilles Requiem" on Archiv
which one is the one you have?
Hey,It's this one.
Totally beautiful, an underrated gem.
Edits: 06/23/14
Some of the Archiv records are OK. For many years I black-listed DG LPs and CDs for having horrible sound quality as the result of the use of multiple microphones and multiple channel recordings with post-production mixdown covering for incompetence in correct microphone placement. The recordings were suitable for mid-fi systems only and their faults were readily apparent on any high end system. No doubt there were a few exceptions, but I passed them by because I had already rejected the record label as failing to meet my sonic standards.
(Comments apply to orchestral recordings, solo and chamber recordings on this label are OK.)
Tony Lauck
"Diversity is the law of nature; no two entities in this universe are uniform." - P.R. Sarkar
At least in part. I used to avoid DGs like the plague. But after I got a pair of Gallo Reference 3 speakers with their no-crossover, polarity-coherent design I started "hearing" polarity " and found to some amazement that DGs -- some DGs at least -- sounded amazingly better when I switched to inverted polarity. Curiously, open reel tapes from DG showed the most marked improvement, although CDs and LPs benefited too. It was really strange.* I queried Gallo about this and heard back from one of their service people that "these speakers are extraordinarily sensitive to changes in polarity."
Edits: 06/26/14
I've been aware of polarity for decades and always listen both ways to see which sounds best. However, it is possible that I gave up on DG before I learned about polarity.
Tony Lauck
"Diversity is the law of nature; no two entities in this universe are uniform." - P.R. Sarkar
I find nothing wrong with Mahler Symp. No 6 Abbado SACD on DG sounds very good on my mch setup.
Edits: 06/23/14
The problem I had with orchestral recordings on the DG label was the complete lack of depth due to the use of multiple microphones. It was clear that the engineers and/or producers were utterly clueless as to the existence of depth, let alone sound stage. Presumably the multi-channel recordings don't have this problem. Have you listened to that Mahler 6 in two channel?
For some reason the Archiv recordings also seem to avoid the problem. I'm not sure whether it is just a different bunch of engineers and producers or it is the size of the ensembles being recorded.
Tony Lauck
"Diversity is the law of nature; no two entities in this universe are uniform." - P.R. Sarkar
Why on earth would I want to listen to SACD discs in Stereo ,when mch is so much better especially when not to the absurd ITU format.
Some of the Archiv cd's/sacd's I have are excellent and I even used a few for demos, then the performances some of them are just the best.
On Friday I was listening one of Magdalena Handel cd on a friend new Giya's loudspeakers, the recording of her voice sounded stunning.
I'm with Chris on this. I'm very happy BIS often gives us a little more dynamic range. It's closer to what I hear in a good hall, which can easily exceed 80 dB. Many assume the dynamic range in a concert hall isn't great, because it rarely gets what we consider "loud." Music in a hall can exceed what happens in homes is at the quiet end. As a good hall, with a good audience, has a very low ambient noise level, a tiny sound, like the gentlest tap on a triangle, can be exquisite.
Reproducing this at home is hard to do, as the ambient noise in most homes is pretty high, so reproducing pianissimo on a recording can be a problem unless you have a very quiet room, and a system that does the quiet stuff well. (Think Quad ESL57, the all-time champs at getting the quiet end right.)
I live in an apartment in a 100-year-old building, which is very quiet, but to get the ppp end of the range to survive, ventilation fans or a/c get turned off, as well as the refrigerator. And once the room is quiet, it helps to just relax for a few minutes, maybe sip a bit of good single malt, and let you ears and brain calm down.
With all the justifiable complaints for years about overly compressed "loud" recordings, I find the BIS approach refreshing.
WW
"A man need merely light the filaments of his receiving set and the world's greatest artists will perform for him." Alfred N. Goldsmith, RCA, 1922
A few hours ago I was at a live performance of Rossini's Cinderalla. I was sitting in the front row, some 20 feet from the soloists. The peak volume levels were well above 100 dB and I suspect that most people's systems would not be capable of reproducing these levels undistorted. If you try to play a wide dynamic range recording on a crippled system the results will be pathetic at best. If you want to listen to solo harpsichord, then Quad 57's will do a superb job.
I have no problem with the BIS dynamic range, but I do find that many of their recordings have a "grainy" sound quality. I've tried to correlate this to the listed equipment on the album art, but I have not yet found an explanation. Because of this problem, I do not consider BIS to be an "audiophile" label, but their musical selection is excellent and I have purchased hundreds of downloads at low prices via eclassical.com. Over the past two years the vast majority of my purchases have come via this web site because of the excellent musical content and the "daily specials". Most of these recordings have been in 44/16 or 44/24 format. Only the newest BIS recordings are at higher sampling rates, but these don't necessarily have better sound than the earlier 44/16 or analog tape recordings.
