[bigshot]

The difference between real life and a recording involves a lot of things that can't be recorded... directionality of sound, reflections off the walls of the room, distances. A recording isn't intended to be an exact copy of reality. Sound engineers optimize recordings to suit the medium. Mike placement, mixing, sound processing, etc. All these things contribute to making a mix that is more organized than real. It isn't an inferior copy of reality. It's creatively organized sound that might even be better than real.

 

[Music Alchemist]

  The difference between real life and a recording involves a lot of things that can't be recorded... directionality of sound, reflections off the walls of the room, distances. A recording isn't intended to be an exact copy of reality. Sound engineers optimize recordings to suit the medium. Mike placement, mixing, sound processing, etc. All these things contribute to making a mix that is more organized than real. It isn't an inferior copy of reality. It's creatively organized sound that might even be better than real.

 
All very true. My original point was that most of the time, you would be able to tell reality and recording apart.

 

[Koolpep]

But a concert in reality is totally processed and amped and reproduced right there. I mean look at the army of sound engineers and their computers and mixing boards equing the sound to the massive speakers and whatnot at a concert. The only real live live sound is unplugged or classical music. Or am I wrong?

 

[analogsurviver]

But a concert in reality is totally processed and amped and reproduced right there. I mean look at the army of sound engineers and their computers and mixing boards equing the sound to the massive speakers and whatnot at a concert. The only real live live sound is unplugged or classical music. Or am I wrong?

I divide the musicians to two categories. "Dirty" and "clean".
 
"Clean" means the musicians for producing their own sound do not require any electricity (OK, maybe score lamps can be excempted from this rule ).
 
"Dirty" means anybody that has to plug into any sort of electronic equipment for him/her to be heard by the audience. A singing microphone thus becomes A PART of the say pop or jazz singer - and quite a few of them would refuse singing "dry" - at any cost...
 
The only real live sound can be produced by "clean" musicians - and that is what I am referring to in all of my posts.
 
By that definition, it is unplugged and classical that falls into this category. Sometimes, if REALLY lucky, you can listen to a jazz combo in unplugged version .
 
There are exceptions to this rule - few and far between, but they do exist. One that can create quite "acoustical" atmosphere (although totally impossible without use of electrical means/loudspeakers ) is Italian jazz accordeonist Simone Zanchini:
 

 

[Music Alchemist]

But a concert in reality is totally processed and amped and reproduced right there. I mean look at the army of sound engineers and their computers and mixing boards equing the sound to the massive speakers and whatnot at a concert. The only real live live sound is unplugged or classical music. Or am I wrong?

 
I was indeed referring mostly to acoustic concerts, especially classical.
 
Many other genres sound awful live compared to the studio albums.

 

[RRod]

   
I was indeed referring mostly to acoustic concerts, especially classical.
 
Many other genres sound awful live compared to the studio albums.

 
Though in all fairness it might be more accurate to say "venues" instead of "genres".

 

[Music Alchemist]

  Though in all fairness it might be more accurate to say "venues" instead of "genres".

 
It's both in this context. Different genres of music being performed in different venues.

 

[anetode]

There is no point trying to test the differences between a year 2000 movie on a 4k tv now...is there ? The same as high resolution music. Most of the recording we have now only stop at so many things playing and composed in a track. I need something with even more things being composed. Unless you can point me to one of those files. Otherwise I will try to find it

 
4K is about enough for a complete scan of a 35mm film negative, with 65/70mm films you'll need an even higher res. Motion resolution will remain poor with 24fps, but that's another matter.
 
As an aside, don't compare audio and video information processing because all such analogies quickly fall apart.

 

[Whitigir]

4K is about enough for a complete scan of a 35mm film negative, with 65/70mm films you'll need an even higher res. Motion resolution will remain poor with 24fps, but that's another matter.

As an aside, don't compare audio and video information processing because all such analogies quickly fall apart.

Thanks for some scientific explaination on HD movie ....my quest of looking fore more natural listening experience keeps on going. My very important question to me, please, if anyone can help. Does the more expensive headphones with a reputable brand sound more natural and closer to the real instruments with lossless sound tracks ?

Also thank you musicalchemist. I got a confirmation of the differences from lossy and lossless.

Somehow when watching a movie from dvd vs bluray, I can hear extra sounds ? Is it true ? Or am I imagining it ?

 

[castleofargh]

my quest of looking fore more natural listening experience keeps on going.

get some nice speakers.

 

[Whitigir]

get some nice speakers.

get some nice speakers.

Do you have any recommendations please ?

 

[Dobrescu George]

Thanks for some scientific explaination on HD movie

....my quest of looking fore more natural listening experience keeps on going. My very important question to me, please, if anyone can help. Does the more expensive headphones with a reputable brand sound more natural and closer to the real instruments with lossless sound tracks ?

Also thank you musicalchemist. I got a confirmation of the differences from lossy and lossless.

Somehow when watching a movie from dvd vs bluray, I can hear extra sounds ? Is it true ? Or am I imagining it ?

very expensive headphones will sound better with better amping and better DACs... but it is a matter of taste..
 
you can be imagining that you are hearing something in plus, or a remaster of the audio could have been done, unless someone can double test you, or you do a double blind test.

 

[bigshot]

Do you have any recommendations please ?

 
I prefer old school cabinet speakers from the 70s. They have good ones turning up at thrift stores if you are patient. Otherwise, I have had good luck with Klipsch.

 

[Music Alchemist]

Thanks for some scientific explaination on HD movie

....my quest of looking fore more natural listening experience keeps on going. My very important question to me, please, if anyone can help. Does the more expensive headphones with a reputable brand sound more natural and closer to the real instruments with lossless sound tracks ?

Also thank you musicalchemist. I got a confirmation of the differences from lossy and lossless.

Somehow when watching a movie from dvd vs bluray, I can hear extra sounds ? Is it true ? Or am I imagining it ?

 
Many more expensive headphones sound better, but there is no guarantee. Even in the four figure range, there are headphones that may sound bad to you. If you want to learn about which ones may be a good fit for you, this site is full of information on the subject.
 
You may have already seen comments that many people can't distinguish between lossless files and 256 kbps AAC. Some people can and have passed ABX tests, though.
 
It mainly depends on the audio mix used. It's often the same type of apples vs oranges thing there.

 

[Dobrescu George]

totally true... it is all so very too subjective to make any assertions...
 
you should go and test what you like~