Live vs. Reproduced?

[DaveyF]

Tonight I went to a pleasant symphony at a local hall. While I was sitting in the audience, I once again realized how far away we are from being able to reproduce the sound of a 'live' orchestra in our homes.
One of the most obvious aspects is the massive dynamics and overall 'bloom' that the live orchestra brings to the table. I have never heard any audio system that can even come close to bringing this aspect to life.
What also struck me tonight, was the value of tremendous bottom-end extension that is not really that supportable in our homes. I'm beginning to think that perhaps the ability to move massive amounts of air is a requirement for any possible realistic reproduction of a symphony orchestra...although while in my seat the volume wasn't really that loud, however, the scope of sound was what impressed me.. and what. IMHO, we simply cannot seem to come close to reproducing in our homes..
Do we perhaps need to re-think how we put our systems together so that we focus primarily on the aspect of 'bloom/scale' reproduction and not on other areas such as imaging, etc?

 

[fas42]

Oh dear!

DaveyF, I'm afraid you've opened the door again, you have no right to do that, pushing my buttons!!

At the guaranteed risk of boring just about everyone here witless, I am afraid to say that you can reproduce "massive dynamics and overall bloom" in the home, and that's achievable with just about any system. I won't repeat the patter I've trotted out every time this sort of subject comes up; suffice to say that I'm working on getting my weenie little system described in the member's gallery subforum to do that very thing on a consistent basis. When I've managed to get all the gods to look favourably on me, and that's bloody hard(!), I get Beethoven's 9th, at maximum volume, thundering fit to burst the room and house, and it's beautiful stuff!

And again, ever again, it is not the bass that's critical!! Yes, the underpinning of the low notes is necessary, but what is absolutely, absolutely crucial is getting the treble right! If that's not behaving, it will never, ever happen ...

Sorry about that, people ...

Frank

 

[JackD201]

Unless you have tolerant family and neighbors I would not advise it

The problem is we can't fight physics. To really begin to just approach that sense of scale you either need a really large space or a fairly large one that is heavily treated and loudspeakers that as you mentioned can move a lot of air. Of course there are psychoacoustic "cheats". Nearfield bordering on the extreme is one but expect to use powered and adjustable subs to get any semblance of a natural tonal balance from 4 feet in. The speakers will also have to be extremely low in distortion lest their break up modes normally masked with distance present themselves horribly.

 

[mep]

Davey-We are all humbled after hearing live music. I'm more in Jack's camp here than Frank's camp. I have stated numerous times that speakers have to move lots of air to sound realistic. You can beat the snot out of your tweeters like Frank does to make them behave before you play music, but the finest tweeters in the world that don't require a good beating before you sit down to listen can't pull off resembling sounding like live music if the rest of the speakers aren't up to snuff. And you really do need multiple subs, Frantz has convinced me of that.

 

[garylkoh]

I am also more in Jack's and Mark's camps than in Frank's. You have to move a lot of air to have anything resembling live music - especially large orchestral works. Nevertheless, for small jazz groups, it can be surprising how close to live good reproduction can be. I don't agree that you absolutely have to get the tweeters right - if any one frequency range outperforms the rest, you lose the suspension of disbelief.

I'm in the process of learning, having been given the chance to do it myself by being at a live performance, and having the 5 mono Tascam 24/96 tracks of the recording. The more I try, the more respect I have of the great mastering and recording engineers.

 

[Phelonious Ponk]

Again, this completely depends on what you're looking for. If you're looking to re-produce the scale and ambience of a live symphony, A) You can't do it, but B) Given enough power, transducers, room volume and treatment, you can get a bit closer than mortals do with their normal rooms and appropriately-sized "high-end" systems. But if you're looking for resolution of detail, imaging (as opposed to sound stage) and the beautiful, nuanced tone of voices and instruments so immediately there that they seem to be hanging in front of you, where you could almost reach out and pluck them from the air...then I would submit that there are probably only a few seats in a few halls that will be as good as a good hifi system.

With very rare exceptions, recordings are recordings and live performances are something else. I choose not to chase phantoms when what is right in front of me is quite beautiful.

What Frank is chasing, on the other hand, is not a phantom. It's real enough but won't accomplish what's being discussed in this thread, it is just the kind of purity in the upper midrange that gets the system out of the way and allows the overwhelming majority of the music to come through unmolested. Get a really good pair of active monitors, Frank. Plug a good, transparent DAC into them, and you can call your quest done and spend the rest of your days listening to music.

Tim

 

[garylkoh]

I choose not to chase phantoms when what is right in front of me is quite beautiful.

Tim, I like this very much. I find that too many audiophiles stress over some phantom and then they go chasing rainbows and leave the beauty they already have behind.