Tony Lauck
"Diversity is the law of nature; no two entities in this universe are uniform." - P.R. Sarkar
I found Quad ELS 57 unlistenable due to its concentrated beaming efect which others do not notice. I did use Quad 63,s many years ago but now much prefer sound & appearance from a TL speaker. The problem I found with some BIS SACD,s I constantly had to use the volume control to hear the quiet passages then turn it down when the loud passages are heard . Not a problem with other brands .Andrew Mcgregor did say on CD review that the disc he was playing you will have to turn up the volume on the quiet part but later denied it when asked to do so by Robert von Bahr BIS owner. I no longer buy any BIS discs.
Edits: 06/22/14 06/22/14
Good. Then quit your never ending belly aching about BIS. We have heard your incompetent opinion over and over in this thread and others ad infinitum. You have made your simple minded point while others look on, their minds boggled by your incredulousness.
Normally, when people complain about the dynamic range of a recording, it is because it has too little of it or the sound might be dynamically compressed in postproduction, like it is on many pop releases. Never before have I heard a self proclaimed "audiophile" complain about too much dynamic range. Are you suggesting that BIS does some unnatural post processing or gain riding to expand the dynamic range beyond what was heard in the hall? How would you know since you do not attend live concerts with good orchestras in good halls anyway? Or, are you proposing that they apply some artificial dynamic compression just so that you will be happy while no one else is?
Fortunately, I do not think many listeners agree with you and BIS' high recording standards will continue, unfazed by the loss of a lunatic fringe of listeners such as you.
Disbeliever has his opinions they maybe not yours but so be it, this is what makes this forum interesting. I am also not a big BIS fan, the dynamic range problems is not a Disbeliever only complaint, they are many who find it a problem, mine has mostly to do with the greyness of the sound.
And for sure is not one of my fav label. As we all know, there is no smoke without fire
There are two issues here. One of them is not anyone's entitlement to hold an opinion. That is a given. Another issue which is not my mission here is to tout BIS as some sort of ideal. Their recordings, their choice of repertoire, their Grammy awards, their positive reviews and their popularity among sa-cd.net and other forum denizens all speak for themselves and to the marketplace, whether you or I or disbeliever like them or not. Lord knows, there are labels I do not like and avoid buying, but BIS is not one of them.
The first real issue, which I raised, is how can a recording have "too much" dynamic range, as disbeliever alleges? Too much dynamic range is pretty unheard of in the annals of serious audiophiles, recording critics and listeners. Though, it is important to note that he has changed his tune on the subject. Originally, his complaint was that BIS recordings were at a lower average recorded level than many others, requiring that the volume control be, horrors!, turned up a bit, which is not the same as a mythical, "excessive " dynamic range problem. You can check out his earlier rants here at hi rez highway.
The second issue is disbeliever's incessant harping on the subject, not only here in many threads, but elsewhere, also repeatedly in many threads, usually completely off topic. He has a very unfortunate track record, as I and many others know on this and many other topics. Like zombies, his opinions once stated, will not die as he keeps repeating them. It is one thing to have an opinion, but quite another to go on and on repeatedly when few find his opinions, any of them, credible. There comes a point when our forebearance of his right to state an opinion is superseded by the need to abide by forum customs and a sense of courtesy to other forum participants and their own opinions.
FITZY :Perhaps you can point out where I have complained of too much dynamic range, this is your repeated comment not mine. What I am complaining of is that on some BIS SACD discs( which I do not experience on the other brands to the same degree) listening at a normal level when the quiet passages arrive I have to turn up the volume which makes the louder passages far too loud so I am continually having to adjust the volume levels.(is this your interpretation of too much dynamic range ?). One Saturday morning when listening to CD review on BBC Radio 3 Andrew McGregor the presenter said on a BIS disc he was playing that you will have to turn up the volume on the quiet passages, subsequently denied after intervention by the BIS owner, McGregor an excellent presenter but not in this case, then posted that I misinterpreted what he said.
Edits: 06/26/14 06/26/14 06/26/14
You did misrepresent what he said.
Gerald -
Your statement, even in the above, though you do not use the words " too much dynamic range", describes a situation where the dynamic range on the recording is too great for you and/or your system, room and environment. I am not trying to put words in your mouth, but you have described the situation to a tee using different words.
