|
Pro Audio Asylum Pro studio recording equipment and music production/industry. |
|
|
|
Pro Audio Asylum Pro studio recording equipment and music production/industry. |
|
In Reply to: RE: More about Absolute Polarity posted by b.l.zeebub on December 18, 2008 at 08:53:19:
If you care to research the AES recommendations for preservation of polarity, they recommend a forward motion of the driver cones as being the preferred way to mark the positive terminals. Bearing in mind that these standards were promulgated fairly late in audio history, many traditional older companies have elected to retain their older standards. I suspect Tannoy would be one of them. The fact that JBL has altered their designs reflects an acceptance of that AES recommendation (also part of the IEC recommendations, IIRC).
People like AKG, last I checked their website, openly admit that their headphones are reversed in polarity but say that is part and parcel of the AKG sound. Thus some companies retain their non standard procedures in order to satisfy their particular niche market.
The fact is, much like the dual standard for XLR pin outs, again covered by AES and IEC standards, there is absolutely no law forcing manufacturers to adhere to the standards recommended. Hence there is much confusion in the world of audio. Some can hear the differences, others can not. But with the various "standards" comes tremendous confusion, and many listeners are simply overwhelmed by trying to understand what problem is causing what anomaly in sound.
In addition, polarity inversions are used to "doctor" the sound. I have long stated that Phil Spector's "wall of Sound" was his use of inverting the polarity of the background instrumentals while keeping the vocals in correct polarity. The inverted polarity of the background instruments gives a large soundstage because it smears the sound of those players and seemingly enlarges the soundstage.
You can also hear this in the movie "The Commitments". In the newly released directors cut, the director explains how they recorded every one in the band playing their own instruments but reversed the polarity in respect to the lead singer in order that his voice project far more and sound significantly better in order to emphasize the pint in the story line.
In the Michael Crawford album, I notice that Crawford's voice is reversed in polarity to the other people in the duets he sings. I find that his voice is not the greatest, at least not in comparison to Barbara Bonney, a noted operatic singer, so to underscore that this is his album, there are polarity inversions.
In addition, the use of vocal synthesizers creates issues with polarities. The Aphex Aural Exciter, IIRC, inverts polarity and adds some EQ. Many singers use it inn order to get that husky voice which seems to be popular these days. Streisand, Ronstadt, Neil Diamond all use it. Compare their very early recordings to their latest ones and the quality of their voice has significantly changed. Then try inverting the polarity of their recordings and you will immediately hear the sound of their early recordings.
Polarity has become a tool to further emphasize certain aspects of music, when sheer volume differences are not enough. In a world where electronics are pretty much mandatory, that may not be so much of an issue. It is definitely an issue when you come to acoustical instruments and voices performing in real time and space without electronics, however.
Stu
This post is made possible by the generous support of people like you and our sponsors:
Follow Ups
- Interesting - unclestu52 10:59:08 12/18/08 (0)
Top of Page ]
[ Contact Us ]
[ Support/Wish List ]
[ Copyright © 2024, Audio Asylum, all rights reserved ]
