Live unamplified music v home audio, another thread/perspective

[PeterA]

The truth lies probably in the middle. The hobby is both about the music and the gear. Now that I have settled in with my new gear I am starting to get into the music itself again. And I get a presentation that gets me closer to the music than before, and certainly closer than a Bose radio. Are concerts always the answer? No. I am currently (again) exploring Stockhausen's marvelous "In the Sky I am Walking" for two solo singers. When will I ever hear that in concert? (There are concerts with that music next year, but I'd have to hop over the big pond.) Yet now my system reveals more about the musical intent of the composition and of the two performances I have on CD. That certainly is about the music.

Al, I agree. As my system improved, I got deeper into the music and it was much more enjoyable. I thought of the system less, and the music more. Do you remember that live jazz concert we attended together last Winter? The music was pretty good, but the experience was dreadful with the terrible PA system and outrageous volume. I even emailed the organizer and told him that I would not attend another performance there because of the horrendous acoustics. I never got a response. I much prefer a good system to that kind of a live experience. The BSO is different.

Some of my favorite musicians are no longer with us, so I must turn to my collection of LPs played on my system to appreciate their music. I do love good live performances, though.

 

[Jazzhead]

Hello Fitz,

That the ear/brain mechanism is not stereo, does not confer a discrete multi-channel (or binaural) system a definitive advantage per se, due to the fact that a microphone is still only ever capturing information related to a given polar pattern, software for all its advances still can’t come close to the processing sophistication of human hearing and is of course, reliant on content recorded specifically for that format. In other words, that discrete multi-channel can in some instances confer an advantage over conventional stereo is true only in as much as the full chain from mic through to mixing to software to speaker placement and room is optimised, which as always results in a system chained to a format (check out the number of recordings available in Auro 3D and the process needed to record/mix it).

Indeed, one of the most impressive demos relative to conventional stereo music recordings according to some is Professor Edgar Choueiri’s BACCH 3D system, which relies on small microphones implanted into the ear canal for initial subject calibration, an infrared sensor to track head movement of the subject in real time, the BACCH-SP processor and two conventional stereo speakers and a sub. That only one listener can only ever benefit from that experience at one time and is non-compatible with other systems will make it a non-starter for many, even should one be able to pony up the $54K.

So far, it seems to be that a consumer who wishes to maximise the potential of all formats is still going to need to assemble independent systems optimised for the format. That multi-channel systems are best realised when playing back multi-channel recordings confers no advantage to those of us whose library primarily consists of mono or conventional stereo recordings - the latter of which by far proportionately outnumber all other music releases - and as such, continue to hold only limited appeal to those who buy music because of its artistic content, rather than its format.

Best,

853guy

Hi 853 ,

The BACCH is down to 18k for the processor only version . Maybe enticing enough for you now

 

[PeterA]

Sure, there is an overlap. One feeds the other. But Peter does not need a colibri, Airtight Supreme, and a MSL to bridge that overlap. Nor a KL Audio cleaner.

Frankly, I don't get many hours to listen at home either. As Bill asked me, you did all this search to listen to music 2 - 4 hours a week at home? Maybe as I stop travelling on my hifi days, I will gain a day a fortnight more. As opposed to stopping on the way home from work, catching a concert 7.30 - 9.30. Dinner can be had either side of the concert.

Good one Ked. No, I certainly do not need the Colibri or Supreme, but I most certainly do need my MSL and KL Audio RCM to get me closer to the music. And I would not give them up for the other component upgrades that I have recently contemplated. They are two very high value variables in the equation that is my music delivery system. The Colibri was a gift and the Supreme is a spare should anything happen to the MSL. Remember, I don't have digital, so should the MSL need repair, I need a temporary replacement so as not to be without music.