If the sound is agreeable on loud passages, but then too soft on low level ones, and, conversely, agreeable in soft passages, then too loud on high level passages, you are saying, in effect, there is too much dynamic range. This necessitates you adjusting the volume frequently, "gain riding", which is a no-no on the recording end of things among quality conscious recording engineers, like those at BIS, who want to preserve all of the natural dynamic range they can get.
Many pop music engineers reduce dynamic range either by using a certain amount of manual gain riding, or more likely, by using an electronic box that automatically and artificially compresses the sound, turning down the loud parts and boosting the soft parts. They do this so that their recordings can sound generally louder on average than the competition on radio or on MP3, advancing their appeal, they think. You are in your listening taking a page from that playbook of rock music engineers. Ouch, I knew that would hurt. But, you might consider investing in one of those electronic compression boxes for your system.
So, I have concluded that you are the first audiophile, as opposed to a casual rock listener on earbuds, I have ever heard of who complained about too much dynamic range. Understand that dynamic range is about the difference between the loudest and softest passages, not about where you set the volume knob to achieve a desired average playback level.
Your "debate" with McGregor and Von Bahr of BIS is not as you portray it. McGregor said that BIS recordings had to be turned up, period, in order to enjoy their dynamics at their best. I quite agree, BIS recordings do need a higher volume setting than do others. You, as usual, petulantly flew off the handle at the very idea of having to turn some recordings up and others down to achieve a satisfactory average playback level. Same story, same tune at sa-cd.net. We know your repeated, nonsensical rants well, dear Gerald. Look it up. It is there in the record in this forum and at sa-cd.net, as well. And, you have positioned this as a choice. Either, McGregor under pressure from Von Bahr was trying to hide the "ugly" truth about BIS recordings, or else your narrow views are right. What nonsense. Yes, it is clear that you misinterpreted what McGregor said.
You are reminiscent of dear Theresa, who was exposed for the lightweight she is, after she decided to deliver a scathingly negative review - completely unwarranted and unjustified - of the BIS Sound of Sibelius SACD at sa-cd.net. Countless others lambasted her because (a.) they found it to be a good recording, and, (b.) it was clearly payback on her part because BIS does not use her beloved DSD on the recording end. In spite of repeated denials of the truth, her problems were like yours, an unwillingness or inability to turn the volume up a bit and leave it there to let the music do its thing with wide dynamics, better bass response, etc.
I've learned a while ago that it is fruitless to argue with a moron who apparently is offended when he has to adjust the volume control so a recording will sound right. It is lunacy yet he prattles on....
Thanks, Krisjan, for your kind words. Yes, I know, but it has become a mission for me to correct his moronic statements, because the record of them lives on in forums and they give extremely bad counsel to innocent ears. I am hoping we can put this zombie-like and completely unjustified BIS tirade to bed, but I would not count on it.
I do not see what is moronic about accurate findings with BIS discs.
You = accurate? Since when?
The fact is that in hundreds of postings here and elsewhere on virtually every topic you have made a colossal, moronic fool of yourself. It's all the worse because you dismiss, deny, evade and obfuscate the truth that is right before your eyes in the thread responses, not just from me, but from countless others. It is pathetic that your mind works in that distorted way, but you are so full of yourself, that you do not even see that no one supports you. And, that is the problem for us all. Get some professional help, man. You need it.
Ok, let's test this hypothesis. Go over to sa-cd.net and post your findings. I am aware that you have a Forum daily word limit over there, because of the idiotic rants you have done before. That would be like the one recently where you were telling Erdo Groot of Polyhymnia he did not know what he was talking about and you knew better. So, instead, post a review, no word limit, of a BIS recording of your choice, in which you cite, as Theresa did, your courageous, but shocking findings on the "accurate" truth of what you say. You will find out in short order whether there is any "truth" in your assertions in the minds of many other sophisticated listeners. So far, absolutely no one here has supported your view in the least, but I am sure that is something you are totally insensitive to. We are all the morons, not you.
Fitzy: Moronic inaccurate , ranting, you post well of yourself. You should read the very first post by DOKTOR BRAHMS, he says "I never hear in the Hall what I hear on BIS recordings. The near-inaudible stretches of quiet music on the SACD are not true to what I hear live". This is also my experience and my main complaint with BIS recordings.Its you who needs urgent treatment .Your constant denigration of me ,the continuous misquoting, the twisting is unacceptable & totally out of order.
