2. speakers
  3. 165297-138652

I just bought a Steinway which sounds like a banjo.

I have a question: I’ve seen a lot of terms in audiophile jargon: laid back, top end, low end, harsh, soft, smooth, etc.
I don’t understand them. I only listen to recorded music, almost nothing synthesized. So the adjectives I know are: pitch, timbre, dynamics and spatiality. I cannot think of sound characteristics that are not inscribed within these four adjectives.
I believe that a sound reproduction device must first of all take care to satisfy these 4 characteristics.

When I read that a loudspeaker sounds harsh to me it means that the timbre is wrong because nobody would describe as harsh the reproduction of an instrument that has a harsh timbre. That would be a speaker that has a correct timbre. It can only be described as harsh the reproduction of an instrument that does not have a harsh timbre. The same goes for the other terms listed at the beginning. For spatiality it is even simpler because it is a geometric, spatial question. An ensable of which occupies 5 meters must sound like an ensambe that occupies 5 meters, not as one that occupies 2 meters nor as one that occupies 20 meters. Then the dynamics is linear so it is the simplest of all.

When Steinway puts a Steinway on the market it does so by taking care of a certain amount of objective characteristics, i would say 96-98% and 2-4% are probably left to the "character" of the instrument.

In the audiophile field, judging by the immense difference between one reproduction technology and another, it seems that the opposite meter is used, that is 4% of objectivity and 96% of character.
As if a Steinway sounded like a forgotten Pleyel in a basement, and a Pleyel sounded like a Boesendorfer. The whole is defended with sword drawn by the audiophile community as and cleared as subjective perceptions or eventually as an incompatibility between the elements in play (source, amplifier, speakers, cables) Hahah! Obviously, if all the products that follow the 4% objectivity meter and 96% "character", it takes a lot of luck to have a system in your hands that allows you to recognize a Pleyel from a Steinway.

When will sound reproduction become serious?
daros71

Showing 1 response by audiopacer

audiopacer
17 posts
 

adam817956 posts03-22-2021 4:57pm

I am a professional pianist and I feel that piano is one of the hardest instruments to really reproduce. Maybe I’m biased because its my instrument but I think because of its enormous range and complexity of interacting overtones, not just with sympathetic vibrations or the strings but interactions with the soundboard and cabinet, it’s really hard to get it right. That being said, I feel that 9 times out of 10, it’s the recording that gets it wrong, not the speakers or the electronics. Bad mic placement, bad EQ, bad mic choice all contribute to pianos not sounding like pianos. One of the micing techniques that has become en-vogue is to put two ribbon mics less than an inch away from the strings. Who listens to a piano like that with their ear inside the lid inches away from the strings! I’m sure speakers and electronics can contribute to the timbre of a piano from being off, but there are a whole slew of bad things that can happen before that sound reproduction gets to the hi-fi.


THIS 100%;
IMHO, most everything we do seems to be an exercise of making the best out of what we have no control over- the recordings;

At home I have a Yamaha baby grand piano, acoustic, and electric guitars. I have a high quality (44.1 KHz / 16 bit sample rate) portable USB recording/mixing product from PreSonus as well as the DAW to capture, process (mix multi-tracks, apply compression, etc) and accomplish final stereo mix down. When I record these instruments in their pure form with no compression and play them back, the sound coming from the speakers sounds properly harmonically rich and dynamic; In the case of the guitars it’s very much like being plugged into my guitar amps, and the piano sounds like it sounds to my ears in its space; If compression is applied to the recording you can hear these effects most profoundly in the playback; The piano loses its force and becomes more artificial sounding; Add in multiple tracks and various processing and what we have left is a far cry from the original instruments on their own; I’m amazed however how some recordings sound awesome and natural despite the homogenization of post processing;
These are simple tests anyone can do if so desired, and it proves that it’s (mostly) not our gear at fault but simply that what we struggle with, IMHO, is how we tune our systems to provide the average best response to the recordings we like;
Of course there are basic component mixing and matching loose rules to follow, such as try not to use an 8 watt SET on your Apogee’s, try not to use a Crown amp on your ultra sensitive $20K horn speakers;

I guess the point of this is, garbage in garbage out;

Happy listening
More to discover