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

[watchnerd]

watchnerd, perhaps I should have specified an amplifier that a jazz guitarist may play on at a small venue. What's the name of your band? Love to check them out online.

Dan

We don't have an online presence -- we don't do it for a living (we all have other careers), just play local clubs and bars for fun. Sometimes I'll fill in for the bass player of Purple Passion if he's sick or something.

As for the amps...

I won't comment on guitar amps, as what I use, as a bass player, and what the guitarists use are different, and every guitarist has his or her own preference.

For portable gigs, I use:

Amp: Mesa Subway D-800+
Cabinet: Mesa Subway Ultra Lite 1 x 15

Home use:

Amp: Mesa Bass Prodigy Four:88
Cabinet: Mesa Subway Ultra Lite 2 x 10

These are fairly popular with bass players across a wide set of genres.

FWIW, I don't want my studio monitors or my living room speakers to sound like my music instrument amps.

 

[watchnerd]

I think we all know that music reproduction is not the same as a live music event. I'm not sure why you won't accept this point. The original question was asking if "live" music is the gold standard of audio? Why, why not? I can say yes, can't I?

I don't really think Jeff Hamilton is in my room playing drums for me when I play his music on my stereo.

No, it is not the standard.

The standard for reproduction at home is reproducing the *recording*.

Recordings of live events are massively manipulated by recording engineers to make the finished product.

When I do mixing at home, the raw mic feeds I start with are very different from the mix at the end.

Not to mention the colorations microphones introduce into the recording.

 

[gonefishin]

No, it is not the standard.

The standard for reproduction at home is reproducing the *recording*.

Again, I don't think anyone is trying to say otherwise. In fact, I would say that you can assume this is the starting point and then ask yourself if you can have a discussion beyond this point. I would say it depends.

Once again, I know that Jeff Hamilton is not in the same room with me playing inside my speakers. I'm playing a recording, I think we all get that.

 

[watchnerd]

Again, I don't think anyone is trying to say otherwise. In fact, I would say that you can assume this is the starting point and then ask yourself if you can have a discussion beyond this point. I would say it depends. Once again, I know that Jeff Hamilton is not in the same room with me, today. Hopefully I'll be able to see him again in the future.

Unless you're making your own recordings from scratch, it really doesn't depend.

You, as a consumer, are not using raw, unaltered, unmixed, live concert audio.

You're listening to a product that has been manipulated by a recording engineer to create a product that gives a pleasurable home experience.

It's an artistic creation unto itself.

Most people don't do live field recordings and so aren't aware of all the steps that happen to alter what is being heard at home.

 

[Doodski]

Unless you're making your own recordings from scratch, it really doesn't depend.

You, as a consumer, are not using raw, unaltered, unmixed, live concert audio.

You're listening to a product that has been manipulated by a recording engineer to create a product that gives a pleasurable home experience.

It's an artistic creation unto itself.

Most people don't do live field recordings and so aren't aware of all the steps that happen to alter what is being heard at home.

I knew a guy that made unadulterated field recording of birds, bees other insects and wild animals for nature films. I serviced his 6 portable DAT recorders for years. Very fussy fellow and insisted I service them even if they where operating well. Wanted the best.

 

[gonefishin]

Unless you're making your own recordings from scratch, it really doesn't depend.

.

Again, I don't think anyone is trying to say otherwise. In fact, I would say that you can assume this is the starting point and then ask yourself if you can have a discussion beyond this point. I would say it depends.

I meant it depends on the person if they are able to have a discussion beyond this point or if they can't get past it

 

[watchnerd]

I meant it depends on the person if they are able to have a discussion beyond this point or if they can't get past it

"Reference" means you can use it as a standard to judge quality.

If you weren't at the live event, personally, you have no reference point.

 

[gonefishin]

"Reference" means you can use it as a standard to judge quality.

If you weren't at the live event, personally, you have no reference point.

again, of course everyone accepts this point.

 

[watchnerd]

Example of creating a reference at home:

1. Put my recording mic in my usual listening position

2. Set up my bass amp at the front of my listening room, between my speakers

3. Play some stuff through the bass amp and record it through the mic at my listening position.

4. Play back the recording through my home stereo while sitting at the listening position and compare how it sounds in the very same room

That's a valid reference standard.

FWIW, it's not a close call. I've got a pretty good home stereo, but it still doesn't fool anyone into confusing a recording of me playing bass in my living room with actually playing bass in my listening room.

 

[watchnerd]

again, of course everyone accepts this point.

