Is "Live" Sound the Gold Standard for Audio? Why? Why Not?

[MediumRare]

I love live music, I bet you do too. Even though I would like my home system to replicate that experience, my system seems to be missing something. So here go some questions for you:

Part 1: Is that "Live" sound a key reference against which an ambitious system should be judged?
Part 2: How is an actual "Live" performance different, in a technical sense, from what most home systems can reproduce?
Part 3: Is "Live" sound even worth chasing? What happens when the dog catches the car?

 

[chaking]

I don't think so. I like the music more than the musicians, the venue, or the fans. There are occassions when the crowd adds an element that I enjoy (pink floyd pulse, johnny cash @ folsom), but most of the time I'd prefer an environment which is best suited to record the music and only the music, and I don't think that's often acheived live.

 

[Sgt. Ear Ache]

well, as a fan of "popular music" - rock, alt rock, punk, indie, acoustic, folk rock, et al - live sound is often...errrr...terrible. lol. So no I don't really use that as a guidepost. I've heard lot's of audio systems that were far better-sounding than the average live show. Also, the best sounding live show I've seen was probably just a couple years ago - Joe Jackson here at a local venue. It sounded bloody fantastic...largely I think because the spl was kept fairly low. I was struck by how much it sounded like a good home system! lol

 

[JeffS7444]

1. Not really, am only concerned with reproducing what's on the recording.

2. Live sound has plenty of dynamic range, comes at you from 360 degrees and is only listened to at one volume!

3. "Sometimes" depending on one's intent. For binaural (headphone-only) recordings, great if you don't lose your hearing due to excessive SPLs. Otherwise, unless you live by yourself and have no neighbors, there are reasons why compression, limiting and volume controls exist.

 

[Eetu]

With unamplified music, yes. With everything else.. why would you want to mimic a PA-system at home?

 

[maverickronin]

I love live music, I bet you do too.

Nope, and I've never understood the obsession with chasing it in a hifi system.

Part of it is that I'm an introvert. I'm never going to relax and enjoy myself in a crowd.

Part of it is that live music is just too limiting. You can do so much in a stereo (let alone multi channel) mix than you can IRL. It's like comparing a play to movie.

 

[MediumRare]

Nope, and I've never understood the obsession with chasing it in a hifi system.
... It's like comparing a play to movie.

Excellent analogy!

 

[MediumRare]

well, as a fan of "popular music" - rock, alt rock, punk, indie, acoustic, folk rock, et al - live sound is often...errrr...terrible. lol. So no I don't really use that as a guidepost. I've heard lot's of audio systems that were far better-sounding than the average live show. Also, the best sounding live show I've seen was probably just a couple years ago - Joe Jackson here at a local venue. It sounded bloody fantastic...largely I think because the spl was kept fairly low. I was struck by how much it sounded like a good home system! lol

Very interesting. I may be an outlier. For me, Blues live is almost a different genre than Blues recorded. Live Reggae, again, a very different experience than recorded. I know others on ASR have commented how it's impossible to properly record a classical piano, no matter how much it has been attempted and how enjoyable are the results. Just not the same.

 

[Wes]

I know some fellows that Got Live, If Ya Want It

 

[TimVG]

It depends. When I perform in an orchestra and you come and listen, chances are your 'live' reference will already be quite different from mine.

 

[Rja4000]

I love live music, I bet you do too. Even though I would like my home system to replicate that experience, my system seems to be missing something. So here go some questions for you:

Part 1: Is that "Live" sound a key reference against which an ambitious system should be judged?
Part 2: How is an actual "Live" performance different, in a technical sense, from what most home systems can reproduce?
Part 3: Is "Live" sound even worth chasing? What happens when the dog catches the car?

I'm a "Live" sound sort of guy.

There are different topics:
1. Performance
Some musicians are actually transcended by the stage
Ambiance is different. As is the challenge, the complicity between musicians, and the adrenaline linked to a live event, I guess.

2. Technically, "Live" sound is a challenge. Translate "nightmare".
And the smaller the venue, the bigger the challenge.
In-ear monitoring,digital drums and keyboards, all those help, for sure.
But there is a risk this may then conflict with the point 1 benefits.

3. Nowadays, recording a live event is easy.
Dante and other low latency audio network technologies are game changers.
But that doesn't fix the live sound capture challenges: mics proximity, non ideal conditions, unexpected incidents...

4. One of the main difference between recorded live sound and the real thing is the same than for the original sound recording: you can't produce even remotely similar dynamic range.
If you did, nobody would listen to it, anyway.
Not only for accoustic instrumemts: even the big rock or blues, with modern PA systems, which are very close to HiFi + an incredible dynamic capacity, are usually less compressed than what you may find as sold production.

 

[ReaderZ]

For something like Vienna New Year's Concert, yes. For pop, rock etc, hell no, same song is much better in their studio recorded versions.

