Thread: Reproducing the sound of a live concert in a real concert hall - A thread prompted by assertions concerning Polyhymnia by Jonalogic

Posts: 33
Page: prev 1 2 3 4 next

Post by hiredfox November 24, 2011 (21 of 33)
dcramer said:

Good for you - almost daily for six weeks? That's a lot of climaxing for an old geezer (for the record, I'm only a few years south of your age). I'm hoping to get to Prague myself in the next few years.

Oh yeah, I meant "spiritual" of course

LoL and thanks Chris for cheering our days

Post by stvnharr November 24, 2011 (22 of 33)
Interesting issue, though a rather pointed thread title:

One can assess this issue in a rather simple ways and with simple conclusions.

Most concerts, other than those with smaller local/regional orchestras, are recorded for at least archiving or broadcast reasons. Just look at where the microphones are generally located, especially in relation to the orchestra. Then assess where you are seated in relation to the orchestra and note the difference, which should be quite obvious.

As for live concert sound vs. reproduced sound.....
Orchestra sound is made by the individual 60-80 or so musicians by blowing air, bowing a string, pounding a membrane to excite the air at the proper frequencies. It is naturally excited air pressure.
Reproduced sound is made by a moving membrane, cone, etc. that excites the air creating sound pressures. What makes the membranes, cone, etc. move is electricity. Without getting in to too much detail, the properties of electronic circuits are quite different from what happens in naturally produced sound. An electrical sine wave is not exactly the same as a naturally occuring sine wave.

Other considerations..........
A large concert hall vs. a relatively much smaller room in a house with an audio system, the percentage of direct sound vs. reflected sound off room boundaries. A large number of single sound sources vs. a few speaker drivers, membranes, etc.

I find it a modern miracle that the sound of an audio system can be as good as it is.

As for multimiking vs. stereo pair miking of recordings.....
I think Erdo Groot has come here a time or two and outlined quite well this issue.
The only sacd's recorded with a stereo pair, outside of perhaps some older reissues, are the 3 Water Lily discs. The difference in sound is not subtle.

Post by canonical November 24, 2011 (23 of 33)
stvnharr said:

The only sacd's recorded with a stereo pair, outside of perhaps some older reissues, are the 3 Water Lily discs. The difference in sound is not subtle.

The 2 Water Lily discs I have are outstanding:

Ali Akbar Khan: Indian Architexture
Simon Shaheen, V. M. Bhatt: Saltanah

They are both modern analogue recordings, and then converted to DSD. Works brilliantly.

Did you mean these? Or some orchestral recordings?

Post by stvnharr November 24, 2011 (24 of 33)
canonical said:

The 2 Water Lily discs I have are outstanding:

Ali Akbar Khan: Indian Architexture
Simon Shaheen, V. M. Bhatt: Saltanah

They are both modern analogue recordings, and then converted to DSD. Works brilliantly.

Did you mean these? Or some orchestral recordings?

I was referring to the 3 orchestral discs recorded in St. Petersburg in 2003, I think that was when they were recorded, by Kavi Alexander.

Post by DSD November 24, 2011 (25 of 33)
I just wanted to state for the record that next to the Telarc teams, the Polyhymnia teams produce some of the most realistic SACDs I've heard. Besides PentaTone, Polyhymnia also engineered most of the European Telarc's.

Post by DSD November 24, 2011 (26 of 33)
stvnharr said:

The only sacd's recorded with a stereo pair, outside of perhaps some older reissues, are the 3 Water Lily discs. The difference in sound is not subtle.

Actually all 15 Water Lily SACDs are so recorded "Since all our recordings are done with one stereo pair of microphones, the balance is achieved by placing the microphones in the optimum position in relation to the musicians being recorded and the acoustical environment." http://www.waterlilyacoustics.com/main.htm

In addition most Opus 3 recordings.

Post by JohnFerrier November 24, 2011 (27 of 33)
SteelyTom said:

Anyone who thinks two rows back in a center balcony at Symphony Hall is too far back, has never attended a concert there.

