Videos of Acoustically-Coupled Audio Recordings

[SlapEcho]

No cats but maybe turn off the air conditioner (or whatever it is making that rumbling noise in the background)? However, video sounds good!

Thank you for the compliments.

Yes, there’s quite a bit of background noise in the recording. The first ½ second of the video is the background noise in my room plus low level cellphone prior to actually playing the track.

Sounds great! What software/streamer/dac are you using?

Using a custom Windows 10 server with Tidal playback, a modified Benchmark Media DAC 3B, and a custom USB cable which has been another area of enlightenment I would say an analogical visual equivalence of going from 2D to 3D.

As a system in whole there’s quite a bit of customization going on but some, if not most of the effort has been focused on removing EMI/RFI, layer by layer, by which I find greatly improves system transparency and resolution to the point I’m often pleasantly surprised how much hidden information lays within these “digital grooves”.

 

[Wavetouch]

Does your playback of this track sound as good as this?

Live recording.

 

[hopkins]

The videos are great.

The track itself bothers me in that the piano is mixed in stereo. Am I mistaken? Perhaps two microphones were used?

 

[Rexp]

Live recording.

Thanks! Curious why you posted the youtube version though as that is not a standard anyone is aiming for?

 

[RCanelas]

Bringing the conversation here not pollute Peter's thread. I enjoyed the comparison between the various systems from @PeterA , @tima , @jdza and @LMR-Miguel , all horns, and decided to add my own. Also horn, but dipole, maybe a different flavor.

I absolutely love the amount of low-mid energy from your systems. I'm familiar with @LMR-Miguel system, need to drop by again to get a look at the latest tweaks.

I don't have this record, so this is a Qobuz stream.

 

[Rexp]

Bringing the conversation here not pollute Peter's thread. I enjoyed the comparison between the various systems from @PeterA , @tima , @jdza and @LMR-Miguel , all horns, and decided to add my own. Also horn, but dipole, maybe a different flavor.

I absolutely love the amount of low-mid energy from your systems. I'm familiar with @LMR-Miguel system, need to drop by again to get a look at the latest tweaks.

I don't have this record, so this is a Qobuz stream.

I would say that version sounds a bit 'digital', try this one:

 

[Wavetouch]

The videos are great. The track itself bothers me in that the piano is mixed in stereo. Am I mistaken? Perhaps two microphones were used?

Yes. I use 2 mics. I agree my previous recording was bit off. The problem was from the speaker. I fine tuned speakers and recorded same track again. Thank you for input!

 

[Wavetouch]

Thanks! Curious why you posted the youtube version though as that is not a standard anyone is aiming for?

If you are asking about my original YT video posts with my live recording, I think hearing the original sound, a reference, refreshes our biased ears from listening other systems.

What is a standard aim for others?

 

[hopkins]

Yes. I use 2 mics. I agree my previous recording was bit off. The problem was from the speaker. I fine tuned speakers and recorded same track again. Thank you for input!

Sorry, I meant that the original track had some weird stereo effect - I did not notice it more in your video, but if you managed to fix something, then even better!

 

[Rexp]

If you are asking about my original YT video posts with my live recording, I think hearing the original sound, a reference, refreshes our biased ears from listening other systems.

What is a standard aim for others?

The 'original' youtube version is not a reliable reference. Who knows what the channel owner chose to upload, could be a poor mp3 version of the original 24/44.1 track.

 

[PeterA]

If you are asking about my original YT video posts with my live recording, I think hearing the original sound, a reference, refreshes our biased ears from listening other systems.

What is a standard aim for others?

Wavetouch, how is the original YouTube video considered the original sound when some of these recordings that we are playing were originally analog recordings to tape and then vinyl? In what way do you consider it “original”? It is some later digital version of a recording that was once analog.

if it sounds thin and bright and “digital“ to some listeners, in what way does it reset one’s biased ears? It just represents a different sound that we cannot conclude is representative of the original recording. How are these YouTube recordings designated somehow as “official“? What does that mean? It’s just some digital file, undefined, that is not played through an audio system. Is anyone claiming that this sounds like the original music? If not, why should we hold it up as a reference?

 

[Wavetouch]

The 'original' youtube version is not a reliable reference. Who knows what the channel owner chose to upload, could be a poor mp3 version of the original 24/44.1 track.

Before I download the music from YT, I listen/compare the sound quality of available same music videos. Always official videos sound the best.

 

[PeterA]

Before I download the music from YT, I listen/compare the sound quality of available same music videos. Always official videos sound the best.

Is it true that in your case you are playing the digital file through your system and comparing it to The original official YouTube file?

If that is the case, it’s quite different from someone playing a tape or LP and then recording it through his system and comparing that result to a digital file.

Usually the electronics and speakers and room have a negative impact on the quality of the recording. If you start with the same digital source and one has the rest of the system and room while the other does not, I can understand your conclusion.

 

[Wavetouch]

Wavetouch, how is the original YouTube video considered the original sound when some of these recordings that we are playing were originally analog recordings to tape and then vinyl? In what way do you consider it “original”? It is some later digital version of a recording that was once analog.

Basically, the original music for me here is the music playing with my modded Oppo which I live-record. I download the best sounding video (to my ears) among official videos after the comparison. I think these videos can be used as a reference since it is available to every body.

if it sounds thin and bright and “digital“ to some listeners, in what way does it reset one’s biased ears? It just represents a different sound that we cannot conclude is representative of the original recording. How are these YouTube recordings designated somehow as “official“? What does that mean? It’s just some digital file, undefined, that is not played through an audio system. Is anyone claiming that this sounds like the original music? If not, why should we hold it up as a reference?

Usually, official videos are uploaded by singers, owners, or license holders of the music. I believe that they post their best quality videos.

if it sounds thin and bright and “digital“ to some listeners, in what way does it reset one’s biased ears?

I am not sure your exact question. My possible answer.
In below video (**reduce the computer speaker volume,
1) at 0:08 ~ 0:22 the natural sound spkr sounds OK.
2) at 0:25 ~ 0:35 the unnatural sound spkr sound OK, your ears quickly adjust to the unnatural sound. ** Your ears are biased.
3) at 0:37 ~ 0:44 the natural sound is weak and unclear because your biased ears are not quickly adjust to the natural sound since unnatural sound is powerful, harsh and difficult to recover. Unnatural sounds prevail. Natural sound is soft and delicate.
4) at 1:00 ~ 1:25 your ears are adjust to the natural sound with support of my voice.
5) at 1:27 ~ 2:00 Your ears are confused between natural sound (my voice) and unnatural spkr sound. Your ears switch very fast between my voice and spkr sounds. **Lot's of listener's fatigue. Your ears are bit biased.
6) at 2:5 ~ 2:18 Your ears are easily adjust to the natural sound with my voice.

All audio systems in the world (not Peter A's system) behave like the left speaker. So, I post the original music to refresh your possible biased ears. And you can hear my video sound correctly.

 

[Rexp]

Here's a good sounding system, I particularly like the Django track by Grant Green at 19.40 in. Has a nice liquidity to it:

 

[hopkins]

Here's a good sounding system, I particularly like the Django track by Grant Green at 19.40 in. Has a nice liquidity to it:

Nice Grant Green album ("Idle Moments"). On Qobuz, there are two Blue Note version, the latest being the better version (identified as RVG Edition) IMO. A good mono version of this album would probably sound terrific, but I don't know if one has ever been issued (on CD).

 

[Rexp]

Nice Grant Green album ("Idle Moments"). On Qobuz, there are two Blue Note version, the latest being the better version (identified as RVG Edition) IMO. A good mono version of this album would probably sound terrific, but I don't know if one has ever been issued (on CD).

I thought I preferred the the 16/44.1 RVG version, then switched from 2.4 to 5G wifi on my laptop and whaddaya know, the 24/192 version now sounds better.

 

[Wavetouch]

Flac file music vs. YT MP4 music.
In below live recording video, I hear bit difference in resolution but MP4 sounds fine to me.

 

[Wavetouch]

Ticking away the moments that make up a dull day

 

[stehno]

Ticking away the moments that make up a dull day

Hi, Wavetouch. If you're playing back youtube video on your system and then recording to share the video here along with your system playing the full version for comparisions, I'm failing to see the point in doing so. The Youtube version is already compromised and counterfeited enough, don't you think?

In contrast to your strategy, above is my in-room presentation video compared to perhaps an "official" Youtube flavor NOT being run through my system. This seems to be a far more appropriate standard to measure our pleyback performance against. Don't you think? IOW, does my in-room video rise up to be somewhere in the ballpark of the unadulterated Youtube version?