How many of you here have bought an upgrade, and then find something else wrong, and drop you into another upgrade spiral?

 

[Phelonious Ponk]

Tim, I like this very much. I find that too many audiophiles stress over some phantom and then they go chasing rainbows and leave the beauty they already have behind.

How many of you here have bought an upgrade, and then find something else wrong, and drop you into another upgrade spiral?

Yeah, we seem to have a very similar philosophical approach to audio. Makes me want to hear your speakers.

Tim

 

[fas42]

What Frank is chasing, on the other hand, is not a phantom. It's real enough but won't accomplish what's being discussed in this thread, it is just the kind of purity in the upper midrange that gets the system out of the way and allows the overwhelming majority of the music to come through unmolested. Get a really good pair of active monitors, Frank. Plug a good, transparent DAC into them, and you can call your quest done and spend the rest of your days listening to music.

Okay,Tim, I'll take it on ... .What DaveyF was calling for was "massive dynamics and overall 'bloom'". I agree with you totally about good actives and a spot on DAC being a smart way to get good sound, in fact an even sharper way would be Meridian-like digital speakers, done correctly -- so what won't your recommended approach fail to get right and satisfy DaveyF?

Frank

 

[RogerD]

Interesting and a subject I think audiophiles have always thought that was the holy grail. I think you can come about 85 pct close. The most important point for me is the emotional feeling. Now, to reproduce that I have 2 pairs of speakers and 2 subwoofers plus some equipment I have collected over 40 years. I think a way to recreate psychoacoustic ques is important along with a wide soundstage that produces a complete wall of sound,top to bottom,side to side,and with very good three dimensional qualities. I have found bloom is important and is speaker cable dependant. Also I think either tube amps or a tube preamp will bring you closer. I do like SS amplifiers for their ability to bring good bass sock to the illusion.

Anyway I am never finished and it has been a life long journey searching for the holy grail.

 

[fas42]

You have to move a lot of air to have anything resembling live music - especially large orchestral works.

I'm sorry to have to disagree with all you folks. This is a great fallacy, possibly the great fallacy in the audio industry, which perhaps more than anything else is holding it back. The simple truth is that live music is loud, and that is a key characteristic that the ear is looking for, or is used to. Yes, that does mean moving more air than normal, but the moving of a lot of air to most people here means lots and lots of bass grunt, which is only a part of the picture. Now, every system can move that amount of air in the middle and treble ranges, go loud, just as loud as live music does, so that key attribute is there. But, it fails to convince, and the reason is that far too much distortion is added to the mix, is far too obvious to the ear, and the illusion fails. Remove the distortion, and the illusion works, quite irrespective of the bass content.

I know exactly what DaveyF means about the "bloom", live music most assuredly has in spades, virtually every extremely expensive system I've experienced fails miserably on this count unless exactly the right recordings are played, but it can be achieved on normal systems if the right measures are taken. This bloom exists in live music, and on a properly sorted system, when the sound is at seemingly deafening levels, when it is close to impossible to hear what someone standing right next to you is saying ...

Frank

 

[fas42]

so what won't your recommended approach fail to get right and satisfy DaveyF?

Unprecedented! I'm quoting myself, because the thought came that you enjoy nearfield listening, which tells the story. The problem is that when you attempt to raise the volume and move further back, the electronics start to "stress", distort, and the beauty fades. So there is a sweet spot of volume where your circuitry is barely ticking over, and the music's fine. So that's good, and a perfectly valid way of achieving a goal. My thing, however, is to be able to have the music running at a level so that it sounds "real" wherever I am in the house.

And a further thought. Tim believes that a choice needs to be made: soundstaging or imaging, other people perhaps call it truth or tonality. I know that you can achieve both, at the same time, that no such choice needs to be made ...

Frank

 

[mep]

Frank-Moving lots of air does not mean just in the bass. You have to move lots of air from top to bottom. The more air you move, the more effortless your system sounds and the more realistic. Yes, you can turn up the volume knob until a small speaker gets as loud as it can before it cries uncle, but it sure won't sound as "big" and realistic as a speaker with multiple drivers covering the spectrum.

 

[fas42]

Mark, I agree, lots of air need to be moved, but the remarkable thing is that the drivers are not the problem. Before I did the fiddling that I have described here many times I would have agreed with every one of you about the necessity of having enough cone area to do the job. Of course, in the bass there are obvious physical limits because Xmax rears its ugly head at some point.

But I really got a shock the first time I heard a fairly ordinary tweeter and mid/bass driver do the job, pump out high levels of volume without obvious distress. I have yet to find a driver that cries uncle, because in every case when it sounded like that, it was always the electronics that were the culprit. At the moment the speakers I am using are really quite ridiculous, tiny Bose like things, but I have yet to find a limit to their capabilities ...

