Esteemed group,
I have really enjoyed lurking and reading this thread, which until now,
has emphasized the technical aspects of music recordings. I can't help
but add the following comments about the human aspects.
Studio recordings are wonderful in that they allow control of many
things, a quiet room being the chief one, I believe. In this day of
digital technology, even a flat note from the third violin on the last
half of the third beat of the 178th measure can be digitally corrected,
and is done so regularly by compulsive producers. Full movie scores are
regularly produced on synthesizers, thus putting many fine musicians out
of work. Some movie composers and directors still insist on live
musicians, recording the score in front of a large screen which is
showing the scene for which the music is being written and performed.
This results in a superior movie score, in my opinion. Many
commercially available CDs, recorded in a studio, are missing the vital
humanness of a live performance.
I will take a jazz tune recorded in a smoky lounge after 2 AM or on
stage live at a jazz festival over one recorded in a studio any time
because the performances in front of a live, appreciative audience
evokes an extra measure of excellence from the musicians performing the
piece. All audiences are not equal. Sometimes the synergy between
performers and audience is so intense, you can feel it, taste it, and
cut it with a knife. Other times the audiences are so dead, it actually
puts a damper on the musicians performance.. Also. you can listen to the
same group or artist perform the same tune a hundred times before a live
audience and you will get a hundred variations, some better than the
best-selling recording of the same song. Listen to five different
symphony orchestras play the same classical piece and you will get five
variations. At least it gives the music critics, who evidently cannot do
anything else productive in society, something to write about.
Some musicians/composers/directors believe that music doesn't exist
until it is performed in front of a live audience. I don't have a
problem with that. Also, I personally believe that the reason we have
these endless discussions is that music falls into a special category of
its own. It opens a window into the soul of the listener and moves us in
ways we otherwise cannot be moved. For the performer, life is not real,
in some sense, unless he (or she) can perform.
I speak from the heart, although I am not a professional musician. I am
educated and earned my living as an electrical engineer but have
performed as an amateur musician for 53 years. I presently play trumpet
in several groups an am on stage at least 60 times a year. I still take
lessons. I have played for as few as a dozen in the audience and for as
many as 8000. I love it. I have come to recognize music as part of my
life's fabric.
As in everything else in life, your opinion may differ, and I respect
that. I do believe in balance in all things in life, but fail to achieve
it most of the time ;-). My wife says she never has to worry about me
being in a bar or chasing other women. I'm either behind the horn or
under the headphones. She may not be able to talk to me easily, but she
knows where I am.
Whatever type of music you like and whatever type of equipment you
prefer listening to it on, good for you (except for rap--rap is
entertainment, but not music IMHO).
73,
Dave, K4TO
Vic K2VCO wrote:
Ron wrote:
You really should know. I repeat....know... hands down....tube
amplifiers are the big winner in seeking esoteric audio reproduction.
McIntosh brings big bucks for a reason. Solid state just can't do
what tubes can. Solid state feels harsh, sounds harsh. Tubes bring
reality to audio reproduction. Warmth...
Any form of reproduction of sound is imperfect to some degree. Sound
is recorded by imperfect microphones, recorded by imperfect devices
onto imperfect media, amplified by amplifiers with some degree of
distortion, played through speakers with bumpy frequency response,
and reproduced in a room which is different from the original studio
or live venue. If you are listening at a lower level than the
original (pretty much a necessity in our crowded world), then even
characteristics of the human ear need to be taken into account.
Some people would like to be able to listen to a recording of a
performance and have it entirely indistinguishable from the experience
of the original performance, although it's impossible to do an A/B
comparison, since by definition the listener isn't in the studio. But
if this is your goal, then various devices along the way must
introduce the least possible distortion of the signal -- that means
harmonic distortion, IMD, less-than-smooth frequency response,
transient effects, etc. This is a matter of engineering and cost, and
results can be measured. Tubes are not in general better in this
regard than modern solid-state designs.
Others like music to sound a certain way that's more pleasing to them.
They prefer to tailor the response of their systems so that the
distortion that they get is the right kind of distortion -- the kind
that makes the music feel 'warm' or 'smooth'. They feel that tubes
tend to produce this kind of sound. Actually, a solid state amplifier
can do exactly the same thing, if the correct kind of distortion is
introduced.
There is a subculture of audio enthusiasts who believe that such
things as the oxygen molecules in their power cords and the dielectric
in bypass capacitors affects the quality of their sound. To
understand this phenomenon see
<http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cargo_cult>. Or just Google 'cargo cult'.
_______________________________________________
Elecraft mailing list
Post to: [email protected]
You must be a subscriber to post to the list.
Subscriber Info (Addr. Change, sub, unsub etc.):
http://mailman.qth.net/mailman/listinfo/elecraft
Help: http://mailman.qth.net/subscribers.htm
Elecraft web page: http://www.elecraft.com
