Home General Asylum

General audio topics that don't fit into specific categories.

Re: IMO the quality of the recording process to produce the software

I'm neither a recording engineer or a qualified electrical engineer but I feel an inordinate amount of blame placed at the feet of audio hardware for the lack of perceived "live sound experience" should be reallocated squarely in the realm of software. If the mic serving as feed for any recording has any degree of overshoot, ringing, frequency aberrations, phase anomalies whatever, just at this jumping off point alone the final result will be flawed as compared to "live sound", the ensuing electronic processing/manipulation regimen notwithstanding. And this problem increases in scale in direct proportion to the scale of the musical event which is why small scale intimate recordings typically fare better than Mahler in this regard. Hardware capabilities, I'm sure, can be improved upon furhter but I don't see the holy grail of live sound in my room being the end result.

Further, it is because of these "truths" that I do not hold up live musical performances as the absolute standard by which to judge the relative performance of an audio system. A more reasonable standard seems, to me, to be to compare one's system's prowess to an absolute standard that recognizes and takes into account the inherent limitations of current recording technology/methodology, if, in fact, you believe them to exist.


This post is made possible by the generous support of people like you and our sponsors:
  McShane Design  


Follow Ups Full Thread
Follow Ups
  • Re: IMO the quality of the recording process to produce the software - acres verde 13:30:51 03/21/07 (0)


You can not post to an archived thread.