|
Audio Asylum Thread Printer Get a view of an entire thread on one page |
For Sale Ads |
65.19.76.104
In Reply to: RE: Audio System Performance (a rant) posted by Presto on December 06, 2012 at 15:32:11
Here's a story of the interaction between a recording and the playback system, prompted by your post.
The other day I download a 96/24 recording of Bruckner's 7th. The performance had sounded good from the samples, but when I played the recording the sound was horribly harsh. As I was suffering all the way through I decided to play a game, namely to guess exactly what parametric EQ settings to use that would improve the recording. As it turned out, I wasn't right on, but a few minutes more tweaking and I had a "remastered" version of the recording that actually sounded very good, with a full sound stage, no dullness, but virtually all of the harshness from the strings long gone.
What were the engineers thinking? Or, more probably, what was wrong with the system they were using to monitor the recording? Who is right? Who is wrong? Which version of the recording is good or bad? Things for people who only listen to recordings to think about.
Tony Lauck
"Diversity is the law of nature; no two entities in this universe are uniform." - P.R. Sarkar
Follow Ups:
Tony -
A couple years ago I heard Garrick Ohlsson play one of his great Chopin concerts. The next day I went to the Hyperion site and downloaded his recording of the Polonaises. Dreadful: no bass, honky upper mids, distant, muffled, no highs, gritty, flat as a pancake. Overall, like the Bad Old Early Days of CD. Confirmed it on multiple systems, with CAL Sigma II, Metric Halo ULN2, and Universal Audio 2192 converters. Undeterred (or foolish) I bought his box set on CD, thinking I just had to have his work, no matter how bad it sounded. The CDs are terrific. (ahh - big sigh here)
I wrote Hyperion, asking how this could be. They replied that the files were identical to the CDs, and yes, they had listened to both and they sounded identical.
It remains a mystery to me. OK, the response I got from Hyperion is probably from some flunky charged with dealing with those pesky customers, so let's ignore that. But the difference between the FLAC files and the CD is so huge - someone at Hyperion must have heard both. WTF.
WW
New Orthophonic High Fidelity
Well, Tony...
We do quickly get into semantics issues with these discussions (such as me and the OP discussing what constitutes a good or bad recording, be it appraised by subjective or objective criterion).
In your case, you likely have no idea what would consitute an equalization transfer function that would "reverse" some of the EQ woes done in the recording / mixing / mastering process. What you did is subjectively EQ the recording - it SOUNDS better now.
This is all I mean by "good and bad" recordings. Those that sound good are good, those that sound bad are bad.
Now, for more semantics, you differentiate between those who listen to recordings and those who (I assume) listen to MUSIC.
Therein lies the rub: We listen to recordings OF music. The fact it's recorded music cannot be eliminated from the equation no matter how determined some of us are to do just that (me included).
Cheers,
Presto
"In your case, you likely have no idea what would consitute an equalization transfer function that would "reverse" some of the EQ woes done in the recording / mixing / mastering process. What you did is subjectively EQ the recording - it SOUNDS better now."
Yes, it sounds better, on a carefully calibrated (by listening and measuring) playback system that has been adjusted so that the majority of recorded music will sound good on it, leaving only outliers as sounding bad. By sounding better, I mean sounds like a plausible reproduction of a Bruckner symphony in a decent concert hall from a seating perspective consonant with the level of reverberation in the recording. I don't know that the recording was EQ'd other than the transfer function of the microphones and the position of the microphones in respect to the violins, which have different frequency balance at different radiation angles. It would have been better to have moved the microphones to slightly different locations, rather than do the fixup that I did, but, either way, a bad recording was transformed into a good one.
"The fact it's recorded music cannot be eliminated from the equation no matter how determined some of us are to do just that (me included)."
I expect recorded music to give me the same emotional experience as a live concert, with the exception of the doubt one experiences during an actual performance that the artists will actually pull it off.... I also expect that recordings of small ensembles and solo instruments will play back in a living room with equivalent sonic results to having the actual musicians present and performing. For small scale ensembles this is entirely possible, as I have demonstrated to my personal satisfaction by recordings that I have made.
Tony Lauck
"Diversity is the law of nature; no two entities in this universe are uniform." - P.R. Sarkar
"Yes, it sounds better, on a carefully calibrated (by listening and measuring) playback system that has been adjusted so that the majority of recorded music will sound good on it, leaving only outliers as sounding bad. By sounding better,"
This is my philosophy. Have a system that is very detailed and resolving despite being neutral. I think some audiophiles deplore "neutral" because they associate neutral with boring or pedestrian and run off to find some exciting "voicing" done by a boutique designer.
"I expect recorded music to give me the same emotional experience as a live concert,"
I get more spine chills and goose pimples at home actually. For me, a concert is a more engaging experience where I get to be in the company of the performers I want to see. The visuals are not virtual but real, as is the acoustics of the venue. It may not sound perfect, but it's the ACATUAL sound of THAT venue with THOSE musicians with THEIR PA equipment. Because there is a PA involved I don't worry so much. Unplugged instruments? That's surreal. From string and soundbox right to my ear. I guess for me is that although I enjoy both I just think of them as different ways to appreciate art which BOTH give me satisfaction, just in slightly different ways.
Cheers,
Presto
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: