|
Audio Asylum Thread Printer Get a view of an entire thread on one page |
For Sale Ads |
146.90.25.92
In Reply to: RE: Live versus Computer Classical Music posted by Sprezza Tura on August 26, 2014 at 10:45:13
Wasn't. My post was about those here who have said consistently that they don't understand terms like imaging, space and other attributes in reproduced sound.
Follow Ups:
Those terms, or ANY terms related to HiFi should NEVER enter the mind while listening to live music.
This is the result of audiophiles being poisoned by the dreck that reviewers insert in their reviews.
I can't wait for the day somebody posts about a hall or venue having "tube like" qualities.
Now that's goddamn funny.
Hey, I've actually thought that!
I have a musician friend who supported herself by busking in the London Underground while completing her PhD in musicology. As she found out the hard way, one doesn't continue to busk without joining the buskers' union. Admission to this union requires passing an audition. The union schedules the time and place its members play. She had been scheduled to play at a tube station that was blown up on 7/7, but fortunately she missed the scheduling message.
Tony Lauck
"Diversity is the law of nature; no two entities in this universe are uniform." - P.R. Sarkar
That reads like the ghost of dearly departed Douglas Adams penned it
You have a legitimate claim.
It is rather frightening. I have 6 or 7 concerts coming this month and next..maybe I will check the hall for PRAT, "air", and soundstaging..LOL!!!!
You should walk around the venue doing a clap-echo test. I'm sure you'll get lots of weird looks. ;-)
My post was about those here who have said consistently that they don't understand terms like imaging, space and other attributes in reproduced sound.
Who are these imaginary inmates that post such things consistently?
nt
...I'm still looking for those inmates who you claim, "said consistently that they don't understand terms like imaging, space and other attributes in reproduced sound."
fmak could have written about his concert experience in a positive way. As usual, he used it as a way to accuse others of imaginary failings.
fmak's posts say a lot about him as a person.
my blog: http://carsmusicandnature.blogspot.com/
His quote verbatim, "My post was about those here who have said consistently that they don't understand terms like imaging, space and other attributes in reproduced sound.
Since his post was about 'those here who have said'..., I was wondering who they are. He has yet to produce any evidence that these people exist and if they do, where have they posted consistently about not understanding the terms above? Perhaps it was his imagination or on an imaginary forum. ??
As usual, you used your response as a way to accuse him of imaginary failings.
Your posts say a lot about you as a person.
PS: Apparently, no one in this forum "listens to peanut sized speakers 1-2 metres away and deny that imaging, tonal accuracy, image height, depth and width matter" - what's the problem?
I am immune to these pointless accusations or insinuations. As you said, just shows himself up.
read and won't comprehend or assimilate. Only a machine under instruction will look for an exact match of words.
....someone with a wild imagination who made the statement:
My post was about those here who have said consistently that they don't understand terms like imaging, space and other attributes in reproduced sound.
I was simply asking where these posts might exist as I don't recall any group of inmates who consistently didn't understand the terms you listed above.
You don't need to wait' it's all there to access.
ie halls like Concertgow, Boston etc (long rectangular) have excellent acoustics.
60s halls are terrible and need modifications ie Festival Hall London.
Berlin was very ordinary when I was there years ago.
The Royal Festival Hall has had 'flying saucers' fitted to improve acoustics and this works. Festival Hall has had Helmhotz resonators fitted to offset it's defect etc.
If no one listened critically to concert halls and learned from mistakes made there would not be such a thing as a good sounding concert hall.I remember H. Pearson's most "credibility enhancing" moment - for years he had complained about how the CARNEGIE had lost its magic after a major renovation. He would say it had a glassy sound LONG before they removed the stage floor and found massive mounds of broken glass underneath.
The same critical facilities you use to make an enjoyable system for "music in the home" are used in concert halls. Don't be so childish. Why couldn't a hall have a tube-like sound? Words and phrases are used to communicate an idea - if the concept is shared by the listener then the idea is made plain.
It is not as if the great halls used (inept) computer models to come up with their sound - it was experience built upon the antecedents of architects who knew what they were doing from personal experience and from the knowledge of those who came before; who spoke and wrote in a nomenclature both understood, and hence, were able to use this knowledge in the real world.
The halls that have broken with the tried and true end up relying on gimmicks and kludges, after their completion and often for YEARS after their completion, to sound acceptable as opposed to "good".
Have never been to the ROYAL ALBERT but cannot imagine a round hall sounding anything but horrible. Was the ROYAL ALBERT the first "who needs to pay any attention to the history of hall acoustics" hall?
Edits: 08/27/14
The Royal Albert certainly used to have a reputation for horrible acoustics. However, fmak's close in seating position would have done a good job of hiding these characteristics, assuming they hadn't been somehow "fixed".
Tony Lauck
"Diversity is the law of nature; no two entities in this universe are uniform." - P.R. Sarkar
The Royal Albert certainly used to have a reputation for horrible acoustics.
True, true but they were greatly improved over thirty years ago following the installation of some innovative saucer-like diffuser thingies. The age-old joke that used to do the rounds that the Hall was the best value venue in the land because one got to hear a concert twice was no longer fair, not that that stopped us repeating the quip.
I remember going to e.g. Proms-season period band concert performances of Handel operas (James Bowman? - I may well still have the programme) with very acceptable acoustics back in the late '80s. Which, for a hall that size and shape, is not to be sneezed at.
However, fmak's close in seating position would have done a good job of hiding these characteristics, assuming they hadn't been somehow "fixed".
See above - you're thirty years minumum out of date. Fmak's points are fair comment.
I agreed with fmak's post. And yes, I'm out of date. Other than some recordings, my knowledge of the hall is limited to a 1950's movie. :-)
Tony Lauck
"Diversity is the law of nature; no two entities in this universe are uniform." - P.R. Sarkar
and posting way back here, as humbly as I can, to say that I agree with your original post. Live music can provide experiences that are transformational. What I really love is how that nearly electric feeling can be recalled for years. I hope you enjoy your memories of the evening you posted about for many years to come.JE
Edits: 08/26/14
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: