Impact

DaveyF · Oct 18, 2013

Having just returned from listening to a live marching band, I once again realized that one of the biggest and most obvious differences between "live" and reproduced is the feeling of "impact" of the instruments. In the marching band example, the brass instruments and most strikingly, the percussion instruments, are massively impactful. No system that i have ever heard can come anywhere near close to this rendition. Horn speakers seem to come the closest, IMO; however, even they fall willfully flat when compared with the real thing. BUT, and this seems to be a major factor to some and less to others, the 'Life' of much music lies in the impact that our ears are expecting to hear when listening to these types of instruments. Personally, when this is missing or lacking, I can ALWAYS hear and recognize that I am listening to an audio system..vs. live.
Anyone believe that their systems have the "impact" of live reproduction of the instruments mentioned? If not, what do we believe is the primary factor in our system that is holding this aspect back....the room( A major culprit , IMO), the speed of our driver's, the ability of the amps to react quickly enough, the recording ( another major possibility...I have NEVER heard any recording that completely gets this aspect of reproduction correct)...OR something entirely different? Thoughts....

audioarcher · Oct 19, 2013

I think it is mostly the recording. This is done to protect average playback gear from having problems. If everything was recorded like the Sheffield Drum and Track record there would be allot more blown speakers out there.

JackD201 · Oct 19, 2013

Moments here and there but definitely not always.

Johnny Vinyl · Oct 19, 2013

It's likely a combination of many factors, but I think the recording is the primary exhibitor. And in my case, switching from a 2-way pair of Totem Sttafs to a full-range pair of Genesis G7.1f's has also contributed greatly to getting me closer.

LL21 · Oct 19, 2013

1. Totally agree with Davey. Live is a whole different level. The sound comes from everywhere...impact, etc
2. The closest I've heard are:
- Arrakis driven by VTL monos. It was the first time during Nirvana Unplugged, my 'non-audiophile' senses picked up the initial note first. I suspect its because the scale, roundness and tonal quality of the voice was close enough to live, my non-audiophile senses (the same which listen to people speak, watch for traffic, etc) just heard something close enough to a person speaking on a stage, that I just listened. Quite a shock and a TON of fun.
- Genesis 1.1s driven by Scarlatti, all-Kondo Japan's finest, etc
- Both of these systems made my X1/Grand Slamms feel like Sashas. And I am sure if I were transported to the stage...the Arrakis might possibly feel like a stiff flat version of the real thing too

That said, where I PREFER recordings is when I wish to listen to the subtle cues and nuances of performances (particularly classical)...and where the venue live just does not allow for this. You hear more of the recording sometimes when the recording engineers and remastering engineers do a nice job.

Robh3606 · Oct 19, 2013

Hello Daveyf

Speakers can be a factor as well. You need driver surface area, the more the better, efficiency and dynamic headroom to be able recreate that kind of brute force power. All of that helps.

Rob

ack · Oct 19, 2013

DaveyF said:
Having just returned from listening to a live marching band, I once again realized that one of the biggest and most obvious differences between "live" and reproduced is the feeling of "impact" of the instruments. In the marching band example, the brass instruments and most strikingly, the percussion instruments, are massively impactful. No system that i have ever heard can come anywhere near close to this rendition. Horn speakers seem to come the closest, IMO; however, even they fall willfully flat when compared with the real thing. BUT, and this seems to be a major factor to some and less to others, the 'Life' of much music lies in the impact that our ears are expecting to hear when listening to these types of instruments. Personally, when this is missing or lacking, I can ALWAYS hear and recognize that I am listening to an audio system..vs. live.
Anyone believe that their systems have the "impact" of live reproduction of the instruments mentioned? If not, what do we believe is the primary factor in our system that is holding this aspect back....the room( A major culprit , IMO), the speed of our driver's, the ability of the amps to react quickly enough, the recording ( another major possibility...I have NEVER heard any recording that completely gets this aspect of reproduction correct)...OR something entirely different? Thoughts....

