|
Audio Asylum Thread Printer Get a view of an entire thread on one page |
For Sale Ads |
174.137.241.221
In Reply to: RE: Wow. posted by Kal Rubinson on July 10, 2012 at 15:32:19
>>They do not share the same attributes because two-channel fails to provide the spatial characteristics (as well as the tonal characteristics) of the ambiance of the original performance site.<<
no, you misinterpreted my original post ... they (venue & room) share the same attributes in that both the venue and the room have reflections issues related to the music coming from the front of the stage. Does not mean that the spatial characteristics of the recorded venue are re-captured or duplicated via a 2 ch system (or even a MC system for that matter) with any such room (every room, like every venue would be different).
Please re-read my posts.
tb1
Follow Ups:
I am with Kal and Robert on this.
Thanks for proving further insight into the basis for your distorted views on the nature of sound, acoustics and recordings. You have made it clear that you lack an accurate understanding . You are not going to get that by arguing defensively for your sophomoric point of view. Listening to people with much more experience, like Kal and Robert, might help.
Also, listening to a wider range of live music, systems and recording might help too. But, so far, you have also have asserted that CD's sound better than SACD's, that CD's are indistinguishable from vinyl, and that you can get a good sense of recorded vs. live sound from rock concerts. You claim to have listened to classical recordings, but avoided the question of whether you have also attended live classical concerts to know what they are supposed to sound like. You also claim that your room can sucessfully recreate the sound of a live performance venue in stereo. You further claim that you have heard Mch - with what systems and recordings we don't know - and imply that you now know all about it, including that surround sound is faked, which may be true of many rock recordings, but not classical ones. As I said often before, it is not about the music, it is merely about the sound vs. a live standard, the recording venues and engineering practices. But, you assert that is classical snobbery and that those differences do not matter.
As always, you are entitled to your opinions. The rest of us will have to decide whether they have any credibility or usefulness. So far, I do not think you have a good track record.
> > But, so far, you have also have asserted that CD's sound better than SACD's, that CD's are indistinguishable from vinyl, and that you can get a good sense of recorded vs. live sound from rock concerts. < <
What?
I never said any of those items on an absolute level, in fact all you've done is read snippets, made general assumptions ... and came to the wrong conclusions.
> > But, you assert that is classical snobbery and that those differences do not matter. < <
No, no "assertion" ... simply ... I questioned snobbery.
Honestly, you really need to work on your comprehension skills.
> > Thanks for proving further insight into the basis for your distorted views on the nature of sound, acoustics and recordings. You have made it clear that you lack an accurate understanding . < <
How ironic!
tb1
"they (venue & room) share the same attributes in that both the venue and the room have reflections issues related to the music coming from the front of the stage. "
Right but that is only a portion of the entire picture. We do not listen only to signals impinging on us from the front. When you begin to consider the contribution of the listening room, the differences grow considerably.
> > Right but that is only a portion of the entire picture. We do not listen only to signals impinging on us from the front. When you begin to consider the contribution of the listening room, the differences grow considerably. < <
Well, at least YOU understood my meaning.
Well, ... obviously sound travels ... and obviously we do not listen only from the front ... and I've already mentioned that reflections make rooms and venue sounds quite different ... so therefore their "contributions" would influence each accordingly ... hence the same attributes.
tb1
".... and I've already mentioned that reflections make rooms and venue sounds quite different ... so therefore their "contributions" would influence each accordingly ... hence the same attributes."
I think I get what you mean but I believe it is only tenuously relevant. You seem to be saying that they would have the same parameters, e.g., a direct sound (relatively similar) and a site-dependent ambiance (decidedly not the same). That is like saying that a red apple and a green apple have the same attributes (OK) without acknowledging how they differ in the value of one of the significant attributes (color).
The ambiance of the original performance site, contained on the recording and improperly conflated into the direct sound, would, on playback, be added to the ambiance contributed by the listening room which is irrelevant to the performance. This imposes a difference which can be ameliorated with multichannel recording and suitable acoustical treatment in the listening room.
I think this is enough logic-jousting for me on this topic.
Kal
> > This imposes a difference which can be ameliorated with multichannel recording and suitable acoustical treatment in the listening room. < <
Matter of perspective, based on my experience, you're still quite a distance from recreating that actual "live" venue within the confines of your room, and that alone is not what I'm after ... but if THAT aspect of reproduction is ones main goal, well ...
> > I think this is enough logic-jousting for me on this topic. < <
Me too.
tb1
Yes, no sound system or format is perfect. None of us has proclaimed that to be true. But, some are better than others. I do not think you are denying that, which is self evident. And, from a lot of experience with both stereo and Mch reproduction, several of us here and elsewhere consider Mch reproduction to be quite a significant leap in the direction of more closely capturing the sound, and hence, the musical experience of the real thing live.
