Live unamplified music v home audio, another thread/perspective

[Al M.]

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.

Same with me. If you sit close enough to the stage, certainly depth and localization is all there. Once you sit far away enough so that the contribution of reflective sound overtakes that of direct sound, then indeed it becomes 'one big mono'.

 

[853guy]

Hi 853 ,

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

Hi Jazzhead,

Hmm. 18K would buy both a full carbon long travel 29" full-suspension trail bike and a full custom all-titanium 27.5+ aggressive hard tail mountain bike, with Enve's, Industry Nine hubs and full Sram XX1 on both.

I know where my $18K would go.

Be well!

853guy

 

[DaveC]

Hi Jazzhead,

Hmm. 18K would buy both a full carbon long travel 29" full-suspension trail bike and a full custom all-titanium 27.5+ aggressive hard tail mountain bike, with Enve's, Industry Nine hubs and full Sram XX1 on both.

I know where my $18K would go.

Be well!

853guy

I have a 27.5 Trek Slash with upgraded shocks and wheels, the new 29'er Slash looks amazing... Not sure on the 27.5+ thing, until they start winning EWS races I'm out.

 

[NorthStar]

Yes. You are on the wrong forum

Not necessarily. In today's world it is permitted to mix nostalgia with the latest development in audio technologies.
It is allowed to live the vintage era in this renewed analog era.
Travelling to beautiful beaches and walking the trails of the jungles and forests is becoming more popular than surfing the internet.
Real life is coming back to take its due value. Live music and museums are exploding with tremendous benefits from non-reproductions (fakes).
There is more emotion from seeing the artists and their masterpieces than listening and seeing to reproductions @ home and on our computers.

Of course, that is my intelligent calculated take. It's not an absolute, only a constatation.

 

[Jazzhead]

Hi Jazzhead,

Hmm. 18K would buy both a full carbon long travel 29" full-suspension trail bike and a full custom all-titanium 27.5+ aggressive hard tail mountain bike, with Enve's, Industry Nine hubs and full Sram XX1 on both.

I know where my $18K would go.

Be well!

853guy

Colour me confused ... after all that elaborate theorizing .

Ride safe .

 

[morricab]

Same with me. If you sit close enough to the stage, certainly depth and localization is all there. Once you sit far away enough so that the contribution of reflective sound overtakes that of direct sound, then indeed it becomes 'one big mono'.

I still hear plenty of depth when I sit farther back. For example, I can still clearly hear that the woodwinds and horns are sitting behind the string sections and that the percussion section is behind them. I can also still clearly hear that the differences in the first and second section violins, cellos from basses. True I can hear individual instruments but that is also impossible on most, if not all, recordings. If there is a soloist, I can clearly locate their position on the stage relative to the other instruments...even with my eyes closed. It doesn't sound like one big mono to me...just a less distinct stereo.

 

[morricab]

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

You mean you can't tell when something is playing behind something else? Strange...

 

[spiritofmusic]

I'm afraid so Brad.
Maybe I'm a musical philistine who doesn't know my instruments characters.
Or maybe I'm just not hearing it.
But at no point could I be wheeled into a hall blindfold, the musicians kick off, and I confidently state:
"Viola at 3pm well behind lead violin, percussion at 9pm well behind brass section, lead violin in front of oboes, oboes in front of piano".
Or whatever.
Then again, I don't hear this massively at home either.
So, I'm very sensitive to some spatial cues, tone, timbre, decay.
But totally delineated and differentiated instruments in the depth plane, no it's not happening for me.

 

[853guy]

I have a 27.5 Trek Slash with upgraded shocks and wheels, the new 29'er Slash looks amazing... Not sure on the 27.5+ thing, until they start winning EWS races I'm out.

Hi Dave,

Thread drift alert!

Really like EWS, but let’s face it, no one’s going to rock up to the line with a titanium hard tail, especially one with a 120mm fork, 3.0” tyres and expect to be competitive. That’s what the carbon 29” FS with 140mm is for, right?

Be well, Dave!

853guy

 

[853guy]

Colour me confused ... after all that elaborate theorizing .

Ride safe .

Hi Jazzhead,

Sorry, perhaps my point wasn't communicated clearly.

Though I appreciate the benefits conferred via a MCH system when optimised solely for MCH content the reality is the overwhelming majority of all the music I listen to is only currently available in conventional stereo (and in a few cases, mono) (1), and I see no plausible evidence to the contrary that will likely change. That BACCH limits me to a system in which one and only one person can appreciate its benefits at a time despite its compatibility with conventional stereo (and binaural) recordings, and a MCH system confers no substantive benefits to me given my musical taste, my $54K or $18K or, for that matter, $1.8K is simply better spent elsewhere.

Given the tremendous pleasure I'd derive from the above two mountain bikes, on indeed further music purchases versus the potentially specious enjoyment I’d derive from the BACCH system relative to my expenditure, sticking to a conventional two-channel system optimised toward the musical content I already have and will continue to buy solely based on musical preference seems like a no-brainer, though I appreciate others will feel differently.

Best,

853guy

(1) As of this writing, nearly 100% of the music I prefer is still being released exclusively on conventional two-channel stereo via CD, vinyl and more recently, WAV or FLAC.

 

[audioguy]

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

TOTALLY agree. And the further you sit back in the hall, the more "mono" it sounds. Even on row G (dead center) where I sat for over 25 years, it is still large mono. Close your eyes or open your eyes, you can not point to a specific instrument like you can at home. Even a solo violin, for example, does not present the image specificity we get at home. Given my age, maybe this is different for a 20 something .... but then again, I wasn't attending the symphony when I was a 20 something.

 

[PeterA]

I still hear plenty of depth when I sit farther back. For example, I can still clearly hear that the woodwinds and horns are sitting behind the string sections and that the percussion section is behind them. I can also still clearly hear that the differences in the first and second section violins, cellos from basses. True I can hear individual instruments but that is also impossible on most, if not all, recordings. If there is a soloist, I can clearly locate their position on the stage relative to the other instruments...even with my eyes closed. It doesn't sound like one big mono to me...just a less distinct stereo.

This is what I experience also. The fact that a well set up stereo system can approximate this information is astonishing to me. The best systems combining great resolution, great room, and proper set up, can produce a sense of presence, room filling sound, tone and dynamics which are quite convincing. Not as good, as big, or as real as actual live sound, but quite remarkable nonetheless. Every now and then I sit back and marvel at what audio designers and recording engineers have been able to achieve. It is truly impressive, IMO.

 

[spiritofmusic]

I'm glad I'm not alone here (hear).
The deaf leading the deaf LOL.
Now if listeners are getting the tone and dynamics I do with the differentiation in depth and imaging I hear at home, I can only guess what a thrill live classical and jazz is.
For me it surpasses the home experience in so many ways.
But not all.

 

[audioguy]

For me it surpasses the home experience in so many ways.
But not all.

Musically, not even close. Live is just live. Convenience, repeatability, on demand, home wins hands down. And if we can just enjoy the home experience for what it is, then this hobby/passion becomes even more enjoyable.

 

[spiritofmusic]

Sure Audioguy.
The purpose of the thread was just to throw up the comparison, based on my immersion in over a dozen live classical gigs in a fortnight.
I've learnt quite a bit about the shortcomings in my sound, where it competes, where it wins out, and things I could be looking at.
And I remain vastly more happy than unhappy in what I'm achieving at home.

 

[PeterA]

Sure Audioguy.
The purpose of the thread was just to throw up the comparison, based on my immersion in over a dozen live classical gigs in a fortnight.
I've learnt quite a bit about the shortcomings in my sound, where it competes, where it wins out, and things I could be looking at.
And I remain vastly more happy than unhappy in what I'm achieving at home.