Agreed, and this is why I placed percussion higher in difficulty of reproduction over piano in my recent survey. I would think the primary limiting factors are the recording and speakers.

Bill Hart · Oct 19, 2013

Kickdrum is very tough to reproduce- maybe some folks here with really big systems can do it effectively, but even unmiked, in a small-ish club, there is an explosive quality to the drum- the mallet thud, then the immediate 'whack' and overtones from the bass drum, very fast in time, not just loud- explosive is the best descriptor i can come up with.

mep · Oct 19, 2013

Threads asking this very question pop up from time to time on this forum and I think I may have even started one before. Hearing live music is always a reality check to our stereo systems. I know I talked about being at Axpona last March and eating at Gibson's Steakhouse. While we were waiting to be seated, we were in the bar area which happened to have a small jazz combo playing and the drummer had the smallest drum kit I have ever seen with the smallest kick drum I have ever seen. I was like maybe 3' away from them and the drum kit was knocking me down it was so powerful. The sheer energy, intensity, and the SPLs/power that you hear when instruments are played live are not the same when played back over a recording.

I can say that the Wilson demo that some of us heard at RMAF 2013 was very impressive with regards to capturing more than a big slice of the energy that you would hear live. The Liberty Fanfare cut is the one I'm thinking about in particular which was played by the Air Force band from Langley Air Force Base. When that 40" bass drum is smacked (and I mean smacked), some of the strikes will make you blink involuntarily. Dave Wilson recorded all of the demo material on his Ultra Master Studer recorder which is a two channel 30ips machine that is flat from 12Hz to over 40kHz thanks to the wizardry of John Curl. As has been reported previously, our own Bruce Brown transferred the master tapes to DSD for Dave Wilson.

Bill Hart · Oct 19, 2013

mep said:
Threads asking this very question pop up from time to time on this forum and I think I may have even started one before. Hearing live music is always a reality check to our stereo systems. I know I talked about being at Axpona last March and eating at Gibson's Steakhouse. While we were waiting to be seated, we were in the bar area which happened to have a small jazz combo playing and the drummer had the smallest drum kit I have ever seen with the smallest kick drum I have ever seen. I was like maybe 3' away from them and the drum kit was knocking me down it was so powerful. The sheer energy, intensity, and the SPLs/power that you hear when instruments are played live are not the same when played back over a recording.

I can say that the Wilson demo that some of us heard at RMAF 2013 was very impressive with regards to capturing more than a big slice of the energy that you would hear live. The Liberty Fanfare cut is the one I'm thinking about in particular which was played by the Air Force band from Langley Air Force Base. When that 40" bass drum is smacked (and I mean smacked), some of the strikes will make you blink involuntarily. Dave Wilson recorded all of the demo material on his Ultra Master Studer recorder which is a two channel 30ips machine that is flat from 12Hz to over 40kHz thanks to the wizardry of John Curl. As has been reported previously, our own Bruce Brown transferred the master tapes to DSD for Dave Wilson.

So, some of the limits may be the vinyl, I dunno. I remember sitting in studios years ago and hearing playback off the multitrack tapes of drums through what were pretty standard monitors- JBL 4320?- and they moved air, kicked you hard- I think overall, they were probably bright sounding for full spectrum listening, but i assumed the engineers mixing wanted a hyper-analytical view of what they were capturing.

mep · Oct 19, 2013

whart said:
So, some of the limits may be the vinyl, I dunno. I remember sitting in studios years ago and hearing playback off the multitrack tapes of drums through what were pretty standard monitors- JBL 4320?- and they moved air, kicked you hard- I think overall, they were probably bright sounding for full spectrum listening, but i assumed the engineers mixing wanted a hyper-analytical view of what they were capturing.