 

[ta240]

As said before, classical: yes; anything amplified: no.

Live amplified performances are for experiencing the energy of being there, not for sound quality. I've never understood people that use that as the goal for their home system.

I know my system is coming together when the classical music starts sounding more like I'm in a properly treated concert hall.

And the bottom of the barrel are the street fair performance and in many cases the state fair shows with the really poorly setup system that is painfully bad up close and just bad at a distance. I'm sure some of the performers probably can sound good, just not through the loud as possible PA sound system. I bet that if they ran it through a smaller but reasonable quality setup it would be decent up close and nobody a half mile away would hear it so it would be a win/win.

 

[Wes]

for testing a small combo, chamber music, girl with guitar all make a good reference

for amplified music your system needs to accurately replicate the fuzz box and wa-wah pedal

for studio tracks laid down you need to capture the mood of the Moog

 

[escksu]

I love live music, I bet you do too. Even though I would like my home system to replicate that experience, my system seems to be missing something. So here go some questions for you:

Part 1: Is that "Live" sound a key reference against which an ambitious system should be judged?
Part 2: How is an actual "Live" performance different, in a technical sense, from what most home systems can reproduce?
Part 3: Is "Live" sound even worth chasing? What happens when the dog catches the car?

It depends. But if you are talking about live band playing, then NO. You try talking to someone beside you while standing 2m from a live band playing. He wont be able to hear you clearly. Even shouting would still be hard to hear.

Yeah, if the singer has no mic (and speakers), you will have a very hard time hearing the person sing. It would be drown out by the instruments.

Then, there is personal preference and ocassion too! Eg. You just want to sit down relax... Some music to enjoy... Having a live band playing wont make you relax...

Then there is reference sound... Your ears simply doesnt like the sharpness of the original sound. Tol sharp for you. The hit hats, cymbals etc makes you jump.

 

[Robin L]

Once I heard a microphone feed I realized I was hearing the sound of microphones. Transducers are never 1 for 1, I don't expect them to be anymore.

 

[Blumlein 88]

Once I heard a microphone feed I realized I was hearing the sound of microphones. Transducers are never 1 for 1, I don't expect them to be anymore.

Yes this.

Listen to a microphone feed on a multi-pattern mic. One you can easily switch patterns on. So many times I'd heard people refer to hearing microphone feeds as an arbiter of fidelity. Okay, which pattern, which microphone?

 

[Kvalsvoll]

Not necessarily a goal to sound exactly like a typical live concert, but in some aspects, live is the reference. Generally, I say a good home system by todays standards can reproduce sound better. At least for any amplified/PA performance.

Purely acoustical performances will be different. at least if we talk about fidelity - making it sound exactly like the live performance. But it can be quite close, and equally enjoyable.

What is new is that we now can reproduce a sufficient dynamic range, to get the same impact and loudness as the live performance has. With better clarity, better separation between instruments, and much better holographic presentation. Then of course we have the option to turn down the volume, at the expense of physical tactile impact and loudness, but sometimes we just prefer a nice and quiet concert, and at home we can have that.

 

[Rja4000]

Live recordings can easily be made sounding cleaner and more sophisticated than the original live event.

This is because
1. Nowadays, it's easy to record more tracks than was used for live PA. Including several mics or DIs on the same instrument. But also ambiance and 'reverb' tracks.
2. You can select the best performance for a song from all the tour performances. And even rebuild an ideal performance from several.
3. Tracks may be accurately time-aligned, cleaned, repaired, part may be muted, even replayed, or sound be re-shaped (triggered drums from original drum play, as an example) and, of course, re-levelled without fearing feedback. And mixed using automation, so be much more carefully balanced.
And you have plenty of time: it's not live anymore.
You can do trials and errors.
And several people may help too.
You also usually have better monitoring.

So, cleaner, it can be.

But if you want to distribute and sale the recording, you'll have to follow the market rules, and dynamics will have to be seriously reduced.
Because 99.9% of people would not be able-or won't want anyway- to reproduce the original dynamic at home.

 

[Rja4000]

Live sound in Small places, with accoustic instruments -even if locally amplified- is very different from big live show on huge stages with large PA. (Or from a big classic orchestra in a large hall)

In that case, direct band sound plays a major role. The art for the live sound engineer is then to balance direct sound with amplified sound, to subtly reinforce what has to be.

Recording such a performance is much more of a challenge. And the smaller the place is, the more of a challenge it is.
Ambiance mics are required, but are difficult to position and get right, with the right balance of music sound, reverb, public noise,...
Close miking is not ideal, and, sometimes, not even possible, if the place is really small.

So that's probably the most difficult scenario.
Too bad, since that's also often the one where the "live" atmosphere has the most impact on the performance quality.