Videos of Acoustically-Coupled Audio Recordings

[tima]

When I think of "balanced" I think of a see-saw. A see-saw is balanced only when the pivot point is in the middle of an equally-bisected, equally-weighted board.

Balanced sound understood as a teeter-totter? That may be what is holding you back.

balanced - adjective
1. fairly or equally containing a diversity of views, aspects, ingredients, activities, etc.:
2. being in harmonious or proper arrangement or adjustment, proportion, etc.

But all that was a deflection. I don't know what is meant by "sonic center of gravity" but I will read that as talking about frequency balance.

To effectively communicate among ourselves -- a continuing challenge here -- I don't think we should make the audiophile vocabulary more complex by using new phrases for known concepts.

 

[Al M.]

I don't know what is meant by "sonic center of gravity" but I will read that as talking about frequency balance.

What is meant by that is so obvious that it's a head scratcher to even ask the question.

To effectively communicate among ourselves -- a continuing challenge here -- I don't think we should make the audiophile vocabulary more complex by using new phrases for known concepts.

Tell that to "black background":

Among audiophile terms it's the cockroach that just refuses to die.

 

[the sound of Tao]

We have way more to fear from the semantics stasi than we ever did from the hyperbole police. People talk about diversity of opinion but then don’t allow for diversity of expression .

Where is the latitude here… this is an audiophile forum and not the anal retentive writer’s guild .

 

[bonzo75]

Among audiophile terms it's the cockroach that just refuses to die.

There are some Bollywood heroes that way too

 

[Argonaut]

What is meant by that is so obvious that it's a head scratcher to even ask the question.

To all but the most deliberately obtuse .

 

[the sound of Tao]

There are some Bollywood heroes that way too

Stuff semantics… let’s dance!!

 

[Argonaut]

Since we have resorted to artistic metaphor , I for my part take his “sonic center of gravity” to represent the Main Course within his personal audio banquet , where resides the meat on the bones of the performance if you will.


PIETER (TALLER) AERTSEN (AMSTERDAM, 1507/1508–1575)

Meat Stall with the Holy Family Giving Alms

Circa 1551

 

[tima]

What is meant by that is so obvious that it's a head scratcher to even ask the question.

"sonic center of gravity"

tao yikes in fear, moon unit talks about food, ron sees a see-saw.

what does it mean, al m.?

 

[PeterA]

"sonic center of gravity"

tao yikes in fear, moon unit talks about food, ron sees a see-saw.

what does it mean, al m.?

I think it means that Ron wants his system to emphasize a particular frequency range, specifically the 100Hz-1000Hz that he has mentioned numerous times. His system has an FR emphasis now which he describes as bright sounding, but he wants to lower the range that is emphasized. He does not understand the term “balanced” which is why I questioned him about his listening experience at ddk’s house. He seemed to really like David’s main system describing it as more able to “suspend his disbelief” on classical and jazz music than any other system he has heard. So perhaps that listening experience is a kind of reference for him. I would like to know if he thinks the Bionor system is balanced sounding and if he sees a see-saw or if it has a sonic center of gravity with an emphasized frequency range. And then if he hears something similar at Disney Hall.

EDIT: I am trying to understand what Ron means. Perhaps understanding each other does not really matter. To each (their) own. Personal goals and results and enjoyment matter more than anything else.

 

[rando]

When I think of "balanced" I think of a see-saw. A see-saw is balanced only when the pivot point is in the middle of an equally-bisected, equally-weighted board. If the board balances outside of the middle then each end is of a different weight.

This minds eye picture of a see-saw would prosper from visiting any playground with one installed. Placed dead level a see-saw will gravitate towards the same end with unerring regularity. In fact it will do so from an opposing point tilted against it. Each end is of a different weight.

What might appear to be your intended meaning is clear enough if simply accepted. Reality of it doesn't stand up in the outside world unless you are building to the point I have just made above. Given the placement within this conversation I suspect you were. Decrying the complex failures of simplistic balance and forcing them to acknowledge why your statement failed to satisfy their outcomes being portrayed as ideal.

Music is not balanced. There is no equal and opposite weighting separating music from all else. A system must deal with this in the real world where that which is temporarily residing on a given end will always have a larger presence. It must set the opposing forces into equilibrium attained through mechanical means overcoming natural inclinations.

“Old man, how is it that you hear these things?”

“Young man, how is it that you do not?”

 

[Argonaut]

One might have to consider the possibility … timaBot … did it return or was it Sent

 

[Ron Resnick]

This minds eye picture of a see-saw would prosper from visiting any playground with one installed. Placed dead level a see-saw will gravitate towards the same end with unerring regularity. In fact it will do so from an opposing point tilted against it. Each end is of a different weight.