Bill-I don't believe that vinyl is the cause because the same limitations on reality exist with digital recordings as well. My personal opinion which is based on nothing more than listening to music is that I think that recordings that are made live to two-track or a three-track deck will sound more live and capture more of the live energy than a 4 track (and on up to the highest level of multitrack machines) will. The more tracks you have, the more chances you have to screw up the recording and screw up the mixing and mastering. I think one of the reasons that I love early jazz so much was that most of it was recorded on two track machines and they were able to capture a semblance of the sound and energy we would hear live.

LL21 · Oct 19, 2013

whart said:
Kickdrum is very tough to reproduce- maybe some folks here with really big systems can do it effectively, but even unmiked, in a small-ish club, there is an explosive quality to the drum- the mallet thud, then the immediate 'whack' and overtones from the bass drum, very fast in time, not just loud- explosive is the best descriptor i can come up with.

I have seen people quote the frequency range of certain kick drums at 55hz-75hz. (26" is more like 35hz-50hz, I think)...but one way or the other (perhaps because of the mic) most kick drum recordings I have include information well below this...and with a sub that only starts at 40hz and goes down...I find a LOT of important impact that makes a huge difference in terms of 'feeling' the chest-impact of the sub. Not sure why, but it gets me a lot closer to what I used to feel when we had the band playing.

Bill Hart · Oct 19, 2013

mep said:
Bill-I don't believe that vinyl is the cause because the same limitations on reality exist with digital recordings as well. My personal opinion which is based on nothing more than listening to music is that I think that recordings that are made live to two-track or a three-track deck will sound more live and capture more of the live energy than a 4 track (and on up to the highest level of multitrack machines) will. The more tracks you have, the more chances you have to screw up the recording and screw up the mixing and mastering. I think one of the reasons that I love early jazz so much was that most of it was recorded on two track machines and they were able to capture a semblance of the sound and energy we would hear live.

Makes sense~ yes, what I was hearing was not mixed down- just the stuff that was put on big -probably 24 track- machines back in the 70's- and later. Simpler is better of course, as is the width of the tape devoted to the 'track' I would assume.
Without starting down our usual path on the digital v analog thing, I would think this would be an area where uncompressed hi rez digital should really shine, but don't have much experience on that front.
PS: and my 'better' here was focused on the 'impact' part of the kickdrum.

Bill Hart · Oct 19, 2013

LL21 said:
I have seen people quote the frequency range of certain kick drums at 55hz-75hz. (26" is more like 35hz-50hz, I think)...but one way or the other (perhaps because of the mic) most kick drum recordings I have include information well below this...and with a sub that only starts at 40hz and goes down...I find a LOT of important impact that makes a huge difference in terms of 'feeling' the chest-impact of the sub. Not sure why, but it gets me a lot closer to what I used to feel when we had the band playing.

Lloyd, i am sure you are right that some of this is the 'weight' of low frequencies, but the 'speed' of this is also part of the 'explosion' that you hear with a kickdrum on stage. Maybe the problem starts at the mic?

RogerD · Oct 19, 2013

You have to move a hell of a lot of air to recreate a marching band, a singer much less so. One of my dreams one day is to have a downstairs system with a pair of JBL 5732's http://www.jblpro.com/catalog/general/Product.aspx?PId=325&MId=2 Maybe that will get me closer. But you need low distortion and clean power,but that's nothing new. Or better yet these......http://www.jblpro.com/catalog/general/Product.aspx?PId=324&MId=1

Bill Hart · Oct 19, 2013

RogerD said:
You have to move a hell of a lot of air to recreate a marching band, a singer much less so. One of my dreams one day is to have a downstairs system with a pair of JBL 5732's http://www.jblpro.com/catalog/general/Product.aspx?PId=325&MId=2 Maybe that will get me closer. But you need low distortion and clean power,but that's nothing new.

What do those sticker for? I quickly scanned the spec sheet, they are self-powered. I really liked the sound of the K2 with a small tube amp. Luscious and very open. I dig the idea of using industrial gear- all those retro systems based on WE, old RCA, etc. were basically ripped out of theatres.