After Benaroya Hall was completed, here in Seattle, acoustic engineer Cyril Harris was asked where he would sit for the best acoustic experience. He indicated two or three rows back in the first balcony either side of the center. There was discussion about how the sound is richer that far back because the increased mix of reflections. (Off center increases slightly the difference that each ear picks up. As some of you know, these things relate to the BQI--Binaural Quality Index used to evaluate differences in concert halls.)

Post by JohnFerrier November 24, 2011 (28 of 33)
hiredfox said:

For Symphony Orchestras recordings one supposes that maestros have the last word.

Maestro Pierre Boulez, who is known for both keen ears and strong opinions, has indicated that he has some influence in recordings but the bulk of decisions are made by the Recording Producer in the US and the Recording Engineer in Europe. He takes it as his responsibility to bring about the musical realization to be captured.

Post by stvnharr November 24, 2011 (29 of 33)
DSD said:

Actually all 15 Water Lily SACDs are so recorded "Since all our recordings are done with one stereo pair of microphones, the balance is achieved by placing the microphones in the optimum position in relation to the musicians being recorded and the acoustical environment." http://www.waterlilyacoustics.com/main.htm

In addition most Opus 3 recordings.

Recording a small group with a stereo pair is a lot different from recording a large orchestra in a big hall with a stereo pair. And I believe the basis of this thread is orchestral recording. I mentioned the 3 Water Lily discs because I believe these are the only three new orchestral sacd's recorded with a stereo pair.

Post by Fitzcaraldo215 November 24, 2011 (30 of 33)
stvnharr said:

Recording a small group with a stereo pair is a lot different from recording a large orchestra in a big hall with a stereo pair. And I believe the basis of this thread is orchestral recording. I mentioned the 3 Water Lily discs because I believe these are the only three new orchestral sacd's recorded with a stereo pair.

You may be right about these 3. Robt. E. Greene, who writes for TAS and is a frequent recording partner of Kavi's, also added an alternative Mch mix to them, though he will not say how he did that. I suspect that was done synthetically, since Greene hates multi-mikes and omni mikes, as well. He will not even describe proper Mch speaker placement for those recordings.

There is something unique and special about the Blumlein paired stereo mike technique for 2-channel. But, it requires a 90 degree speaker placement for correct listening, and consequently has a tiny, one-person sweet spot. I was never a fan of Kavi's earlier In Nature's Realm CD with the Philadelphia Orchestra in the Old Academy of Music. I felt it sounded considerably drier than the real thing live in that problematic hall, which was already dry as a bone.

I have not heard the 3 Russian recordings by Kavi, but some friends whose opinions I trust completely did not like the Mch version at all. The stereo is, perhaps, better, but I do not know.

But, you have to wonder about the Blumlein technique. It dates back to the 1930's. It has a few fierce devotees, like Kavi, Greene and others, yet it never caught on, in spite of the theoretical claims made by its adherents. I expect that the "mainstream" teams we revere here at sa-cd.net, like Polyhymnia, Channel, Bis, Sound/Mirror, even Telarc, etc., know all about Blumlein. I expect they have experimented with it and know exactly what it can or cannot do. Yet, they each, separately and independently, have chosen a different technique, based largely on spaced omni mikes. Omnis tend to deliver truer tonality, especially in large spaces, than the directional mikes required for Blumlein or ORTF.

In terms of tonality plus spatial presentation, I am much more impressed by the Mch offerings of these top teams on Mch SACD than any Blumlein or similarly miked stereo recording I have ever heard. There is still only one true sweet spot in listening, of course, but Mch imaging that is still quite good is available over a wider area. I think the spaced omni technique on SACD or Blu-ray delivers via Mch, the most true to life recordings out there, ever.

So, Blumlein has had every opportunity to catch on for many years, but has not done so. And, frankly, I do not think it ever will, though the old debates about it from the 50's and 60's, the early days of stereo, continue to rage on as a tempest in a teapot in certain tiny circles. I think the issue has pretty much been settled long ago.

Page: prev 1 2 3 4 next

Closed