[jude]

[size=xx-small] Quote:

Originally posted by BenG Comparing headphone sound to live, un-amped sound is a joke....

Quote:

Originally posted by BenG I never said you shouldn't have a reference for what a real instrument sounds, in fact I meant that you will hear that this a very unattainable goal with recordings, headphones, speakers, and stereo euipment in general.

[/size]

I don't think anyone was suggesting that the only expectation one should have when comparing a live instrument or voice to a hi-fi-reproduced one is to be completely fooled into thinking that, for example, Arcadi Volodos, his concert grand, James Levine, and the Berlin Philharmonic Orechestra are actually physically there in your room with you. If that's all you'll accept, and nothing less, then, yes, such trickery will likely be unattainable for a long time to come.

The suggestions to Vertigo to listen to live performances, live instruments, were made largely because Vertigo said ....instruments that should have a slight edge to them like cymbals or string instruments lack that edge or bite, etc.... And so it was suggested (by me and others) that he actually listen to, for example, real cymbals and stringed instruments to see if indeed he comes to the conclusion that they have the edge to them that he currently thinks they should -- keep in mind that he mentions he's never heard live musical instruments.

No, my rig doesn't convince me that the performers are physically here with me. That I can tell, however, whether or not a change I make is getting me closer or further to what might be an unattainable goal makes the comparison quite useful, and so hardly a joke (to me at least).

 

[Beagle]

Great posts by jude and Quality Guru.

Live unamplified instruments are the best reference. And no headphone is going to reproduce the exact sound and timbre of an instrument.

The best it can do is remind you of how real instruments sound. In other words, you can be listening to headphones and say to yourself "This sounds like the live jazz combo I saw today".

Or you can be listening to live music and say to yourself "This reminds me of my Grado RS-1 or my Etymotic (for examples only)

If the live music sounds dull compared to your phones, or your phones sound shrill compared to the live music, then that is probably telling you that your headphones (or something in your system) are too bright.

This is why I have a problem with the Grado bowl pads, for example. In real life I don't hear an icy glaze tacked on to instruments and vocals. But with out the real life live "reference" your ear would eventually get used to this and you would find nothing wrong.

 

[RobertR]

I agree with jude & guru that you need a reference by which to judge headphones keeping in mind that a lot of cd's are equed heavily.
I have heard live combos and the er do a great job of reproducing cymbals etc.
I bet you could make the er's sound like other phones by manipulating the tone controls or equalization but you couldn't make other phones sound like the er if you get what I mean.

 

[Tomcat]

Quote:

The suggestions to Vertigo to listen to live performances, live instruments, were made largely because Vertigo said ....instruments that should have a slight edge to them like cymbals or string instruments lack that edge or bite, etc.... And so it was suggested (by me and others) that he actually listen to, for example, real cymbals and stringed instruments to see if indeed he comes to the conclusion that they have the edge to them that he currently thinks they should -- keep in mind that he mentions he's never heard live musical instruments.

Yes, exactly.

Vertigo,

I'd say jude is right. Your frame of reference might be quite erroneous. I'd say this is somewhat of a problem for many Head-Fiers: the music they like isn't necessarily played on acoustic instruments, and if they attend concerts they don't hear unamplified instruments. For them, achieving realism in musical reproduction is a somewhat fuzzy goal. Not that there was anything wrong with individual criteria. If someone likes popular or electronically generated music, he has every right to do so. And he has every right to tailor the sound of his system to what he likes best. But in that case, the idea of realism and high fidelity becomes even more of a moving target than it already is - considering how many variables influence the sound that comes out of one's system (starting with the specifics of the recording).

Vert, I'd follow the excellent advice of jude and the others. Try to listen to real-life instruments. Accept no substitutes!

 

[Vince]

Hi guys! Very interesting and valid comments regarding the importance of understanding the true acoustic sound of musical instruments.

However, I'm going to take a slightly different perspective here. Specifically, I don't think live performances in general provide "perfect" musical fidelity. On the contrary, I think a well-produced studio recording captures many more nuances in the music than a live performance. How many concerts have you seen where the band sounds as good as the recording?

In a studio, the engineers can take pains to mic the vocals and instruments in a way that would be difficult if not impossible to duplicate live.

A studio recording is more of an idealized environment and has its strengths. A live performance is a totally different experience of music and the beauty is more than just in the audio fidelity - seeing the expressions and the sweat on the musicians' faces, experiencing the audience reaction, and just "being there." It's kind of like going to a sporting event. You can see it better on TV, but it's sure great to be there for other reasons.

So, I guess my point is that Vertigo may not be totally off base just because he hasn't heard a live performance. He has quite a sensitive ear and knows what he likes and articulates it very well.