Frank

 

[mep]

But I really got a shock the first time I heard a fairly ordinary tweeter and mid/bass driver do the job, pump out high levels of volume without obvious distress.

Frank-again I’m not talking about driving an “ordinary tweeter and mid/bass driver” to the point of distress. I don’t care how loud you can turn them up and still stand them, they won’t move the air of a larger speaker system. It’s a simple law of physics that can’t be ignored away.

I have yet to find a driver that cries uncle, because in every case when it sounded like that, it was always the electronics that were the culprit.

Horse puckey.

At the moment the speakers I am using are really quite ridiculous, tiny Bose like things, but I have yet to find a limit to their capabilities ...

Give them to me Frank, I will find the limits of their capabilities for you in a flash. I will blow the paper cones and domes plum off the drivers and give them back to you in pieces.

 

[Phelonious Ponk]

Okay,Tim, I'll take it on ... .What DaveyF was calling for was "massive dynamics and overall 'bloom'". I agree with you totally about good actives and a spot on DAC being a smart way to get good sound, in fact an even sharper way would be Meridian-like digital speakers, done correctly -- so what won't your recommended approach fail to get right and satisfy DaveyF?

Frank

Volume. Scale. Lots of square inches of driver surface moving lots of air in a really big room. Many of audiophiles think they've got it; very few do. And like all things, it's a trade-off. To get that huge sense of space you have to give up the resolution of fine detail, just like you do in the concert hall. Sit closer, you get more detail, less space. Back away you get more space, less nuance. As someone earlier said, at some point you're just up against the physics of the thing; there isn't much you can do to change it.

Tim

 

[Phelonious Ponk]

Unprecedented! I'm quoting myself, because the thought came that you enjoy nearfield listening, which tells the story. The problem is that when you attempt to raise the volume and move further back, the electronics start to "stress", distort, and the beauty fades. So there is a sweet spot of volume where your circuitry is barely ticking over, and the music's fine. So that's good, and a perfectly valid way of achieving a goal. My thing, however, is to be able to have the music running at a level so that it sounds "real" wherever I am in the house.

And a further thought. Tim believes that a choice needs to be made: soundstaging or imaging, other people perhaps call it truth or tonality. I know that you can achieve both, at the same time, that no such choice needs to be made ...

Frank

Frank, Frank, Frank...My little monitors have their weaknesses, but this is not on the list. Each tweeter has its own 75-watt amp. Each woofer has its own 250-watt amp. The amps and drivers are purpose-built to match in output and resistance. They have gobs of headroom and when I take them out of my little listening room and set them on stands in the living room of the house they can fill that room, and the kitchen, and the adjacent den without strain. It would take a much bigger room than any I own to find their limits.

You're going to need another theory.

Tim

 

[Phelonious Ponk]

Give them to me Frank, I will find the limits of their capabilities for you in a flash. I will blow the paper cones and domes plum off the drivers and give them back to you in pieces.

The clipping will probably fry the voice coils first, Mep.

Tim

 

[mep]

Tim-I don't know if I agree with what you said with regards to giving up resolution of fine detail in order to gain a "huge" sense of space. I still think I hear tons of fine detail in my system along with the sense of space. You are probably way more sensitive to this than most of us since you are listening very near-field due to the nature of your set-up. You probably give up detail when you go from your cans to your powered speakers even though you are sitting in the near-field when you listen to your speakers. My room is L-shaped and at the narrowest point, my room is 15' W x 23' D x 9' H. The L shape adds another 4' to the left side of the listening position. Each of my speakers has 9 drivers (two are 14" passive radiators) and my sub adds another 3 drivers (two are 14" passive radiators) so depending on how you count them, there is either 21 speakers moving air or there is 15. Either way, they are moving lots of air and provide plenty of detail at my listening position.

 

[fas42]

Horse puckey..

Expression I've never heard before ...

Give them to me Frank, I will find the limits of their capabilities for you in a flash. I will blow the paper cones and domes plum off the drivers and give them back to you in pieces

Pretty easy to do if you overdrive them, feed any driver full amplitude pure sine wave from a 200 watt amp continuously, I'm sure you'll smoke any normal JBL or Cerwin Vega; or even better, a good square wave will do an excellent job ...

But these are drivers designed to handle 20 watts, with efficiencies to match, and within those constraints they do an excellent job. Biggest problem was damping the plastic enclosures, the driver gaskets and the original connection hardware. These all started to rattle and buzz when speakers were driving hard on, of all things, transfers from old 78 records, these seem to have a nasty bass peak in a particular spot.

Frank