What might appear to be your intended meaning is clear enough if simply accepted. Reality of it doesn't stand up in the outside world unless you are building to the point I have just made above. Given the placement within this conversation I suspect you were.

I apologize for a now-obviously defective analogy. As Lola cannot use a see-saw I never go to an actual playground.

Thank you for recognizing and understanding my intended meaning.

 

[rando]

I apologize for a now-obviously defective analogy. As Lola cannot use a see-saw I never go to an actual playground.

Thank you for recognizing and understanding my intended meaning.

My intrusion here only came after PeterA had clearly registered his lack of comprehension. After that it was all a guessing game where the disconnect occurred in statements I felt inserted a well reasoned anomaly asking the broader readership to pause and resettle.

Any reasonable apology should be directed towards misinterpreting your analogy into deeper modes of thought.


From distant memories I recall see-saw only being truly fun to play on for the lighter side. Certainly more dangerous too. Especially if a swingset is conveniently placed to form a jumping off point from the high end. More than anything else I felt this was the natural inclination being lost to mature observation. The Hammer Blow in a Mahler symphony or some other shocking climax/descent alternately propelling one out of their seat or dropping it away. Balance is recognizing control over the entire remaining board so heavily tilted in those moments is no less tenuous than while gently teaming efforts for comfort and ease.

Lopsided suggestions made from determinations gained through acoustically coupled recordings is the topic. I will return this discussion to it.

 

[hopkins]

I received the SP-15 USB-C microphone (same one used by Fermer in his recording of the infamous "Truly"), and tested it with my Android phone, using the app "Field Recorded Pro". I'll make some recordings this weekend, comparing:
- phone with build-in mic
- phone with SP-15 mic
- Tascam recorder with build-in mic
- Tascam recorder with Superlux S502 mics
I'll link some wav files here, but will not publish videos on YouTube.

I also thought it would be fun to compare, with the SP-15, a recording of my desktop speakers (Vanatoo Transparent Zero) against a recording of the same track with my speakers (open baffle, 4 TangBand drivers). It could be fun...

Most of my listening is done during the day at my computer, and while I enjoy the Vanatoo desktop speakers, it is a completely different experience listening to my larger speakers in my living room, and I am wondering whether that difference will be captured in a recording. By the way, once you deal with desk reflections, from a nearfield position (i.e. sitting at my computer), the Vanatoo Transparent Zero have a pretty nice frequency response curve between 100 Hz and 10.000 Hz.

 

[hopkins]

Here are some recordings - "Truly" sorry...

I just took some samples of the song, as I was getting tired of listening to the whole thing. I think the differences in recording quality are pretty obvious. I did not make an effort to match the sound level (kept the same level on my amp), so you may need to adjust the volume. They were all taken from my listening position. Different placements may be more optimal for different types of microphones...

Android phone (Google Pixel 6a) with build-in microphone, recorded with "Field Recorder Pro":

https://storage.googleapis.com/cloudplayer/samples/Mic%20Comparison/Phone%20build%20in%20mic.wav

Android phone (Google Pixel 6a) with SP-15 microphone, recorded with "Field Recorder Pro":

https://storage.googleapis.com/cloudplayer/samples/Mic%20Comparison/Phone%20SP-15.wav

Android tablet (Galaxy Tab S6 Lite) with SP-15 microphone, recorded with "Field Recorder Pro":

https://storage.googleapis.com/cloudplayer/samples/Mic%20Comparison/sp15%20on%20galaxy%20tab.wav

Tascam DR-100MKII with build-in omni mic:

https://storage.googleapis.com/cloudplayer/samples/Mic%20Comparison/Tascam%20Omimic.wav

Tascam DR-100MKII with build-in Uni mic:

https://storage.googleapis.com/cloudplayer/samples/Mic%20Comparison/Tascam%20Unimic.wav

Tascam DR-100MKII with external (XLR) Superlux S502 mics:

https://storage.googleapis.com/cloudplayer/samples/Mic%20Comparison/Tascam%20Superlux%20S502.wav

A video taken from my phone with the android camera app (and the phone's build-in mic):

https://storage.googleapis.com/cloudplayer/samples/Mic%20Comparison/PXL_20230422_100245413.TS.mp4

---

Unrelated - a recording I also took this morning of Oscar Peterson's "Corcovado" from the well known "We Get Requests" album (with the Tascam recorder and Superlux mics):

https://storage.googleapis.com/cloudplayer/samples/Mic%20Comparison/Corcovado.wav

Here is the original flac file (CD Rip - I forget the exact release there are 38 CD releases referenced on Discogs...):

https://storage.googleapis.com/cloudplayer/samples/Mic%20Comparison/04%20Corcovado.flac

Here is the link to the Qobuz version: https://open.qobuz.com/track/26332262
The Qobuz version is not as good as my CD Rip, IMO, but that's not because it is streaming from Qobuz - I believe they are just different releases/masterings.

