On 13 December 2013 03:12, Manu <[email protected]> wrote: > On 13 December 2013 04:52, John Colvin <[email protected]> > wrote: >> >> On Thursday, 12 December 2013 at 18:31:58 UTC, Joseph Rushton Wakeling >> wrote: >>> >>> On 12/12/13 19:15, Iain Buclaw wrote: >>>> >>>> You know, I've never had that... but then again I haven't had the >>>> fortune of being in a band where distance between the first and back >>>> musicians is > 200 metres. (Because sound doesn't travel *that* slow >>>> ;) >>> >>> >>> Well, it's not _just_ about the speed of sound, there are also things >>> like the speed of attack of different instruments and so on. >>> >>> Then again, ever been to a performance of one of those pieces that ask >>> for some musicians to be placed in different locations round the back of the >>> concert hall for spatial effects? Things can get fun with that ... :-) >>> >>> >>>> Only in the recording studio - if the time it takes for sound to leave >>>> your instrument, into the microphone, through the walls into the >>>> studio booth, into the mixer (and assuming digital) from the mixer to >>>> the sound card, to the DAW software mixer which is taking the >>>> recording and mixing it in with the playing tracks (optional live >>>> effects processing being done) back to the sound card, to the mixer, >>>> through the walls into the studio room, into the headphones of the >>>> receiver playing the instrument... is greater than 22ms, then the >>>> person playing experiences a delay in the time he plays to the time he >>>> hears himself in the song. If that happens, you are not in a good >>>> situation. =) >>> >>> >>> So, if your latency is 22ms, think of how that corresponds to sound >>> travelling in space: you only need to be separated by about 7.5m for that >>> kind of delay to kick in. >> >> >> Delay between people isn't really the problem, it's delay in hearing >> yourself that's the killer. Although 22ms is the normally quoted limit for >> noticing the latency, it actually depends on frequency. Even regardless of >> frequency, i typically find that anything less than 64ms is ok, less than >> 128ms is just about bearable and anything more is a serious problem for >> recording a tight-sounding performance. > > > Latency between recording musicians has a strange effect of gradually > slowing the tempo down. Ie, if both musicians are playing with headphone > monitors or something, and there is a small latency in the system. > If you are playing together, but then you feel a 20ms latency between you > and the other musician, you tend to perceive yourself as playing slightly > too fast, and then adjust by slowing a fraction, the same thing happens in > the other direction, so you're both constantly slowing by a fraction to > maintain perception of synchronisation, and the tempo gradually slows. > It's almost an unconscious psychological response, quite hard to control in > the studio. >
You could argue that it makes the musicians *real*. :) It is however one reason why I prefer recording all musicians playing together rather than in isolation. I love the sound of music from the 60s/70s, in which the musicians that made those records never worked to click tracks. The result is that their timing is all over the place - speeding up, slowing down, what have you. I love it, it gives you a feeling of excitement, and it sounds great. :)