Right.

So you can't use the "liveness" of a recording of the Hamilton Jazz Orchestra as a reference standard if you weren't there, in person.

And even then, unless you were making the recording yourself and have the masters, it's still subject to circle of confusion.

 

[gonefishin]

Actually, The Clayton Hamilton Jazz Orchestra was at the Chicago Symphony Orchestra Hall. While it certainly sounded good at the CSOH you are listening to a fair amount of the room and reflections. I wouldn't say this is a good example at all. Now if we were talking about hearing the Jeff Hamilton Trio in a small venue, I would say that is a better starting point. But again, I think both of us would have to accept the fact that we are, in fact, playing a recording on our stereo systems.

 

[BillG]

Part 3: Is "Live" sound even worth chasing? What happens when the dog catches the car?

For me, absolutely not. Most live music I've heard is never as pleasant sounding as studio recordings, and the performances are often lacking the precision as well.

In the writing the above, that doesn't mean that I don't enjoy the concert experience, because I very much do. However, I never expect them to sound as technically good as a studio recording played back on a high fidelity system. I'm pleasantly surprised when they even approach such clarity, although that doesn't happen often - I think I've only experienced this three or four times in my life: David Bowie's Outside show at the Great Western Forum in Los Angeles, George Duke and Stanley Clarke at the Wiltern in Los Angeles, Public Enemy at the Town Hall in Auckland, New Zealand, and Digable Planets at the Power Station in Auckland.

 

[Doodski]

For me, absolutely not. Most live music I've heard is never as pleasant sounding as studio recordings, and the performances are often lacking the precision as well.

In the writing the above, that doesn't mean that I don't enjoy the concert experience, because I very much do. However, I never expect them to sound as technically good as a studio recording played back on a high fidelity system. I'm pleasantly surprised when they even approach such clarity, although that doesn't happen often - I think I've only experienced this three or four times in my life: David Bowie's Outside show at the Great Western Forum in Los Angeles, George Duke and Stanley Clarke at the Wiltern in Los Angeles, Public Enemy at the Town Hall in Auckland, New Zealand, and Digable Planets at the Power Station in Auckland.

I experienced better than home stereo sound with RUSH and Queensryche and I'd heard some pretty expensive gear by then. Two of the best concerts I've seen other than a flutist girlfriend playing Prokofiev with a pianist @ a recital. It was a experience for sure.

 

[watchnerd]

For me, absolutely not. Most live music I've heard is never as pleasant sounding as studio recordings, and the performances are often lacking the precision as well.

Even aside from this, what's the proper live reference point for an album that was entirely created and conceived in the studio first, before ever going on tour?

Daft Punk's "Random Access Memories" comes to mind.

 

[Jimbob54]

Again, I don't think anyone is trying to say otherwise. In fact, I would say that you can assume this is the starting point and then ask yourself if you can have a discussion beyond this point. I would say it depends.

Once again, I know that Jeff Hamilton is not in the same room with me playing inside my speakers. I'm playing a recording, I think we all get that.

I think a lot of confusion in this thread is due to the nature of the OP- the headline is one to which I think you would / have answer "yes".

But there are more important questions in the OP :

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?

As in, if you are going after it, how? I dont doubt the quality of your live experiences, I dont doubt anything mine and most systems can reproduce is inferior to it. I agree entirely with watchnerds responses - the only goal for a home system is to recreate the source file. If that file is an exquisitely recorded concert you were at, I still dont think , other than with some psychoacoustic brain trickery, it will come close to you being sat there. But it can hope to inspire memories and visions of being there.

 

[gonefishin]

- the only goal for a home system is to recreate the source file. If that file is an exquisitely recorded concert you were at, I still dont think , other than with some psychoacoustic brain trickery, it will come close to you being sat there. But it can hope to inspire memories and visions of being there.

Hi Jimbo,
You are not saying anything that we don't already know. The hobby is home audio reproduction. There is a given that we are reproducing recorded media at home and that the best we can do is reproduce what was recorded. These ideas of yours, and watchnerds. are not discounted. But they are the understood "You" at the beginning of the sentence.

These things you keep repeating and repeating and repeating are accepted and known by audio hobbyist. Any question put forth are within the context of this hobby and the hobby understands that we are reproducing a recording of a band. But there can still be a question outside of this context, or at least I would think we are capable of that.

If someone says that a recording has a "live type" sound to it. You, and watchnerd, can (please) take comfort in knowing that people in this audio hobby know that we are listening to a recording on a reproduction system. Some of us may also have several recording at home already of various recording techniques. We know that different studio's record using different equipment and techniques, we accept this as part of the hobby of home audio reproduction.

But we can also say that such and such a studio does a good job at recording live bands. Shouldn't we also be able to say that such and such speakers present instruments in a manner that gives us the feeling of live sound. Again, all the context stands that was discussed before, we know this. You don't have unknown secret knowledge that nobody has thought about before. The points you bring up are valid and the most basic premise of thought that this hobby knows. We can know this and have a conversation accepting the context of the hobby.

 

[Jimbob54]

Hi Jimbo,
You are not saying anything that we don't already know. The hobby is home audio reproduction. There is a given that we are reproducing recorded media at home and that the best we can do is reproduce what was recorded. These ideas of yours, and watchnerds. are not discounted. But they are the understood "You" at the beginning of the sentence.

These things you keep repeating and repeating and repeating are accepted and known by audio hobbyist. Any question put forth are within the context of this hobby and the hobby understands that we are reproducing a recording of a band. But there can still be a question outside of this context, or at least I would think we are capable of that.

If someone says that a recording has a "live type" sound to it. You, and watchnerd, can (please) take comfort in knowing that people in this audio hobby know that we are listening to a recording on a reproduction system. Some of us may also have several recording at home already of various recording techniques. We know that different studio's record using different equipment and techniques, we accept this as part of the hobby of home audio reproduction.

But we can also say that such and such a studio does a good job at recording live bands. Shouldn't we also be able to say that such and such speakers present instruments in a manner that gives us the feeling of live sound. Again, all the context stands that was discussed before, we know this. You don't have unknown secret knowledge that nobody has thought about before. The points you bring up are valid and the most basic premise of thought that this hobby knows. We can know this and have a conversation accepting the context of the hobby.

You really are only going to condescend rather than answer the one question I want you to. I've asked it at least 3 times now. I don't want to know who you have seen, where, what wood their guitar was laminated with or what you ate for dinner that night.

What have you done to get your system closer to the "live" sound that you desire? In one of your earliest posts in this thread, you say :

"Exactly what I am after is sound the captures that "live" element, that "live" tone, spl, effortlessness and that "live" silence. Most of the concerts that I go to are in smaller venues that have excellent sounding rooms"

The closest you have come to saying how you achieved that was by saying you got "drivers that are low distortion and capable of playing high spl". Well, knock me down with a feather.

You obviously know the sound you want, but seriously, is that all you are going to give us? Speakers that go loud without distorting?

The issue isn't my seeming childlike naivety in not understanding your sophisticated tastes, your wealth of experience. It's your absolute inability to say anything of relevance to the question I have been asking.

 

[watchnerd]

Hi Jimbo,
You are not saying anything that we don't already know. The hobby is home audio reproduction. There is a given that we are reproducing recorded media at home and that the best we can do is reproduce what was recorded. These ideas of yours, and watchnerds. are not discounted. But they are the understood "You" at the beginning of the sentence.

These things you keep repeating and repeating and repeating are accepted and known by audio hobbyist. Any question put forth are within the context of this hobby and the hobby understands that we are reproducing a recording of a band. But there can still be a question outside of this context, or at least I would think we are capable of that.

If someone says that a recording has a "live type" sound to it. You, and watchnerd, can (please) take comfort in knowing that people in this audio hobby know that we are listening to a recording on a reproduction system. Some of us may also have several recording at home already of various recording techniques. We know that different studio's record using different equipment and techniques, we accept this as part of the hobby of home audio reproduction.

But we can also say that such and such a studio does a good job at recording live bands. Shouldn't we also be able to say that such and such speakers present instruments in a manner that gives us the feeling of live sound. Again, all the context stands that was discussed before, we know this. You don't have unknown secret knowledge that nobody has thought about before. The points you bring up are valid and the most basic premise of thought that this hobby knows. We can know this and have a conversation accepting the context of the hobby.

If your point is that you're free to subjectively describe your at-home listening experiences however you wish, including it gives you "the feeling of live sound", I agree -- you can describe your experience however you wish.

Other than that, I don't understand your point.

 

[Jimbob54]

If your point is that you're free to subjectively describe your at-home listening experiences however you wish, including it gives you "the feeling of live sound", I agree -- you can describe your experience however you wish.

Other than that, I don't understand your point.

Massive plus one.

 

[gonefishin]

jimbo, I sent you a private message...let's continue any discussion needed in pm