RogerD · Oct 19, 2013

whart said:
What do those sticker for? I quickly scanned the spec sheet, they are self-powered. I really liked the sound of the K2 with a small tube amp. Luscious and very open. I dig the idea of using industrial gear- all those retro systems based on WE, old RCA, etc. were basically ripped out of theatres.

https://www.soundbroker.com/SPEAKER..._SECTION_3-WAY_SCREEN_ARRAY_-_FATORY_B_STOCK/

https://www.soundbroker.com/SPEAKERS/SUBWOOFER/LISTINGVIEW/JBL_PRO-4642A_DUAL_2241H_18_SUBWOOFERS/

Not to hijack this thread...but the JBL's are all modular so you can mix and match. These can be had cheap or so it seams compared to audiophile standards. I will start another thread if interested.

I don't think they are self powered.

DaveyF · Oct 19, 2013

RogerD said:
https://www.soundbroker.com/SPEAKER..._SECTION_3-WAY_SCREEN_ARRAY_-_FATORY_B_STOCK/

https://www.soundbroker.com/SPEAKERS/SUBWOOFER/LISTINGVIEW/JBL_PRO-4642A_DUAL_2241H_18_SUBWOOFERS/

Not to hijack this thread...but the JBL's are all modular so you can mix and match. These can be had cheap or so it seams compared to audiophile standards. I will start another thread if interested.

I don't think they are self powered.

Interesting suggestion, Roger. However, to be clear, I am NOT talking about the speaker's or the system's ability to reproduce volume. An old friend of mine...a physics prof, once told me that it ONLY takes 15watts to fill a church.
While I'm sure he's right about that, ( I'm not so sure as to what we would be filling it with..

). The point is that to reproduce the impact of these instruments may not take power or multi driver's, IMO. The question is what does it take??...since
really NOTHING I have heard even comes that close, truth be told.

LL21 · Oct 19, 2013

whart said:
Lloyd, i am sure you are right that some of this is the 'weight' of low frequencies, but the 'speed' of this is also part of the 'explosion' that you hear with a kickdrum on stage. Maybe the problem starts at the mic?

Yes...totally agree. That speed is essential. The bass I have in my room has been slowly become sharper, faster, more controlled as the amps, speakers, sub and isolation have all improved. (I think the isolation got rid of 'bass reverb' which makes things sound slower because in a sense, I suspect you're hearing bass 'twice'...once the real thing plus the reverb.) Makes a big difference.

I remember one Stereophile reviewer referring to the T2 film opening scene where the Terminator machine crushes the human skull...he said he actually jumped when he heard it thru a complete all-out assault reference Mark Levinson system in ML's studio in NYC. It was likely the combination of speed and impact that delivered that 'jump' factor that day.

GaryProtein · Oct 19, 2013

LL21 said:
I have seen people quote the frequency range of certain kick drums at 55hz-75hz. (26" is more like 35hz-50hz, I think)...but one way or the other (perhaps because of the mic) most kick drum recordings I have include information well below this...and with a sub that only starts at 40hz and goes down...I find a LOT of important impact that makes a huge difference in terms of 'feeling' the chest-impact of the sub. Not sure why, but it gets me a lot closer to what I used to feel when we had the band playing.

The resonance of the kick drum head after it is struck may be somewhere between 35-50Hz, but the initial impact of the mallet against the head is at least one octave, probably two octaves below that. Yes, I mean around 8 Hz as the head is depressed by the mallet for one or two cycles before it resonates at 35-50 Hz.

Impact

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

WBF Founding Member

Member Sponsor & WBF Founding Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

VIP/Donor & WBF Founding Member

Well-Known Member

Member Sponsor & WBF Founding Member

Well-Known Member

Member Sponsor & WBF Founding Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

VIP/Donor

Well-Known Member

VIP/Donor

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

VIP/Donor

Similar threads