Remember, our Mch systems also play in stereo, too. So we can and have done our own careful comparisons of Mch vs. stereo. For Robert, Kal and I, that is measured, admitedly imperfectly and subjectively, against our considerable live concert going experience with classical music, sometimes with the same orchestras in the same halls as the recordings. Occasionally, we were there when a recording was made live before an audience. At least, I have had that experience on several occasions. And, all that factors into our collective assessment, which greatly favors Mch over stereo in terms of delivering an obviously better sonic replica of the live experience.
As I said, over and over, it it not about the music genre. I respect rock and its creative spirit. And, I have been to more rock concerts than you might expect in both large and smaller venue situations. But, the simple, verifiable fact is there are many, many more successful Mch recordings in the classical genre than there are in any other. I honestly do not think that Mch can be fully appreciated without using classical music and live concert experience with it as a basis for comparison. But, those who prefer other musical genres may well prefer stereo, as there is a very limited set of recordings and live listening opportunities under decent acoustic conditions in those genres to be able to appreciate Mch's sonic capabilities. The genres differ considerably in the technical possibilities and goals of sound engineers to capture a certain sonic experience.
So, if you have truly signed off, I wish you well and happy listening with the music and sound you prefer.
> > Remember, our Mch systems also play in stereo, too. < <
Well, that's like claiming that a Ford Exploder is a great rear powered vehicle in 2w drive ... AND ... it's even better as a 4x4.
I've done the comparison ... despite what you claim ... a finely tuned, highly refined, dedicated 2ch system offers distinct advantages over the vast majority of MC/HT systems in 2ch mode.
> > Occasionally, we were there when a recording was made live before an audience. At least, I have had that experience on several occasions. And, all that factors into our collective assessment, which greatly favors Mch over stereo in terms of delivering an obviously better sonic replica of the live experience. < <
Nice, a requirement that I fully understand and appreciate.
That said, my need for recreating all the details of a specific venue are ONLY equal to the limited amount of software which I possess that were recorded in such proper fashion. The majority of my software does not qualify. But as a true audiophile, certainly, I favor software that was recorded well/live ... and I wish to recreate that event within the confines of my room. As far as the rest of my software, my "tuned" room/environment will supply it's own qualities, much like the Rogers Centre in Toronto supplied Roger Waters his own ... ummm ... "ambiance". (please don't assume I'm claiming that my room = the Rogers Centre)
Hells, bells, why would I want to recreate that specific event within my room, when I can simply play my best-mastered The Wall ... and melt into a pseudo live performance - one that my system provides on a routine basis.
> > As I said, over and over, it it not about the music genre. I respect rock and its creative spirit. And, I have been to more rock concerts than you might expect in both large and smaller venue situations. But, the simple, verifiable fact is there are many, many more successful Mch recordings in the classical genre than there are in any other. < <
Fine, then simply state that next time. Instead, you attempted to minimize my musical taste (of which you were not truly aware) simply as a tool to trump my experiences.
> > But, those who prefer other musical genres may well prefer stereo, as there is a very limited set of recordings and live listening opportunities under decent acoustic conditions in those genres to be able to appreciate Mch's sonic capabilities. The genres differ considerably in the technical possibilities and goals of sound engineers to capture a certain sonic experience. < <
Exactly, as I stated above ... but please note: any highly refined system that offers specific superior attributes, based on any musical genre, such as R&R, will also exhibit those same advantages with other forms of music.
Look, the thing is ... I'd much rather own a great highly refined 2ch system than own a very good off-the-shelf MC system ... but that's just me(*).
((*) well, in the perfect tb1 world, I'd own both)
tb1
TBone says, "Exactly, as I stated above ... but please note: any highly refined system that offers specific superior attributes, based on any musical genre, such as R&R, will also exhibit those same advantages with other forms of music"
Never having been to a live R&R concert in a hay field/similar environment or listening to a band through a PA system, I will never know about reproducing those sonic characteristics in my living room. I suppose stereo is more than adequate since there is no back/side of a hall to reflect anything (sort of like an anechoic chamber (SMILE)).
Stereo will never accurately reproduce multiple room acoustics (real four walls/ceiling) IMHO. Regards. Peace.
> > Never having been to a live R&R concert in a hay field/similar environment... < <
Actually, I have been to outdoor concerts (without walls) but that's neither here nor there ... especially considering that the quote you used above was taken completely out of context (I wasn't referencing acoustics).
tb1
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: