Violin videos: solo or with small ensemble

[bonzo75]

Devil's Trill, David Oistrakh

 

[morricab]

From the vaults:
video of a live performance of my ex playing Paganini caprice No. 5. Recorded on a Sony Handicam circa 2004. Played back through my system circa 2020. Performance is in Tonhalle Zurich, kleiner Saal and playing on a Stradivarius violin.

 

[morricab]

ensemble with trumpet, again circa 2020 system.

 

[morricab]

https://vimeo.com/505640730

https://vimeo.com/505638999

Seven different violins playing the same piece by the same musician. Can you guess which one is the Stradivarius?

 

[morricab]

2nd system fully active with Supravox/Beyma drivers.

 

[hopkins]

https://vimeo.com/505640730

https://vimeo.com/505638999

Seven different violins playing the same piece by the same musician. Can you guess which one is the Stradivarius?

IMG_0853 ?

 

[Scott Naylor]

https://vimeo.com/505640730

https://vimeo.com/505638999

Seven different violins playing the same piece by the same musician. Can you guess which one is the Stradivarius?

Thanks for putting this together, morricab! One question, was the same bow used for each recording?

 

[morricab]

Thanks for putting this together, morricab! One question, was the same bow used for each recording?

Same bow on all violins.

 

[morricab]

 

[morricab]

 

[morricab]

 

[morricab]

 

[morricab]

 

[morricab]

 

[bonzo75]

Four seasons

魅惑の「励磁」の世界にようこそ | Facebook

www.facebook.com

 

[stehno]

Four seasons

魅惑の「励磁」の世界にようこそ | Facebook

www.facebook.com

Not bad, bonzo. In fact, I consider yours one of the more musical videos you've posted. However, when the cellos kick in, the bass becomes rather undefined as it also seemingly moves to the foreground leaving the violins more in the background. And when the cellos kick in so does that empty-coffee-can signature sound in a very unnatural way.

In contrast, I would consider mine sounding more from a concert hall with a reasonable distance between soundstage and audience perspective. And without the empty-coffee-can signature.

 

[morricab]

Not bad, bonzo. In fact, I consider yours one of the more musical videos you've posted. However, when the cellos kick in, the bass becomes rather undefined as it also seemingly moves to the foreground leaving the violins more in the background. And when the cellos kick in so does that empty-coffee-can signature sound in a very unnatural way.

In contrast, I would consider mine sounding more from a concert hall with a reasonable distance between soundstage and audience perspective. And without the empty-coffee-can signature.

Maybe try a different recording…this sounds very thin and wiry.

 

[stehno]

Maybe try a different recording…this sounds very thin and wiry.

You left out waaay too much room reverb, didn’t you?

Your critiques are rather amusing, morricab. Based on your recent post of an organ video “sounding like what a pipe organ should sound like” yet with a bass falling all over itself much like in bonzo’s video and the questionable sound quality of most/all of your own in-room videos, maybe throwing stones while living in a glass house is a best defense after all?

But here’s what causes me most to question your credibility and perceived listening skills…

About 9 or 10 months ago in another thread, you emphatically stated that all of my videos contained waaay too much room reverb. Your words. You were not alone as a few months later your buddy Al M said much the same in another thread. In both cases, by posting other videos I was easily able to demonstrate how much / little reverb my room induced and you both went silent. Not another word from either of you presumably seasoned listeners.

Several things come to mind. For example. Seemingly …

- Neither of you considered the probability that since my room induces so little reverb, then the room reverb you thought you heard must be coming from my system rather than the room. Moreover, if it’s coming from the system, then it must be originating from the music info embedded in the recording.

- If the room reverb you complained about is originating from the recording, then it’s not waaay too much room reverb after all. Rather it’s volumes (and volumes) of ambient info embedded in the recording captured from the live performance.

- You both were so off base with your listening skills you actually confused waaay too much unnatural room reverb with volumes of natural ambient info originating from the live performance.

- Were both so confident in your claims of waaay too much room reverb, you presented it as fact – leaving no room for doubt. Just as you’re doing here with thin and wiry.

- It’s rather obvious that neither of you ever heard such volumes of ambient info before on any other playback system or perhaps never recognized its import during a live performance. Otherwise, I’m guessing you would have left at least a little room for doubt?

- Neither of you bothered to consider the possibility that if indeed my system’s capturing volumes of the most difficult of all detail to reproduce, the lowest of all low-level detail i.e. a recording’s ambient info, might there be anything else my system may be capturing from the recording?

- You both are unable to grasp the significance this volumes of ambient info plays in both reproduced and live music.

- It’s a given that your curiosity how my playback system might capture this volumes of ambient info from the recording (the most difficult low-level detail for any system to reproduce) is pretty much out the window.

IOW, you and Al both being presumably seasoned listeners were attempting to cast a shadow on all of my videos because they actually contained waaay too much natural ambient info from the recording (an impossibility) when you were thought you were casting a shadow on all my videos for having waaay too much unnatural room reverb.

What’s even more concerning is, as I recall you routinely attend live performances, your ex-wife plays the violin, and you sell product and yet you’re still unable to discern a difference between unnatural room reverb and the all-so-important natural ambient info associated with a live performance. How might this oversight be possible for somebody of your supposed experience and caliber?

On the other hand, perhaps you and Al ought to be commended for at least noticing something different or unique about my videos when presumably others didn't?

As for the “thin” sound you claim to hear, sure my system will influence as I’ve yet to encounter a system that doesn’t. Also, that recording is from the Tacet label which in my limited experience their recordings are often times a bit lighter and more airy than usual and a bit more musical.

Nevertheless, what do you suppose happens to any live performance or playback presentation when there is injected volumes of natural ambient info? If you guessed that the playback presentation thins out (becomes lighter, more airy, spacious, etc) , with a perceived greater distance between our ears in the audience and the performers on the soundstage, that’s a BINGO!

Speaking of which, it seems some here get all goose-pimply with recordings that are closely-mic’ed giving a more intimate listening perspective. I’m guessing because such recordings can offer a playback presentation with greater richness, warmth, tonality, etc. to help make up for numerous system deficiencies. IOW, such characteristics ought to be less extreme from a distance – like from the audience.

And because of the close proximity of a live recording’s mics, it will not capture as much of the recording hall's ambient info. Capturing less of the live performance’s ambient info and you have a thicker, heavier, richer, warmer presentation which some translate to more musical. Moreover, closely mic’ed recordings will generate a closer proximity sound almost as though you’re seated with the musicians or at the conductor’s podium. Is that realistic? Sure, if you’re a musician or conductor at that live performance. But I prefer a listening perspective seated in the audience.

In contrast, if you think performances not so closely mic’ed will lose some of that richness, warmth, tonality, etc (including less recording hall ambient info) well…, that’s another bingo. Moreover, distanced mic recordings have the potential to present more of an audience-to-soundstage listening perspective with more recording hall ambient info making the presentation lighter, thinner, more spacious and airy, etc.

BTW, you are perceptive but I’ve not noticed you comment once on any of the many in-room videos that possess that empty-coffee-can signature sound that you will never hear at a live performance. Is this because you haven’t noticed it or is it because you like and prefer it?

These are just some of the things we should be aware of and should go without saying. Yet, here I am compelled to say them.

Since you suggested I try another video, here’s an organ piece for your listening pleasure with perhaps a more musically accurate bass than you’re accustomed.

 

[morricab]

You left out waaay too much room reverb, didn’t you?

Your critiques are rather amusing, morricab. Based on your recent post of an organ video “sounding like what a pipe organ should sound like” yet with a bass falling all over itself much like in bonzo’s video and the questionable sound quality of most/all of your own in-room videos, maybe throwing stones while living in a glass house is a best defense after all?

But here’s what causes me most to question your credibility and perceived listening skills…

About 9 or 10 months ago in another thread, you emphatically stated that all of my videos contained waaay too much room reverb. Your words. You were not alone as a few months later your buddy Al M said much the same in another thread. In both cases, by posting other videos I was easily able to demonstrate how much / little reverb my room induced and you both went silent. Not another word from either of you presumably seasoned listeners.

Several things come to mind. For example. Seemingly …

- Neither of you considered the probability that since my room induces so little reverb, then the room reverb you thought you heard must be coming from my system rather than the room. Moreover, if it’s coming from the system, then it must be originating from the music info embedded in the recording.

- If the room reverb you complained about is originating from the recording, then it’s not waaay too much room reverb after all. Rather it’s volumes (and volumes) of ambient info embedded in the recording captured from the live performance.

- You both were so off base with your listening skills you actually confused waaay too much unnatural room reverb with volumes of natural ambient info originating from the live performance.

- Were both so confident in your claims of waaay too much room reverb, you presented it as fact – leaving no room for doubt. Just as you’re doing here with thin and wiry.

- It’s rather obvious that neither of you ever heard such volumes of ambient info before on any other playback system or perhaps never recognized its import during a live performance. Otherwise, I’m guessing you would have left at least a little room for doubt?

- Neither of you bothered to consider the possibility that if indeed my system’s capturing volumes of the most difficult of all detail to reproduce, the lowest of all low-level detail i.e. a recording’s ambient info, might there be anything else my system may be capturing from the recording?

- You both are unable to grasp the significance this volumes of ambient info plays in both reproduced and live music.

- It’s a given that your curiosity how my playback system might capture this volumes of ambient info from the recording (the most difficult low-level detail for any system to reproduce) is pretty much out the window.

IOW, you and Al both being presumably seasoned listeners were attempting to cast a shadow on all of my videos because they actually contained waaay too much natural ambient info from the recording (an impossibility) when you were thought you were casting a shadow on all my videos for having waaay too much unnatural room reverb.

What’s even more concerning is, as I recall you routinely attend live performances, your ex-wife plays the violin, and you sell product and yet you’re still unable to discern a difference between unnatural room reverb and the all-so-important natural ambient info associated with a live performance. How might this oversight be possible for somebody of your supposed experience and caliber?

On the other hand, perhaps you and Al ought to be commended for at least noticing something different or unique about my videos when presumably others didn't?

As for the “thin” sound you claim to hear, sure my system will influence as I’ve yet to encounter a system that doesn’t. Also, that recording is from the Tacet label which in my limited experience their recordings are often times a bit lighter and more airy than usual and a bit more musical.

Nevertheless, what do you suppose happens to any live performance or playback presentation when there is injected volumes of natural ambient info? If you guessed that the playback presentation thins out (becomes lighter, more airy, spacious, etc) , with a perceived greater distance between our ears in the audience and the performers on the soundstage, that’s a BINGO!

Speaking of which, it seems some here get all goose-pimply with recordings that are closely-mic’ed giving a more intimate listening perspective. I’m guessing because such recordings can offer a playback presentation with greater richness, warmth, tonality, etc. to help make up for numerous system deficiencies. IOW, such characteristics ought to be less extreme from a distance – like from the audience.

And because of the close proximity of a live recording’s mics, it will not capture as much of the recording hall's ambient info. Capturing less of the live performance’s ambient info and you have a thicker, heavier, richer, warmer presentation which some translate to more musical. Moreover, closely mic’ed recordings will generate a closer proximity sound almost as though you’re seated with the musicians or at the conductor’s podium. Is that realistic? Sure, if you’re a musician or conductor at that live performance. But I prefer a listening perspective seated in the audience.

In contrast, if you think performances not so closely mic’ed will lose some of that richness, warmth, tonality, etc (including less recording hall ambient info) well…, that’s another bingo. Moreover, distanced mic recordings have the potential to present more of an audience-to-soundstage listening perspective with more recording hall ambient info making the presentation lighter, thinner, more spacious and airy, etc.

BTW, you are perceptive but I’ve not noticed you comment once on any of the many in-room videos that possess that empty-coffee-can signature sound that you will never hear at a live performance. Is this because you haven’t noticed it or is it because you like and prefer it?

These are just some of the things we should be aware of and should go without saying. Yet, here I am compelled to say them.

Since you suggested I try another video, here’s an organ piece for your listening pleasure with perhaps a more musically accurate bass than you’re accustomed.

Listen again to the Aries Cerat video...and not just the organ piece. Listen to the piano starting at 5:36...very realistic piano reproduction...including the low notes.

Aries Cerat CES 2016 (youtube.com)

Yours is frankly not close to this. Your bass might be deeper and tighter but the top to bottom "gestalt" of a real organ in real space is nowhere as close. Look at the YouTube comments...people are blown away by it. Have you ever actually heard a live organ in a large church? I have a friend who used to build organs for a living...he now makes custom furniture. I played him this piece off YouTube and he was very impressed.

Also, do you hear how different the acoustic is with each piece played? It is radically different depending on the recording. Your sax + organ again is drenched in reverb. Maybe you gravitate towards recordings like this but it is there nonetheless.

I re-listened to the Vivaldi. Once you get past the wiry violins, you hear the soundstage is quite narrow but there is still a lot of hollowness in the soundstage. Again, I asked you to play a different Vivaldi recording of the same piece...not a completely different recording...whatever. I was actually willing to give you the benefit of the doubt that the recording you chose was not a great one...you chose to take it in a completely different direction.

I don't get the impression you listen to live classical music much. Further back in the hall gives a more rolled off and less airy sound as high frequencies are lost with absorption and distance from the musicians. An up close recording with reverb added will sound potentially both wiry and reverberant.

PS. What you think of my own posted videos is frankly irrelevant to me. I know what I hear in them that sounds realistic and what is missing from reality. If you listen to them carefully and then live music you will realize that they are better than you give them credit for.

 

[Hear Here]

You left out waaay too much room reverb, didn’t you?

Your critiques are rather amusing, morricab. Based on your recent post of an organ video “sounding like what a pipe organ should sound like” yet with a bass falling all over itself much like in bonzo’s video and the questionable sound quality of most/all of your own in-room videos, maybe throwing stones while living in a glass house is a best defense after all?

But here’s what causes me most to question your credibility and perceived listening skills…

About 9 or 10 months ago in another thread, you emphatically stated that all of my videos contained waaay too much room reverb. Your words. You were not alone as a few months later your buddy Al M said much the same in another thread. In both cases, by posting other videos I was easily able to demonstrate how much / little reverb my room induced and you both went silent. Not another word from either of you presumably seasoned listeners.

Several things come to mind. For example. Seemingly …

- Neither of you considered the probability that since my room induces so little reverb, then the room reverb you thought you heard must be coming from my system rather than the room. Moreover, if it’s coming from the system, then it must be originating from the music info embedded in the recording.

- If the room reverb you complained about is originating from the recording, then it’s not waaay too much room reverb after all. Rather it’s volumes (and volumes) of ambient info embedded in the recording captured from the live performance.

- You both were so off base with your listening skills you actually confused waaay too much unnatural room reverb with volumes of natural ambient info originating from the live performance.

- Were both so confident in your claims of waaay too much room reverb, you presented it as fact – leaving no room for doubt. Just as you’re doing here with thin and wiry.

- It’s rather obvious that neither of you ever heard such volumes of ambient info before on any other playback system or perhaps never recognized its import during a live performance. Otherwise, I’m guessing you would have left at least a little room for doubt?

- Neither of you bothered to consider the possibility that if indeed my system’s capturing volumes of the most difficult of all detail to reproduce, the lowest of all low-level detail i.e. a recording’s ambient info, might there be anything else my system may be capturing from the recording?

- You both are unable to grasp the significance this volumes of ambient info plays in both reproduced and live music.

- It’s a given that your curiosity how my playback system might capture this volumes of ambient info from the recording (the most difficult low-level detail for any system to reproduce) is pretty much out the window.

IOW, you and Al both being presumably seasoned listeners were attempting to cast a shadow on all of my videos because they actually contained waaay too much natural ambient info from the recording (an impossibility) when you were thought you were casting a shadow on all my videos for having waaay too much unnatural room reverb.

What’s even more concerning is, as I recall you routinely attend live performances, your ex-wife plays the violin, and you sell product and yet you’re still unable to discern a difference between unnatural room reverb and the all-so-important natural ambient info associated with a live performance. How might this oversight be possible for somebody of your supposed experience and caliber?

On the other hand, perhaps you and Al ought to be commended for at least noticing something different or unique about my videos when presumably others didn't?

As for the “thin” sound you claim to hear, sure my system will influence as I’ve yet to encounter a system that doesn’t. Also, that recording is from the Tacet label which in my limited experience their recordings are often times a bit lighter and more airy than usual and a bit more musical.

Nevertheless, what do you suppose happens to any live performance or playback presentation when there is injected volumes of natural ambient info? If you guessed that the playback presentation thins out (becomes lighter, more airy, spacious, etc) , with a perceived greater distance between our ears in the audience and the performers on the soundstage, that’s a BINGO!

Speaking of which, it seems some here get all goose-pimply with recordings that are closely-mic’ed giving a more intimate listening perspective. I’m guessing because such recordings can offer a playback presentation with greater richness, warmth, tonality, etc. to help make up for numerous system deficiencies. IOW, such characteristics ought to be less extreme from a distance – like from the audience.

And because of the close proximity of a live recording’s mics, it will not capture as much of the recording hall's ambient info. Capturing less of the live performance’s ambient info and you have a thicker, heavier, richer, warmer presentation which some translate to more musical. Moreover, closely mic’ed recordings will generate a closer proximity sound almost as though you’re seated with the musicians or at the conductor’s podium. Is that realistic? Sure, if you’re a musician or conductor at that live performance. But I prefer a listening perspective seated in the audience.

In contrast, if you think performances not so closely mic’ed will lose some of that richness, warmth, tonality, etc (including less recording hall ambient info) well…, that’s another bingo. Moreover, distanced mic recordings have the potential to present more of an audience-to-soundstage listening perspective with more recording hall ambient info making the presentation lighter, thinner, more spacious and airy, etc.

BTW, you are perceptive but I’ve not noticed you comment once on any of the many in-room videos that possess that empty-coffee-can signature sound that you will never hear at a live performance. Is this because you haven’t noticed it or is it because you like and prefer it?

These are just some of the things we should be aware of and should go without saying. Yet, here I am compelled to say them.

Since you suggested I try another video, here’s an organ piece for your listening pleasure with perhaps a more musically accurate bass than you’re accustomed.

Now, I find that track almost unlistenable to because the reverberation renders the violin sound more like a cheap woodwind at times - a recorder perhaps! The venue may be OK for the organ, but if a violin is there, it should be mic'd in such a way that it sounds like a violin.