Edits: 06/30/14 06/30/14 06/30/14 06/30/14 06/30/14 06/30/14 06/30/14 06/30/14 06/30/14 06/30/14 06/30/14 06/30/14
.
Just one more, I see on SACD.net Fitzy is calling Doktor Brahms naive
Edits: 07/01/14
...that you completely missed the point of my "13th edit" post. It was in response to your 5 sentence post above that required 12 edits. You apparently suffer from premature (printed) ejaculation. I trust that some others got the sardonic humor in it though...
Edits have factually improved my post, they have certainly elicited a LOL response from yourself, Fitzy has not yet responded ,hope I have shut him up but doubt it. I do not understand what Flying Dutchman is posting ?
Carl, The way I understand your response is that only BIS record correctly, all other Classical Music labels have got it wrong by using compression ?. It is only with BIS that I experience an annoying volume control dynamic range problem which is why I will not buy any more of their SACD,s sorry if this upsets you.
Edits: 06/27/14 06/27/14 06/27/14 06/27/14 06/27/14 06/27/14
It does not upset me. Don't buy them. But, you have said and said and said this over and over and over again. You have made your point for all to hear. Your repetition like a broken record is what us upsetting. I do not see the groundswell of agreement with your view. So, let's move on.
I have no idea what is causing your problem with BIS - your ears, your brain, your system, the ambient noise in your room or all of the above. I have no similar problem with BIS nor do recording critics nor do any other listeners I know at a proper steady volume control setting.
Several others have posted they do not like BIS for SQ for which I have no issue one other if I remember correctly for dynamic range. OTH you still maintain BIS record correctly and all the other Classical labels are using compression is this your take or not, so far you avoid giving an answer.
As I said, there is no groundswell of agreement with you as your statement bears out. Repeated posting will not change that.
I am not saying BIS gets it right and everyone else is wrong or that others use compression.. I am saying that BIS' average recorded level is lower than most, that is all. In my experience, that means it needs to be turned up typically by about 3-3.5 dB vs., say, a Channel Classics, assuming similar program material like full orchestra. 3dB is not a lot. That may vary for chamber music or other genres. There is no standard in the music recording business by which to say one level is right and another is wrong.
We have had this discussion before. As Yogi said, it's like déjà vu all over again. We also discussed the need to turn the volume down, not up, on other labels, especially chamber music on the fine Praga Digitals label and others. I find my optimum volume control settings for Mch SACD varying from -8 to -22 on an arbitrary relative dB scale, which is meaningless in absolute terms. One learns over time to be able to get the level right before playing based on the label. If not, a few minor adjustments on the remote in the first minute or two while listening will get it right. I do absolutely no gain riding. My neighbors do not complain about excessive noise and I do not feel as though I am missing any low level detail.
If BIS recorded at the same level as all the well known Classical Labels then I would not have a problem with BIS dynamic range which I find unacceptable.
Edits: 06/28/14 06/28/14
It doesn't matter what level BIS records at. If they record 3.5 dB lower than some other record label then you turn your volume control up 3.5 dB. It's completely irrelevant. You do that once, before you press "Play". And then if you are going to play the other record label you turn it back when the BIS recording is done. Actually, the requirement to adjust the volume this way applies to every recording. There will be one and only one correct level for playback for each recording to sound its best. The actual volume control setting will be radically different for solo harpsichord music and a Mahler symphony.
Some of the BIS recordings have a tendency to sound a bit thin if you don't make the loud parts very loud. They are recorded from a closer perspective than some other labels. If your system can't handle producing the needed volume then you will have to turn the loud parts down to an unnaturally low level. They may still sound OK to you, but they will not be correct. At this point, the quiet parts will then be way too quiet. If that is your problem then you need a system with the ability to put out more clean volume and/or more solid bass. I suggest you go to a symphony concert and listen to a Mahler symphony from row 5. This will calibrate your ears to the reality of good reproduction.
As I said before, the sound on BIS is very good, but it is not as good as that found on Channel Classics, which is excellent, indeed world class. BIS does have a huge catalog and low prices via eclassical.com so I have many of their recordings and am well familiar with their sound. It is not world class because Bissie is not a total and complete sonic fanatic, which is what one must be to produce world class recordings. However, Bissie gets the dynamics correct.