 

[bonzo75]

That’s the gear hobbyist in you talking, always trying to get closer to the music. You can enjoy the SPU with an used Ortofon a90, SPU a95, etc etc. And I am not saying KL is not the best, but a handmade ultrasonic cleaner like the one that Kuzma sells is sufficient. And there are many lesser carts to be used as back up during waiting time. There are many ways to enjoy music, we are a select percentage of OCDed gearists

 

[spiritofmusic]

Maybe the most interesting concert today, the Gildas string quartet again, playing Haydn, Brahms, and an additional treat, more anon.
We were 15 rows back close to the rear of a 50x30x30 space.
Much less damped than yesterday's more custom designed performance space.
This was as close to what I recognise in my home acoustic, w the major caveat that density, scale and energy as usual off the scale.
But a certain "human" quality recognisable.
This all remains a really fun and educational experience, and is establishing the limits of what I can reasonably expect at home, what I can reasonably try to establish, and what I have achieved already
What I find fascinating is that depth and imaging way superior at home.
Indeed I still don't pick out instruments in space in the live experience, it all seems pretty brush stroke, a kind of uber widescreen mono.
This makes me wonder whether what we're trying to get at home re 3D pinpoint imaging and staging is indeed a false archetype of the stereo process.
And I remain adamant the dynamic swagger, viscous texture, and air molecules crackling w energy, can only be hinted out at home
And actually I'm ok w this.
It will be totally fascinating when my tt gets reinstalled in the next couple of months w reconfigured Straingauge, tt and arm checked out, and the whole rig isolated on Stacore Adv, how my mental comparison points will register.
Last point.
Gilda Quartet played a new piece by 16 year old local boy Ben Pease-Barton, a percussion student at Norfolk School Of Music (commissioned for one of the big London orchestras).
What a treat!
A truly amazing mix of avant garde, minor key menacing swell, repeated riffs, just flowing in and out of each other.
The boy has an amazing career ahead of him.

 

[audioguy]

What I find fascinating is that depth and imaging way superior at home.
Indeed I still don't pick out instruments in space in the live experience, it all seems pretty brush stroke, a kind of uber widescreen mono.

I once wrote a letter to TAS on this subject. When I attend a live unampllified concert, I hear huge mono for all practical purposes. What you hear at home is what the mic hears.

 

[spiritofmusic]

That's why I remain a bit perplexed as to why live unamplified (and tbh also 130dB rock) is the total benchmark for audio at home, as put forward by Ked etc
So tonal density, timbral accuracy, dynamics, texture, velvet bubble, yes all in abundance in live
But stage depth, imaging, true delineation of instruments, I'm not hearing it in any of the concerts I've been to in the last 7 days

 

[RogerD]

I once wrote a letter to TAS on this subject. When I attend a live unampllified concert, I hear huge mono for all practical purposes. What you hear at home is what the mic hears.

That's why I remain a bit perplexed as to why live unamplified (and tbh also 130dB rock) is the total benchmark for audio at home, as put forward by Ked etc
So tonal density, timbral accuracy, dynamics, texture, velvet bubble, yes all in abundance in live
But stage depth, imaging, true delineation of instruments, I'm not hearing it in any of the concerts I've been to in the last 7 days

This is why I think a "wall of sound" from top to bottom and side to side is important. Even though side and rear channels for special effects in movies is needed,I think anything except from the front or overhead is not natural. IMHO

 

[PeterA]

That’s the gear hobbyist in you talking, always trying to get closer to the music. You can enjoy the SPU with an used Ortofon a90, SPU a95, etc etc. And I am not saying KL is not the best, but a handmade ultrasonic cleaner like the one that Kuzma sells is sufficient. And there are many lesser carts to be used as back up during waiting time. There are many ways to enjoy music, we are a select percentage of OCDed gearists

I'm not always trying to get closer to the music, sometimes I just enjoy what I have. However, last Spring, I spent time sweating the small stuff, not buying gear, and appreciating the improvement of the sound of my system. Removing the glass from my pictures and discovering the benefits of DeoxIT on all of my connections was about getting closer to the music. It was not the gear hobbyist talking. That is pretty funny.

I'm not aware of the Kuzma device. Can it be delivered to my door and is it as effective, reliable, well made and quiet as my KL Audio unit with the Silencer for which I paid a total of $3,000? If it can and it does all of that, then I am sorry that I was not aware of it when I bought my KL RCM. For me, adding the KL RCM to my Loricraft/4 fluid regimen, was about finding a more effective way to clean my records and thus getting closer to the music - literally. It was not about spending money and trying new gear.

