Genelec on audio science

[pirad]

What you hear in the recording from the performance venue depends on its acoustics, the miking and the mastering.
What you hear of the reproduction room depends on whether you use headphones (no room acoustics), or loudspekaers. In the latter case it depends , in addition to the room acoustics and loudspeaker characteristics, on the listening geometry (near field, mid field, theater). If you use DRC on top you are listening to your custom sound.

 

[Wombat]

Interesting.
When I listen to recordings where the recording acoustic is present, I've got the feeling that I am hearing both rooms. I can hear the room where the recording was made, but I don't feel like I am inside it. I can hear the musicians playing in that room, but I'm listening to this from my room, if you see what I mean.
Like if there was no wall behind my speakers, but rather a large door, with the musicians' room on the other side of the door.

Exemples on youtube where I've got this impression :
Small room (Omnia - Poëtree Gröne Lunden, two harps and two voices) :

Church (ODO ensemble - Nami Nami, qanoun, ney, percussion and voice. The voice is closer to the mics and is less affected by the acoustic) :

FWIW, my room is untreated (not even with a curtain or a carpet), and the reverberation time is 0.44 s at 500 Hz.

Sorry for the invasive links... I don't find a way to format them as simple links instead of huge Youtube windows

Large pics and Youtube seem to be OK on ASR. Possibly encouraged.

 

[Wombat]

If we wish to get close to what we hear at a performance(recorded) shouldn't the mike/s be located at the listening position, not at the performer/s position?

If we want the performers to hear their performance(recorded) then the mike/s close to the performers seems logical.


Ignoring practicalities of course.

 

[Cosmik]

If we wish to get close to what we hear at a performance(recorded) shouldn't the mike/s be located at the listening position, not at the performer/s position?

Try it and see how it sounds. (I'm surprised you didn't try it the first time you ever played with a tape recorder!).

 

[March Audio]

If we wish to get close to what we hear at a performance(recorded) shouldn't the mike/s be located at the listening position, not at the performer/s position?

If we want the performers to hear their performance(recorded) then the mike/s close to the performers seems logical.


Ignoring practicalities of course.

Not really. As Cosmik was alluding to microphones simply dont "hear" in the same way we do. They hear the mixture of direct plus room acoustic which after recording your brain cant decipher and seperate as its being reproduced from two speakers and not the actual directional reflections in performance space.

This will be particularly true of omni mics. Cardiod mics can be placed in front and fairly close to the performers with excellent effect as they reject a lot of the reflected room sound, still there is a limit.

 

[Wombat]

So wouldn't not hearing like we do apply in both positions, with flawed mic. pick-up at the listening position being the better choice than flawed pick-up at a non-listening position?

 

[svart-hvitt]

COLOURED OR NOT?

Is it relevant to ask if one believes that sound can be coloured by room or not?

If we have coloured sound, should we try and make it clear, neutral again?

This reminds me of the old water experiment, see video below.

Do we understand sound as good as we understand chemistry?

I am also thinking about the analogy of coloured sun glasses; it doesn’t take long before we’re accustomed to our new, coloured vision. However, in the process we get sort of colour blind.

I am colour blind (red-green type) by the way. Trying to explain somebody what it means is futile, as futile as trying to explain me what perfect colour vision is.

However, after I grew older I started regarding being colour blind as a gift; because it made me, implicitly, always question what is real, what is perception and who is the judge of that.

My point is: For some purposes, like recreating sound in a high quality, high fidelity manner, I just wonder if our understanding of sound perception has reached its full potential or if there is still more to learn.

My position is that we have more to learn. And I am curious.

 

[Wombat]

What can one say? Analogies are not definitive, They are sometimes used to convey more complex ideas to less understanding people in a very simple manner but usually can't be advanced much further. They are limited in value and shouldn't be relied on in serious discussion unless a direct relationship exists.

e,g, A lot of fruit is spherical in shape but have a different flavour.

 

[svart-hvitt]

What can one say?

@Wombat, what was the point of your comment? Trying to tease or have fun?

It’s great if we can comment on content instead of making more heat than light.

 

[Wombat]

@Wombat, what was the point of your comment? Trying to tease or have fun?

It’s great if we can comment on content instead of making more heat than light.

I was commenting on your analogy. I thought that was obvious.

 

[Wombat]

S-H stop taking replies personally. It has been going on too long and can lead to a limitation on discourse. IMHO.

 

[Cosmik]

COLOURED OR NOT?

Is it relevant to ask if one believes that sound can be coloured by room or not?

If we have coloured sound, should we try and make it clear, neutral again?

Do room reflections "colour" the output of a video transducer e.g. television? Not a lot for the human observer, but if you were measuring the monitor's output across the room using a single, unfocused optical detector, the room would appear to be colouring the image especially if the decor wasn't a neutral grey or white. What is happening is that the human observer's eyes align on the image, lenses and sensors focus the relevant rays and the brain filters out the irrelevant information; it is aware of the surroundings but does not confuse them with the image.