Tony Lauck
"Diversity is the law of nature; no two entities in this universe are uniform." - P.R. Sarkar
BIS sound not as good as Channel Classics, I fully agree. It does matter at what level the recording is made, I do not have to adjust the volume when listening to excellent Channel Classics. Whilst my listening room is only just over 12ft wide it is 26ft long so I can sit equidistant between front & rear speakers when listening to surround sound SACD, BD & HT. Bissie does not get the dynamics correct for me Channel Classics does. Just played part of a BIS Sibelius disc, I found it sounds thick not thin as you describe and very poor immediately after playing a Channel Classics disc
Edits: 06/29/14 06/29/14 06/29/14 06/29/14 06/29/14 06/29/14 06/29/14
"What I am complaining of is that on some BIS SACD discs( which I do not experience on the other brands to the same degree) listening at a normal level when the quiet passages arrive I have to turn up the volume which makes the louder passages far too loud so I am continually having to adjust the volume levels."
Monsieur Jourdain in Moliere's Bourgeois Gentilhomme spoke prose without knowing it. You complain about dynamic range without knowing it.
Tony Lauck
"Diversity is the law of nature; no two entities in this universe are uniform." - P.R. Sarkar
I see it as bad engineering rather than too much dynamics
Edits: 06/26/14
Call it by another name. Deny what you, yourself, have described in detail. See it as you wish. But, since you know nothing about engineering, your opinion, as usual, is worthless.
With continuous deliberate misinterpretations in your posts your opinions are totally worthless as far as I am concerned . I have spent over 50 years in the Hi-Fi Industry as Manufacturer, Retailer also with considerable experience of Live v recorded sound. Whilst I am not an engineer and have never claimed to be one I have been in communication with the Industries top audio consultants over the years when needing advice. I recommend that you read Doktor Brahms posts again re the problems with BIS which you ignore but are happy to continually attack me. They say attack is the best means of defense.
Edits: 06/30/14 06/30/14 06/30/14 06/30/14 06/30/14 06/30/14 06/30/14 06/30/14 06/30/14 06/30/14 06/30/14 06/30/14
Gosh, I am all broken up about your low esteem for my opinions.
It is really quite sad to see someone become all washed up and a has been like you are. Although given your track record here and elsewhere, I have little doubt that you are considerably embellishing your supposed credentials. There is no evidence whatsoever that you are in touch with reality, let alone the art and science of modern recording or even, unfortunately, basic sanity.
It is quite amazing that you do not see how negatively others view you. Most silently look on either laughing at you or incredulous as you twist and turn, repeat and repeat yourself, go into tirades and rants, usually over insignificant matters. Yet, you absorb nothing, not even from recognized experts like Erdo Groot, Robert Von Bahr, Kal Rubinson, etc. You argue and argue as if you are someone so important and gifted who knows better than anyone, but your words and demeanor betray you for what you are, as here once again. I have seen no evidence whatsoever in any forum that anyone, not just me, believes you have any credibility at all,
I did not start this thread it was Doktor Brahms, so like any AA Forum member I can make my contribution . it makes no sense that you keep on accusing me of repeating myself even if this is the case, because you do so yourself.I could not care less that you object to my opinions just as broken up as you are ha..Interesting to find that you still continue to ignore/avoid the main point of the thread the problem of BIS sound not being as heard by Dok. Brahms in the Concert Hall ,( you always profess to be well versed in Concert Hall sound) because I agree with Doktor Brahms you are only interested in attacking me as a diversion refusing to address the BIS problem It is you who are showing you have no credibility.Robert von Bahr does not produce SACD,s that I want to purchase.As for Erdo as a recording engineer he records to the ITU standard, all I am saying is that I do not find this standard suitable for reproduction in a typical domestic environment . Penguin Guide says rear speakers need only be small, again I agree.As for Kal I fully recognise that he is a very accomplished technical reviewer but as for SQ I do not always have to agree with his opinion especially on speaker SQ.
Edits: 06/30/14 06/30/14 06/30/14 06/30/14 06/30/14 07/01/14 07/01/14
The best stereo recordings involve no engineering other than placing two microphones at the right place and setting the volume level correct one time and never changing it. IMO this is the only way to get an excellent stereo recording, but it can be a crap shoot, unless one is blessed with an excellent venue and first class musicians. (I leave out the bit about selecting the equipment and making sure it is running properly.)
Tony Lauck
"Diversity is the law of nature; no two entities in this universe are uniform." - P.R. Sarkar
Not Stereo recording, surround sound is probably more difficult.
Edits: 06/26/14 06/26/14
Are you saying Royal Festival Hall, Albert Hall , Barbican are not good Halls for live concerts ?
Edits: 06/23/14
Post a Followup:
FAQ |
Post a Message! |
Forgot Password? |
|
||||||||||||||
|
This post is made possible by the generous support of people like you and our sponsors: