- Joined
- Sep 7, 2002
- Posts
- 3,139
- Likes
- 229
QUOTE=chi2;6539242]Sitting in an opera hall means hearing a large part of indirect sound waves reflected by the ceiling and the walls while the auditors' bodies have a strong absorbing and damping effect. High frequencies are reflected to a lesser degree than other frequency ranges which leads to a distinct tilt of the frequency reproduction. Depending on the sonic qualities of the building it does substantially matter, too, where you are sitting.
While this is just the way it is in concert and opera halls, I don't really like it
. I prefer a fresher more involving representation like the one to be found on most recordings where you have a mix of more distantly placed microphones catching more of the indirect sound and of closer placed instrument or instrument group specific microphones recording a higher degree of direct sound. This, however, is more like sitting quite close to the orchestra or just at the rim of the orchestra pit (and I love it).
While the 007A/II is markedly brighter than the 007 I wouldn't call it bright or treble peaked. It certainly is less so than any pro bias Lambda with the exemption of the LNS (and maybe the 404LE which I don't own and haven't heard yet). The Sigmas provide a more concert or opera hall like presentation but with them I just miss some of the sonic experiences that make listening to music involving. My Sigmas with Lambda 202 drivers preserve more of the sonic information at both ends of the spectrum but I still prefer both O2s and the 4070 even for large orchestral works and operas.[/QUOTE]
Higher frequencies of sound suffer greater losses of amplitude in general, not just because of reflection effects. The physics seems fairly complicated even moisture in the air contributes to the attenuation of soundwaves. This source has a reasonable discussion on that subject.
The speed and attenuation of sound 2.4.1
The point being that in any real life listening situation you are probably going to hear less high frequencys than what will be recorded by a mic because this is generally set close in to the performers. So unless equalization is employed, recorded sound will be somewhat "hot." Headphones or speakers that give a flat response may end up sounding harsh or edgy as a result.
There is no single "concert hall sound" for even a single hall. The frequency response and the ratio of direct to indirect sound can vary a lot for different seating locations as well as the position of the performers.
At the Gotterdamerung performance I recently attended I sat in 2 different setas in different parts of the hall, because I misread my ticket and there was no usher when I first arrived. Both seats were pretty good, close to the front of their respective balconies but the lower "loge" seat gave a much stronger sound from the vocalists than did the sme seat number on the next higher balcony. This was probably due to the fact that I was sitting closer to their actual level on stage so they were more or less signing straight at me. However on that same loge balcony when I have sat further back, the sound is less clear.
However, I have been generally unhappy with the ground floor "orchestra" seats for opera in most halls because the orchestra sound is muted. This seeming paradox comes as a result of the fact that an opera orchestra generally sits in a pit so the orchestra seats get almost no direct sound of from the orchestra. Also if you sit under a balcony, you lose a lot of the indirect sound and I don't like these locations at all.
You will generally get both more direct orchestral sound in the balcony as well as a powerfull reflection from the ceiling so the balcony may be the best place to hear an opera orchestra if not the singers.
I listen to a lot more music on phones than in concert halls, for cost and practical reasons, and high frequency preformance has been a continuing source of annoyance to me over the years, especially with headphones.
I wouldn't say the 007A is bad in that regard. However the various Sigmas give both a more concert-hall treble roll-off in addition to their more natural perspective. That roll-off also acts as a filter to some of the nasties of recordings of high frequencies.
However, what I think I was hearing was more in the way of dissatisfaction with the treble artifacts in recorded sound. If you spend all your time listening to recorded music you build up a tolerance but after 5 1/2 hour live performance you develope more or an auditory memory of live sound.
That remains the basic test of recorded sound, does it sound like the real thing? I see very few members of this forum making any comparisons of live and recorded sound. I suspect few go to live performances, as is true with the rest of the population.
The state of the art of recorded sound and playback is very good but there are still issues which I doubt that even a megabuck system is going to solve.
