Geek
Headphoneus Supremus
- Joined
- May 5, 2002
- Posts
- 1,810
- Likes
- 10
April 3rd, 2004.
Today Alexander Markov performed Concerto No. 1 in D major by Paganini. Accompanying him was the Bozeman symphony.
This has got to be the best live performance I've ever heard before in terms of the level of virtuosity reached by the soloist. There is no comparison (for those of you who have a recording of Markov playing Paganini's No. 1, you have a very good idea).
The best part about it was that it was a ten minute drive from my house to the symphony. Markov appears once or twice per decade in Bozeman.
What I really wanted to talk about was sonics: what was the sound of the performance? How did the soloist appear, on a sonic level? What was the presentation like?
I was located on the main floor, about a third of the way back from front (farther forwards than the infamous "halfway point") and located right from center.
I think that audiophile recrordings, equipment, and anything else has got it all completely wrong when it comes to solo violin.
As many of you know, I play the violin myself and hear myself play, obviously, several hours of the day. However, what makes this important is (1) I have a recording of the EXACT SAME PLAYER playing the EXACT SAME PIECE; (2) This is from an AUDIENCE perspective and therefore represents the audiophile philosophy of recreating the performance.
It is point two that I must emphasize; it's a point that seems long forgotten when one listens to all of this gear and then heads to the concert hall only to be disappointed in how far removed high end equipment can be from an actual performance.
To put it bluntly, the average head-fi'er would say that "it lacked detail, had no highs, and the sound was so veiled that I felt like turning the volume up."
Basically, live performances of classical solo violin literature, my hallmark standard for measuring the fidelity of equipment, are woefully colored on (1) recordings and (2) equipment.
Recordings make the performer seem to be two inches from your face; bright, brittle, and involving unnatural imaging in which the performer seems to move from stage left to right.
The actual sound of the same player, in this case markov, is that of pure sweetness. There was no bass, no midrange, and no high end. Instead, you hear a violin. There's none of that grainy hashy stuff that people call "texture" on equipment, it's there even on the orpheus, and it's not there in real life (mabye the recording is at fault). Instead, you hear the gutsy sound of a stringed instrument, and "detail" is a much different story.
I believe that, to some degree, audio is headed the wrong direction. Every piece of equipment that I have owned or own is too bright to be accurate with this kind of music, that's really the only problem. Too much detail, in the highs, and the highs are distorted too much on everything I've heard to even remotely resemble the pure beauty that I heard tonight.
The "veil" that people complain about in certain types of headphones that try to recreate a live classical performance, well, it's there for a reason, it's there because real life is that way. And it's a lot more so in real life, even from a position that's relatively close to the front of the stage.
Finally, smoothness. It deals with the highs, but also the midrange and bass. What I heard was absolute blend, liquid smoothness in every possible description. Even when a whole section of violins was playing, all that can be heard is this rich, powerful texture, far removed from the graininess that people falsely equivocate with live strings.
I bet that some of this has to do with the hall that the performance occured in: there is very little reverb, and the sound tends not to carry very far. The sound is dry and a tad boomy. I must concede this. These things can vary a lot between performances. However, I'm talking about a -----VAST----- difference between live and reproduced sound.
Just thought I'd let you guys know and I know that head-fi is the perfect place for someone like me to ramble about this sort of thing.
In case you guys are wondering, this was truly a marvelous experience. Mr. Markov is very very inspiring, especially to young violinists, and he is full of energy. With every chord his body would sway, moving naturally, fluidly, with little to no apparent effort. From my experience (I've looked at the Paganini concerto 1) it's definitely a huge challenge to play. In fact, the audience gave him a standing ovation after the first movement of the concerto alone! (The audience is normally highly professional in Bozeman, not clapping between movements at all). If this guy drops by to perform a concerto with your local symphony, which could happen, don't miss out on the opportunity to hear it.
Cheers,
Geek
Today Alexander Markov performed Concerto No. 1 in D major by Paganini. Accompanying him was the Bozeman symphony.
This has got to be the best live performance I've ever heard before in terms of the level of virtuosity reached by the soloist. There is no comparison (for those of you who have a recording of Markov playing Paganini's No. 1, you have a very good idea).
The best part about it was that it was a ten minute drive from my house to the symphony. Markov appears once or twice per decade in Bozeman.
What I really wanted to talk about was sonics: what was the sound of the performance? How did the soloist appear, on a sonic level? What was the presentation like?
I was located on the main floor, about a third of the way back from front (farther forwards than the infamous "halfway point") and located right from center.
I think that audiophile recrordings, equipment, and anything else has got it all completely wrong when it comes to solo violin.
As many of you know, I play the violin myself and hear myself play, obviously, several hours of the day. However, what makes this important is (1) I have a recording of the EXACT SAME PLAYER playing the EXACT SAME PIECE; (2) This is from an AUDIENCE perspective and therefore represents the audiophile philosophy of recreating the performance.
It is point two that I must emphasize; it's a point that seems long forgotten when one listens to all of this gear and then heads to the concert hall only to be disappointed in how far removed high end equipment can be from an actual performance.
To put it bluntly, the average head-fi'er would say that "it lacked detail, had no highs, and the sound was so veiled that I felt like turning the volume up."
Basically, live performances of classical solo violin literature, my hallmark standard for measuring the fidelity of equipment, are woefully colored on (1) recordings and (2) equipment.
Recordings make the performer seem to be two inches from your face; bright, brittle, and involving unnatural imaging in which the performer seems to move from stage left to right.
The actual sound of the same player, in this case markov, is that of pure sweetness. There was no bass, no midrange, and no high end. Instead, you hear a violin. There's none of that grainy hashy stuff that people call "texture" on equipment, it's there even on the orpheus, and it's not there in real life (mabye the recording is at fault). Instead, you hear the gutsy sound of a stringed instrument, and "detail" is a much different story.
I believe that, to some degree, audio is headed the wrong direction. Every piece of equipment that I have owned or own is too bright to be accurate with this kind of music, that's really the only problem. Too much detail, in the highs, and the highs are distorted too much on everything I've heard to even remotely resemble the pure beauty that I heard tonight.
The "veil" that people complain about in certain types of headphones that try to recreate a live classical performance, well, it's there for a reason, it's there because real life is that way. And it's a lot more so in real life, even from a position that's relatively close to the front of the stage.
Finally, smoothness. It deals with the highs, but also the midrange and bass. What I heard was absolute blend, liquid smoothness in every possible description. Even when a whole section of violins was playing, all that can be heard is this rich, powerful texture, far removed from the graininess that people falsely equivocate with live strings.
I bet that some of this has to do with the hall that the performance occured in: there is very little reverb, and the sound tends not to carry very far. The sound is dry and a tad boomy. I must concede this. These things can vary a lot between performances. However, I'm talking about a -----VAST----- difference between live and reproduced sound.
Just thought I'd let you guys know and I know that head-fi is the perfect place for someone like me to ramble about this sort of thing.
In case you guys are wondering, this was truly a marvelous experience. Mr. Markov is very very inspiring, especially to young violinists, and he is full of energy. With every chord his body would sway, moving naturally, fluidly, with little to no apparent effort. From my experience (I've looked at the Paganini concerto 1) it's definitely a huge challenge to play. In fact, the audience gave him a standing ovation after the first movement of the concerto alone! (The audience is normally highly professional in Bozeman, not clapping between movements at all). If this guy drops by to perform a concerto with your local symphony, which could happen, don't miss out on the opportunity to hear it.
Cheers,
Geek
