On 1 July 2013 08:21, Paul Hodges <[email protected]> wrote:
> --On 30 June 2013 21:47 -0700 Robert Greene <[email protected]> wrote:
>
> and audio is still uncertain which mike
>> technique really reproduces the live sound.
>>
>
> But you see, how ever many times it gets said (and it does), the
> discussions continue to ignore that fact that there are two independent
> aims in recording: reproduction of an original, and generation of something
> pleasant.
>
> When teaching, I used to refer to these two as the "reportage" and the
"artistic" approaches. Both are valid in their own way. The artistic
approach is especially valid , as Paul says below, when dealing with poor
acoustics or, of course, when working in the studio. However, where I
really object to that approach being used is when a live event in a good
acoustic is made to sound as if it is somewhere else because that's the way
the producer thinks all events of that type should sound. For the first few
years I was at York, outside broadcasts from the Sir Jack Lyons Concert
Hall on Radio Three were done by a guy (I'm ashamed to say I can't remember
his name) who just used a coincident pair and a couple of ambience mics.
The resulting sound was remarkable close to just sitting in the concert.
Fantastic! Then, something changed and a different OB team was used. They
multimiked everything (at times the concerts looked like a Deutsche
Grammophon recording session) and mixed it down with artificial reverb and
eq so that it sounded like every othe Radio Three OB at the time. I hated
it and more or less stopped listening to Radio Three. Ugh...
Dave (at Derby)
An accurate recording of an indifferent acoustic will sound indifferent.
> The question is whether you prefer the realism of that, or the rose-tinting
> of something which obscures or glosses over the poor acoustic. And given
> that the performance that took place was worthy, which approach to
> reproduction will enable the listener to best appreciate it. And this will
> vary with the listeners preference (to an indeterminate extent trained by
> their knowledge of previous recordings and the extent of their experience
> of actually attending performances in real spaces.
>
> For my part, I acknowledge that there are many pleasant-sounding but
> inaccurate recordings which enable me to enjoy the music; but my interest
> in recording happens to be in realism and accuracy.
>
> Paul
>
> --
> Paul Hodges
>
>
> ______________________________**_________________
> Sursound mailing list
> [email protected]
> https://mail.music.vt.edu/**mailman/listinfo/sursound<https://mail.music.vt.edu/mailman/listinfo/sursound>
>
--
--
As of 1st October 2012, I have retired from the University.
These are my own views and may or may not be shared by the University
Dave Malham
Honorary Fellow, Department of Music
The University of York
York YO10 5DD
UK
'Ambisonics - Component Imaging for Audio'
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL:
<https://mail.music.vt.edu/mailman/private/sursound/attachments/20130701/537d1e45/attachment.html>
_______________________________________________
Sursound mailing list
[email protected]
https://mail.music.vt.edu/mailman/listinfo/sursound