Listening to the file now on my computer with a good DAC and Etymotyc ER4SR headphones, the recording is obviously not as good as the original (no suprise here). The microphone placement is probably not optimal either. What interests me most is how the original file played through my headphones compares to the same file played through my speakers, and even though the experience is different, I can see how my system can be improved upon - but it is also difficult to know which part (amplifier, speaker, room and speaker placement, etc...) contributes to what - more about this in a few weeks!

 

[hopkins]

Steve Guttenberg mentions, in his talk at Axpona (available on YouTube), his definition of an audiophile recording: one where the engineer is trying to capture an event as opposed to making up a sound. The "Truly" recording falls in that latter category, at least to my ears. The Oscar Peterson recording is in the former (though I would be curious to hear a mono recording).

 

[Rexp]

Here's a comparison where DAC sound differences are easily heard:

 

[tima]

I just don’t see how recording the acoustic output of high-end audio systems using the ADC in an iPhone, and then playing back that low quality and low resolution digital recording through the tiny, tinny iPhone speaker, bears any high-fidelity relation to the original analog stereo sound created by a meticulously assembled stereo system with carefully positioned loudspeakers.

To come around from the posting of videos found on youtube that someone other than the poster made, back to the OP...

If the iPhone video records the meticulously assembled stereo system the relation is direct. High fidelity relation - if that means sound quality, I don't find phones generally adequate as playback devices. But from my experience the quality of the recording from a decent phone can give a pretty good representation of in-room sound.

 

[Al M.]

To come around from the posting of videos found on youtube that someone other than the poster made, back to the OP...

If the iPhone video records the meticulously assembled stereo system the relation is direct. High fidelity relation - if that means sound quality, I don't find phones generally adequate as playback devices. But from my experience the quality of the recording from a decent phone can give a pretty good representation of in-room sound.

Depends on your reproduction standards

 

[Al M.]

Here are some recordings - "Truly" sorry...

I just took some samples of the song, as I was getting tired of listening to the whole thing. I think the differences in recording quality are pretty obvious. I did not make an effort to match the sound level (kept the same level on my amp), so you may need to adjust the volume. They were all taken from my listening position. Different placements may be more optimal for different types of microphones...

Android phone (Google Pixel 6a) with build-in microphone, recorded with "Field Recorder Pro":

https://storage.googleapis.com/cloudplayer/samples/Mic%20Comparison/Phone%20build%20in%20mic.wav

Android phone (Google Pixel 6a) with SP-15 microphone, recorded with "Field Recorder Pro":

https://storage.googleapis.com/cloudplayer/samples/Mic%20Comparison/Phone%20SP-15.wav

Android tablet (Galaxy Tab S6 Lite) with SP-15 microphone, recorded with "Field Recorder Pro":

https://storage.googleapis.com/cloudplayer/samples/Mic%20Comparison/sp15%20on%20galaxy%20tab.wav

Tascam DR-100MKII with build-in omni mic:

https://storage.googleapis.com/cloudplayer/samples/Mic%20Comparison/Tascam%20Omimic.wav

Tascam DR-100MKII with build-in Uni mic:

https://storage.googleapis.com/cloudplayer/samples/Mic%20Comparison/Tascam%20Unimic.wav

Tascam DR-100MKII with external (XLR) Superlux S502 mics:

https://storage.googleapis.com/cloudplayer/samples/Mic%20Comparison/Tascam%20Superlux%20S502.wav

A video taken from my phone with the android camera app (and the phone's build-in mic):

https://storage.googleapis.com/cloudplayer/samples/Mic%20Comparison/PXL_20230422_100245413.TS.mp4

---

Unrelated - a recording I also took this morning of Oscar Peterson's "Corcovado" from the well known "We Get Requests" album (with the Tascam recorder and Superlux mics):

https://storage.googleapis.com/cloudplayer/samples/Mic%20Comparison/Corcovado.wav

Here is the original flac file (CD Rip - I forget the exact release there are 38 CD releases referenced on Discogs...):

https://storage.googleapis.com/cloudplayer/samples/Mic%20Comparison/04%20Corcovado.flac

Here is the link to the Qobuz version: https://open.qobuz.com/track/26332262
The Qobuz version is not as good as my CD Rip, IMO, but that's not because it is streaming from Qobuz - I believe they are just different releases/masterings.

Listening to the file now on my computer with a good DAC and Etymotyc ER4SR headphones, the recording is obviously not as good as the original (no suprise here). The microphone placement is probably not optimal either. What interests me most is how the original file played through my headphones compares to the same file played through my speakers, and even though the experience is different, I can see how my system can be improved upon - but it is also difficult to know which part (amplifier, speaker, room and speaker placement, etc...) contributes to what - more about this in a few weeks!

Wow, thanks for posting this! Very enlightening.