System versus live
I don't think live can ever be achieved. I'm as close as I've ever been and still fall very short. I went with a FRD with no cross over in the 10 inch driver and it took me closer. My room is well treated and I've biased my Almarro amp a little hot to achieve more dynamics and more trancient attack, but, as good as it sounds, it's still not close. Maybe if I did achieve a live sound I would be disapointed. But I don't think I'll ever come close. |
I don't think it's possible to make a small space sound like a large live venue no matter how the speakers sound. An interesting experiment would be to have a single instrument play on a stage and record that event, then replace the live artist with your sound system in the same room and compare from the same listening point. |
Went and saw Brian Blade at the Vanguard last Saturday, came right home after, and played a lot of the same stuff on the system. Have to say, I was pretty blown away by how close it was. Shocked, really. To be sure, not the same -- really not the same -- but one hell of a lot closer than I expected.... |
There's a recent A'gon thread that addressed a similar topic at great length. You can read it here. In that thread I wrote... "...to my ears, the three principal characteristics that limit how real most systems sounds are: Dynamic range, spatial cues, and harmonic content. My suspicion is that dynamic range, spatial cues, and harmonic content are themselves chiefly limited by recordings, rooms, and equipment, respectively. Dynamic range is limited both by the inherent informational limits of recording media and by the elective use of compression during mixing. Spatial cues are limited by acoustically under-treated rooms, which obscure spatial cues, or by acoustically over-treated rooms, which limit the directionality of spatial cues. And harmonic content is limited by various kinds of equipment-induced distortion, whether harmonic distortion, IMD, TIM, etc.. This is of course an oversimplification, but the general point is that, IMO, the chief factors that limit how real most systems sound are dynamic range, spatial cues, and harmonic content (probably in that order)." Mrdecibel - Those observations seem relevant to your OP. In direct answer to your question... How "live" do you think your system really is?My answer is: On excellent small scale recordings, my system is somewhat close, which is to say, I *very* occasionally hear something on my system that strikes me as indistinguishable from real. On large scale music, however, my system is nowhere close to the real thing. If people have systems that sound indistinguishable from real with large scale music, I envy them. Bryon |
Against amplified concerts, system easily. Against a piano or violin in a small room, system nowhere close. Then again, have one Marcia Ball CD that comes pretty close. No interest in chamber ensembles anyhow. The music I listen to gets amplified. Funny that Shadorne mentions Tower of Power, because the last concert of theirs, closed my eyes and scrutinized a few times. Great to see though. |
Hi all and thanks for the responses. I thought it would be a fun topic and I understand it might have been mentioned here before. There is no question that concerts that use amplification are somewhat easy to duplicate, or even exceed in quality, with a system. The live performances I am talking about are those without the use of any amplification. Everyone should experience some like this. When I lived in NY, jazz clubs in the city were small and set up like this. Street vendors in Central Park were always present, playing there hearts out. My wife playing piano(early in our marriage) was a great source of enjoyment. I was a singer in my early years and it gave me much experience listening to voices and accompanying instruments, all with out amplification. These are the types of "live" that I am speaking of, and this is what drives me to create duplication, which I cannot. Amplified arenas and stadiums are so bad, as mentioned by many of you, who would want this in there living room. But if I were Samantha of Bewitched and can twinkle my nose to have one of my favorite artists and the band in my living room, why not. I will take an "Unplugged" performance any day.It is scary to me and some of my audio buddies how realistic my system can sound, and I am not just talking decibels, but, at the end of the day, "it is far from being live". I think we can all agree that the "audiophile" recordings we own and listen to, that use less microphones, dubbing techniques, etc. sound more real, or live. Most recordings fail to bring us closer. Thanks again for joining this thread and happy listening. MrD |
If you want live, by some xls 215 Cerwins. To me, audiophile speakers are more studio then live. The only refined speaker I have heard that offers a live sound feeling, but yet keeps audiophile qualities is Magnepan. But if you want that live feeling you should sit within 5-8ft (MMG's) 8-9 ft (1.6's) 9-11ft(3.6's) from them so they can play at levels you would hear live. I have a lot of experience with Live Sound, you should try hi end horn designs. |