I am more likely to listen to the 007A's for orchestral work but but I prefer the Sigma/404 more for opera and choral music. I am not sure how the Sigma/202 sounds compared to the Sigma/404. The trandsucers are simliar, but the 404 uses the higher grade cable the same as the 007. I suspect the Sigma/202 is closer in sound to the original Sigma pro. I have one, put together by Stax some years ago and it is slightly less refined in sound and has slightly less bass and treble than the Sigma/404.
While this is just the way it is in concert and opera halls, I don't really like it
While the 007A/II is markedly brighter than the 007 I wouldn't call it bright or treble peaked. It certainly is less so than any pro bias Lambda with the exemption of the LNS (and maybe the 404LE which I don't own and haven't heard yet). The Sigmas provide a more concert or opera hall like presentation but with them I just miss some of the sonic experiences that make listening to music involving. My Sigmas with Lambda 202 drivers preserve more of the sonic information at both ends of the spectrum but I still prefer both O2s and the 4070 even for large orchestral works and operas.[/QUOTE]
Higher frequencies of sound suffer greater losses of amplitude in general, not just because of reflection effects. The physics seems fairly complicated even moisture in the air contributes to the attenuation of soundwaves. This source has a reasonable discussion on that subject.
The speed and attenuation of sound 2.4.1
The point being that in any real life listening situation you are probably going to hear less high frequencys than what will be recorded by a mic because this is generally set close in to the performers. So unless equalization is employed, recorded sound will be somewhat "hot." Headphones or speakers that give a flat response may end up sounding harsh or edgy as a result.
There is no single "concert hall sound" for even a single hall. The frequency response and the ratio of direct to indirect sound can vary a lot for different seating locations as well as the position of the performers.
At the Gotterdamerung performance I recently attended I sat in 2 different setas in different parts of the hall, because I misread my ticket and there was no usher when I first arrived. Both seats were pretty good, close to the front of their respective balconies but the lower "loge" seat gave a much stronger sound from the vocalists than did the sme seat number on the next higher balcony. This was probably due to the fact that I was sitting closer to their actual level on stage so they were more or less signing straight at me. However on that same loge balcony when I have sat further back, the sound is less clear.
However, I have been generally unhappy with the ground floor "orchestra" seats for opera in most halls because the orchestra sound is muted. This seeming paradox comes as a result of the fact that an opera orchestra generally sits in a pit so the orchestra seats get almost no direct sound of from the orchestra. Also if you sit under a balcony, you lose a lot of the indirect sound and I don't like these locations at all.
You will generally get both more direct orchestral sound in the balcony as well as a powerfull reflection from the ceiling so the balcony may be the best place to hear an opera orchestra if not the singers.
I listen to a lot more music on phones than in concert halls, for cost and practical reasons, and high frequency preformance has been a continuing source of annoyance to me over the years, especially with headphones.
I wouldn't say the 007A is bad in that regard. However the various Sigmas give both a more concert-hall treble roll-off in addition to their more natural perspective. That roll-off also acts as a filter to some of the nasties of recordings of high frequencies.
However, what I think I was hearing was more in the way of dissatisfaction with the treble artifacts in recorded sound. If you spend all your time listening to recorded music you build up a tolerance but after 5 1/2 hour live performance you develope more or an auditory memory of live sound.
That remains the basic test of recorded sound, does it sound like the real thing? I see very few members of this forum making any comparisons of live and recorded sound. I suspect few go to live performances, as is true with the rest of the population.
The state of the art of recorded sound and playback is very good but there are still issues which I doubt that even a megabuck system is going to solve.
I am more likely to listen to the 007A's for orchestral work but but I prefer the Sigma/404 more for opera and choral music. I am not sure how the Sigma/202 sounds compared to the Sigma/404. The trandsucers are simliar, but the 404 uses the higher grade cable the same as the 007. I suspect the Sigma/202 is closer in sound to the original Sigma pro. I have one, put together by Stax some years ago and it is slightly less refined in sound and has slightly less bass and treble than the Sigma/404.