I actually owned an A90 but then heard two samples in very different systems and ended up selling mine before ever installing it in my system. Now I discover all of this is really just a manifestation of my inner OCDed gearist. I never knew that.

How long does one have to keep his system unchanged, or at least free of major new components, for you to believe a guy when he says it is not for him about buying gear? Thanks Ked, I appreciate your candor and your keen grip of psychology.

 

[bonzo75]

A musicophile keeps his system unchanged. Chat next time with the guys sitting next to you at concerts, the regular faces you see there. A normal B&O will be the top system. All gearheads are here and love debating, chatting, swapping, auditioning, etc. Nothing wrong with it, just saying it

 

[Al M.]

A musicophile keeps his system unchanged.

I kept my system unchanged for 19 years, between 1993 and 2012. Does that count?

 

[bonzo75]

I kept my system unchanged for 19 years, between 1993 and 2012. Does that count?

Yes. You are on the wrong forum

 

[DaveC]

IMO, being into gear... and I'd agree we all are to some degree, does not diminish appreciation of music. 2 different, but often interrelated things.

 

[bonzo75]

IMO, being into gear... and I'd agree we all are to some degree, does not diminish appreciation of music. 2 different, but often interrelated things.

Didn't say it did. I just find it amusing people become defensive in admitting they are gear heads as if it makes them a bad person and insist no no I do all this for music as if that justifies the craziness.

 

[microstrip]

That's why I remain a bit perplexed as to why live unamplified (and tbh also 130dB rock) is the total benchmark for audio at home, as put forward by Ked etc
So tonal density, timbral accuracy, dynamics, texture, velvet bubble, yes all in abundance in live
But stage depth, imaging, true delineation of instruments, I'm not hearing it in any of the concerts I've been to in the last 7 days

Curiously you are hearing it if you keep your eyes open... Otherwise you would not be able to recreate the illusion at home from the cues encoded in the recording.

Our perception is the result of what we get from our senses and our experience.

IMHO there is no reason to be perplexed!

 

[spiritofmusic]

Micro, I'm not sure how true that is.
At home, I mainly listen in the dark.
Live, I'm often listening w my eyes closed.
Visual cues or not, it makes no difference to the fact I'm detecting next to no depth information in the concert hall.
But I hear much more at home.
I'm convinced imaging and soundstaging as we've come to know it in home audio is an artificial construct of stereo.
I'm not complaining, it adds a lot to the enjoyment of music.
But I don't think it's "real".

 

[microstrip]

Micro, I'm not sure how true that is.
At home, I mainly listen in the dark.
Live, I'm often listening w my eyes closed.
Visual cues or not, it makes no difference to the fact I'm detecting next to no depth information in the concert hall.

So, you suppose that if the orchestra players were sitting in reverse order you would not notice?

 

[morricab]

Micro, I'm not sure how true that is.
At home, I mainly listen in the dark.
Live, I'm often listening w my eyes closed.
Visual cues or not, it makes no difference to the fact I'm detecting next to no depth information in the concert hall.
But I hear much more at home.
I'm convinced imaging and soundstaging as we've come to know it in home audio is an artificial construct of stereo.
I'm not complaining, it adds a lot to the enjoyment of music.
But I don't think it's "real".

He is saying live is both visual and auditory. Your brain puts the two together live to create localization. I don't know halls you frequent but I can clearly hear depth and instrument localization to a pretty high degree...even with my eyes closed but it is enhanced by visual confirmation.

Since you have no visuals at home with music only then the recordings have to be more explicit to compensate. Normally this means the microphone is much closer to the performer than you would be sitting live.

Sitting close at a home concert gives great presence and no problems with instrument localization but in a big hall sitting net the back needs some visual reinforcement.

 

[spiritofmusic]

I'm ok on R to L or L to R
Just not front to back
And even on width info, it still feels a whole lot more "mono" than the panned image we get at home

 

[Al M.]

Yes. You are on the wrong forum

Hehe. Actually, after writing my post I remembered that I bought a subwoofer in 2000 (and 2001, but that one I sold again), so the 'drought' was not exactly 19 years

Anyway, I'll admit that I am a music lover AND a gear head, with the latter sometimes getting out of hand perhaps