The FFT enthusiast's microphone is the same as that unfocused opto detector, and the human listener is doing the equivalent with sound as they do with images.

If you 'corrected' the image based on the opto-detector's output it would look very strange to the human. But it would give a perfect measurement.

(Of course it's not a perfect analogy because generally with video there are external sources of light contributing too, but still the human copes with them. Perhaps this leads to further thoughts on the absurdities of audio room correction. More later... )

 

[Pio2001]

Try it and see how it sounds. (I'm surprised you didn't try it the first time you ever played with a tape recorder!).

Worse yet : try to record your own stereo system from your listening position, and then listen to the recording.
I've done it with the Umik-1. The result is surprisingly faithful as long as the microphone is 10 cm from the speakers.
When it is at the listening position it's... well... hard to believe !

So wouldn't not hearing like we do apply in both positions, with flawed mic. pick-up at the listening position being the better choice than flawed pick-up at a non-listening position?

Mics are not necessarily flawed : a dummy head (a real size model of a human head with microphones inserted into the ears) can record the sound exactly as we hear it. But you have to listen to the recording using earbuds.
It doesn't sound bad with stereo speakers, but with speakers, we prefer to listen to recording made with a pair of traditional microphones.

I'm new in the forum, so I guess it was probably already posted, but here is an example of binaural recording with the same drums, but in different rooms (starts at 4:19) :

 

[pirad]

Do room reflections "colour" the output of a video transducer e.g. television? Not a lot for the human observer, but if you were measuring the monitor's output across the room using a single, unfocused optical detector, the room would appear to be colouring the image especially if the decor wasn't a neutral grey or white. What is happening is that the human observer's eyes align on the image, lenses and sensors focus the relevant rays and the brain filters out the irrelevant information; it is aware of the surroundings but does not confuse them with the image.

The FFT enthusiast's microphone is the same as that unfocused opto detector, and the human listener is doing the equivalent with sound as they do with images.

If you 'corrected' the image based on the opto-detector's output it would look very strange to the human. But it would give a perfect measurement.

(Of course it's not a perfect analogy because generally with video there are external sources of light contributing too, but still the human copes with them. Perhaps this leads to further thoughts on the absurdities of audio room correction. More later... )

Room reflections color the image recording in a big way. It is the job of the director of photography, set designers, light department, colorists to control them.If you put an actress in a green room her face will have a greenish tint. If she is sick or a zombie maybe ok. Now that color correction (grading) is a must in postproduction it is easier to fix mistakes from the set.

 

[Wombat]

I'm not saying mics. are flawed, I do recall that it was stated that they are flawed in picking up performance. The dummy head with mics in the ear canals has always sounded more feasible to me. Is it possible that this approach is more accurate than preferred miking but doesn't pander to audiophile imaginings?

 

[Guermantes]

If we wish to get close to what we hear at a performance(recorded) shouldn't the mike/s be located at the listening position, not at the performer/s position?

If we want the performers to hear their performance(recorded) then the mike/s close to the performers seems logical.

Modern classical recordings appear to have it both ways: cardioids up close for detail and omnis further back for ambience -- the producer decides how much room sound to mix in to make it seem "natural". If using just a stereo pair for orchestra, I've often tried to position near the conductor as he/she is balancing the sound of the performance.

 

[Guermantes]

Room reflections color the image recording in a big way. It is the job of the director of photography, set designers, light department, colorists to control them.If you put an actress in a green room her face will have a greenish tint. If she is sick or a zombie maybe ok. Now that color correction (grading) is a must in postproduction it is easier to fix mistakes from the set.

I think there is some difference here between incident light (your example) and radiant light (Cosmik's example). But video techs I work with do complain about being put off by surrounding wall colours when they are viewing monitors.

 

[Wombat]

Modern classical recordings appear to have it both ways: cardioids up close for detail and omnis further back for ambience -- the producer decides how much room sound to mix in to make it seem "natural". If using just a stereo pair for orchestra, I've often tried to position near the conductor as he/she is balancing the sound of the performance.

It sounds like a compromise between neither method doing the job. Let's average the compromises and let preference override accuracy/reality.

 

[pirad]

If we wish to get close to what we hear at a performance(recorded) shouldn't the mike/s be located at the listening position, not at the performer/s position?

If we want the performers to hear their performance(recorded) then the mike/s close to the performers seems logical.


Ignoring practicalities of course.

You can make recordings with a matched stereo pair from a good position. I like recordings made with this technique. But it is not easy.
If the performance is amplified, the production engineer will be effectively deciding about the sound, also your recorded one.
If it's unamplified, the musicians must adjust their "levels" between themselves.

 

[pirad]

I think there is some difference here between incident light (your example) and radiant light (Cosmik's example). But video techs I work with do complain about being put off by surrounding wall colours when they are viewing monitors.

I am getting lost in those analogies. Perhaps better speak straight about the problem in audio terms.