Vince

 

[jude]

[size=xx-small] Quote:

Originally posted by Vince Hi guys! Very interesting and valid comments regarding the importance of understanding the true acoustic sound of musical instruments. However, I'm going to take a slightly different perspective here. Specifically, I don't think live performances in general provide "perfect" musical fidelity. On the contrary, I think a well-produced studio recording captures many more nuances in the music than a live performance. How many concerts have you seen where the band sounds as good as the recording? In a studio, the engineers can take pains to mic the vocals and instruments in a way that would be difficult if not impossible to duplicate live. A studio recording is more of an idealized environment and has its strengths. A live performance is a totally different experience of music and the beauty is more than just in the audio fidelity - seeing the expressions and the sweat on the musicians' faces, experiencing the audience reaction, and just "being there." It's kind of like going to a sporting event. You can see it better on TV, but it's sure great to be there for other reasons. So, I guess my point is that Vertigo may not be totally off base just because he hasn't heard a live performance. He has quite a sensitive ear and knows what he likes and articulates it very well. Vince

[/size]

I still have yet to hear any hi-fi performance that exceeds, for example, that Bobby Short performance I was recently at. This is also true of some other live jazz performances I've heard, as well as many symphony orchestra performances I've heard.

Yes, I have yet to go to a rock concert that, from a purely sonic standpoint, exceeded a good recording of that same music. Your comments about the sweat, etc. make me wonder if you're speaking to rock/pop performances (and other heavily amplified live performances) specifically.

But if you've ever had anyone play a concert grand for you live, you would quickly realize that no recording or hi-fi system (at this time) can better it, only approach it.

To me, it's not so much a question of Vertigo being off base as it is having expectations that are possibly not rooted in reality. I still stand firmly by the belief that what a cymbal sounds like is best defined by actually hearing a cymbal. Regarding that instrument specifically, I have yet to hear a recording, no matter how idealized the studio situation that recorded it, that reproduced the cymbal more realistically than having someone strike one in my presence.

 

[yage]

Most rock concerts I've been to totally suck when it comes to sound quality. The cymbals sizzle inside your head while the bass jackhammers right through your guts. Still, nothing quite like it. I wouldn't trade that experience for something more 'polite'.

What's truly horrendous is the state of sound quality in movie theaters. Even with all the DTS/Dolby Digital hoopla, I'd rather they leave out the film score than sit through two hours of screeching strings and artificial bass. Even the actors' dialogue is fatiguing after a while (though with some movies that probably has more to do with subpar writing than a subpar audio setup).

 

[Vince]

Hi Jude!

Yes, I agree with you about the importance of understanding the acoustic sound of the instruments (thus the first comment in my post).

You are right that live jazz and classical performances can have incredible sound fidelity (I'm a jazz guy all the way - jazz guys sweat, too! And they make funny faces when they play!). I surely do not doubt your experience seeing Bobby Short (I wish I saw that!) But I still think that depends heavily on the room and p.a. system. Most jazz performances I hear at small clubs sound good, but to me the pure fidelity is not usually there as much as the vibe of the experience.

But your point is well made - as I see it you're focusing on the pure acoustic quality of an instrument. As opposed to even the same instrument going through a pa system. I think the acoustic sound can also get goofed up quite a bit via the pa!

Vince

 

[jude]

Quote:

Originally posted by Vince ....But your point is well made - as I see it you're focusing on the pure acoustic quality of an instrument. As opposed to even the same instrument going through a pa system. I think the acoustic sound can also get goofed up quite a bit via the pa!....

Oi, Vince! Hope all is well with you.

Yes, most concerts I've been to where the instruments are amplified electronically generally do not sound as good to me as the same work recorded. Like the jazz festival in Detroit, where they amplify the bands so that thousands around can hear it -- the sonics are generally poor (though being there is a lot of fun).

At the Bobby Short performance, only Bobby's voice was amplified electronically to the best of my knowledge. Cafe Carlyle is quite compact, and so the sound of his band (and his piano) was all over it -- it was fantastic.

I've also been to small live jazz performances with minimal use of amplification, and, from a pure sonic standpoint, that's hard to beat. And, again, symphony orchestras, like the Detroit Symphony Orchestra (we're lucky to be able to share Neeme Järvi) are just awesome.

So, yes, for the sake of this discussion, and what should be expected of the cymbal specifically, I think Vertigo should go hear one -- there has to be a drum store nearby him. Though it may not affect what he wants in terms of cymbal reproduction, I'd be surprised if he wasn't surprised (and I think it would readjust his standards somewhat).

 

[AssafL]

When you say that the sound of a performance is hard to beat what do you mean? Is it the sound and texture of the individual instruments? Or is it the entire spatial image of the performance sound coming from the band (specifically in small clubs where they take up a substantial portion of the space in front of you).
Recordings can capture most of the former (including the ambience) if done correctly, while only an abbreviated image of the latter is possible.

 

[a1leyez0nm3]

I usually go to rock/ hip hop concerts that are heavily amplified, and in most cases they do not sound the greatest, but I have been to a few that are pretty good in sonics.. although i usually have to wear ear plugs at most concerts I go to, they are just sooo loud. i swear they must be 135db at some, i leave and my ears are tired even after wearing ear plugs... i cant imagine the people that dont use ear plugs!!

although jazz is a different story, as you say, Jude. I have been to few live performances of jazz and such, but I used to play in a band and played the trumpet, piano, and tuba. I am familiar with the crack of the drums, but over time i feel my ears grow accustomed to my headphones and forget the flaws..