Marc, it will be interesting to see how your views evolve over time and after the reintroduction of your turntable to your system. These kids of live listening sessions can really inform one about his system's sound and performance.

Some view the two experiences as completely different and unrelated, to be enjoyed on their own. They may not use one to inform decisions about the other. Others use the live experience as a critical and essential reference from which to learn and drive system changes. Either seems fine to me. There are lots of ways to enjoy music and the hobby.

 

[bonzo75]

Marc, it will be interesting to see how your views evolve over time and after the reintroduction of your turntable to your system. These kids of live listening sessions can really inform one about his system's sound and performance.

Some view the two experiences as completely different and unrelated, to be enjoyed on their own. They may not use one to inform decisions about the other. Others use the live experience as a critical and essential reference from which to learn and drive system changes. Either seems fine to me. There are lots of ways to enjoy music and the hobby.

That's what Ken Kessler said. That he doesn't use live as a reference, hardly goes to concerts, if at all, and he sees no point using that for a hifi system reference. He uses his current system at any moment as a reference

 

[PeterA]

That's what Ken Kessler said. That he doesn't use live as a reference, hardly goes to concerts, if at all, and he sees no point using that for a hifi system reference. He uses his current system at any moment as a reference

That's interesting considering that Kessler is SME's main reviewer and Alastair Robertson-Aikman founder of SME was an opera lover and used liver performances as his reference against which to assess the performance of his products, or so I am told. Kessler's reviews often make reference to how realistic something sounds.

Here is an excerpt from his review of the SME 30/12 in HiFi News: "But then, as if this bassy intro was setting the stage, the guitar work and the assorted Latin percussion provided enough treble activity and transient attack to assure the listener that this confident portrayal wasn’t restricted to only a part of the frequency spectrum. By the time the all-vocals emerged, sounding as warm and natural as one would expect of a device conceived by an opera lover, it was abundantly clear that the Model 30/12 was an upgrade in all areas – not just the anticipated by-products of either a longer arm and heavier plinth."

 

[bonzo75]

That's interesting considering that Kessler is SME's main reviewer and Alastair Robertson-Aikman founder of SME was an opera lover and used liver performances as his reference against which to assess the performance of his products, or so I am told. Kessler's reviews often make reference to how realistic something sounds.

Here is an excerpt from his review of the SME 30/12 in HiFi News: "But then, as if this bassy intro was setting the stage, the guitar work and the assorted Latin percussion provided enough treble activity and transient attack to assure the listener that this confident portrayal wasn’t restricted to only a part of the frequency spectrum. By the time the all-vocals emerged, sounding as warm and natural as one would expect of a device conceived by an opera lover, it was abundantly clear that the Model 30/12 was an upgrade in all areas – not just the anticipated by-products of either a longer arm and heavier plinth."

Classical and opera are not his tastes definitely, he was very clear when he addressed us at Windsor hifi show he does not go to shows for this. Anyway if he has chosen SME and AR he has reached good conclusions using a different route.

 

[spiritofmusic]

From what I've learnt about reviewers over the years, I take everything they say with large pinches of salt.
Peter, the return to my tt after:
1- an 18 month time gap
2- 6 months solid listening only to digital
3- a 3 months continued exposure to live unamplified -
- will be a fascinating experience.
My deep down instinct is that despite some inherent qualities of vinyl not correlating with live, the things I'm most sensitive to, and most precious of, and can't do without, will be most familiar with in a live v vinyl comparison.
Esp tone density, timbral accuracy, and continuousness.
No doubt there is nothing really objective here, I would never criticise anyone who only sees a correlation between top digital replay and live.
But in my case, what I find so persuasive about live that can be had at home I feel is best covered by lp.
Of course, the sheer limitless energy and dynamic shifts in live unamplified IMHO isn't heard anywhere in digital OR vinyl.