Reality Is Overrated When It Comes to Recordings (Article from music Engineer/Producer)

[egellings]

I used a summer buffer op amp (inverting with 2 Rin's) to do the summing. Speaker connections were reversed on the center speaker to correct for the inverting op amp stage.

 

[Robin L]

To the isolated audiophile, "natural" sound is a goal. Yet, in practice, it isn't. Not even in classical music. In pop music, few want to hear the Rolling Stones as they sounded to a fly on the wall in the studio. And they probably wouldn't buy their albums. Older von Karajan/Berlin classical albums sound like they were recorded in a hollow acoustic. Just as in feeding your face, the flavor is largely in the seasoning. And the sauces.

-Just one man's view.

Funny. By the 1970's, Karajan was the sales powerhouse in classical music, re-recording "the hits" using multi-miking techniques inspired by rock & roll productions. Karajan's early Philharmonia recordings were a bit distant, but the DGG recordings of the Berlin Philharmonic made in the seventies are full of the crazy perspectives one hears in the typical Pop/Rock production of that time. A lot of those 1970's recordings later were remixed to approximate "norms" for Classical music productions, but for a taste of HvK's cray-cray, try the mid-seventies HvK/Berlin Phil recording of Berlioz Symphonie Fantastique on LP: the oboe in the slow movement makes a smooth pan from hard right to hard left, like something out of Led Zepplin II.

 

[Tom C]

As the article says: natural or realistic sound is often not the goal when producing music.

But a natural sound is a goal for some recordings.

As for recordings that actually do sound natural/realistic, one I like is "Requiem for Pink Moon", An Elizabethan Tribute to Nick Drake.

It's, yup, Nick Drake songs performed in Elizabethan style. Sounds like a bad audiophile trope, and I gave up buying audiophile recordings long ago. But this I bought because I actually enjoy it. Beautiful voices.

It sounded best on my previous Thiel 3.7s and MBL 121 omnis. I swear, played at "live-like" volume, with my eyes closed, the sensation of listening in to a smallish hall to real singers was amazing. I mean, if I had the real thing right there to directly compare, sure there would be a difference, but lacking that it was just eerie in apparent realism.

I looked for a link directly for the album and just found this, a video of the troupe performing:

What blows me away is that, from the recording alone that is almost EXACTLY the sonic picture the recording painted in my mind. I felt I was listening to the voices and instruments, looking up the stage, in a hall just like that! (Except on the recording the higher vocal is on the right not the left).

Thanks for this. I’d heard the name Nick Drake, but never really looked into who he was before. Interesting but tragic life, quite sad.
I find an element of humor in the performance in the video. Something that never came across in Drake’s work. The tenor sounds centered (center stage) with the baritone when listening on ear pods.

 

[Tom C]

Funny. By the 1970's, Karajan was the sales powerhouse in classical music, re-recording "the hits" using multi-miking techniques inspired by rock & roll productions. Karajan's early Philharmonia recordings were a bit distant, but the DGG recordings of the Berlin Philharmonic made in the seventies are full of the crazy perspectives one hears in the typical Pop/Rock production of that time. A lot of those 1970's recordings later were remixed to approximate "norms" for Classical music productions, but for a taste of HvK's cray-cray, try the mid-seventies HvK/Berlin Phil recording of Berlioz Symphonie Fantastique: the oboe in the slow movement makes a smooth pan from hard right to hard left, like something out of Led Zepplin II.

Too funny…

 

[MRC01]

Rudy was also pretty notorious amongst jazz musicians, and jazz recording engineers, for changing the sound.

...

But despite what many audiophiles think, Rudy's recordings are manipulated to hell and back (like most studio recordings are).

And they sound like it. I have many Blue Note recordings and most of them sound like crap. Artificially emphasized through the mids & lower treble, attenuated at the lowest and highest octave. Listening is fatiguing, if I can make it through an album in one sitting, any more will give me a headache. And that's on high quality playback equipment with measured response slightly on the warm side of neutral. Tone controls to the rescue!
I've never understood why Blue Note and Van Gelder's recordings were held in such high esteem. I can only guess that it's the quality of the music, not the recording. I suppose lots of people like that tinny sound. Horses for courses, I suppose.

 

[MRC01]

Thanks for this. I’d heard the name Nick Drake, but never really looked into who he was before. Interesting but tragic life, quite sad.
I find an element of humor in the performance in the video. Something that never came across in Drake’s work. The tenor sounds centered (center stage) with the baritone when listening on ear pods.

Nice! I read about that album on one of Stereophile's RTDF lists. Then I got several more Joel Frederiksen recordings - all wonderful. One of my favorites is the Elfin Knight - what a wide ranging collection! I find it impeccably recorded, very natural and realistic.

 

[MRC01]

I have. At a Civil War re-enactment. From a good ways away. You could feel the shockwave. Be fun to try and reproduce it close miced with the same impact. Not sure how that would work on the speaker end of things.
...

I agree and believe it's impossible to accurately capture gunshots, let alone cannons, in audio recordings. We hear plenty of gunshots in video entertainment, but it doesn't even resemble the depth, incredibly fast transient, and sheer expansive impact of the actual sound.

 

[Gorgonzola]

Funny. By the 1970's, Karajan was the sales powerhouse in classical music, re-recording "the hits" using multi-miking techniques inspired by rock & roll productions. Karajan's early Philharmonia recordings were a bit distant, but the DGG recordings of the Berlin Philharmonic made in the seventies are full of the crazy perspectives one hears in the typical Pop/Rock production of that time. A lot of those 1970's recordings later were remixed to approximate "norms" for Classical music productions, but for a taste of HvK's cray-cray, try the mid-seventies HvK/Berlin Phil recording of Berlioz Symphonie Fantastique on LP: the oboe in the slow movement makes a smooth pan from hard right to hard left, like something out of Led Zepplin II.

The reputation of DGG recordings of the '70s has fell quite rapidly, (not to mention Von Karajan's reputation). They sounded pretty bad: a monolith of sound albeit spread from left to right for stereo effect. No attempt was made of producing a natural soundstage or sense of perspective or relative instrument location.

Beginning the '90s after the advent of digital processing DGG began to remaster most of those earlier recordings using a technique they called "Original Image Bit Processing". This technique, I believe, involved exploiting their original massively-microphoned master tapes and digitally adding delays and other enhancements to simulate more realistic a orchestral presentation.

Based on the CDs I owned thus processed, I think they are an improvement over the original LPs and CDs no so processed. But in the end you can't make silk purse out of a sow's tail, (as my grandmother used to say).

 

[Gorgonzola]

I agree and believe it's impossible to accurately capture gunshots, let alone cannons, in audio recordings. We hear plenty of gunshots in video entertainment, but it doesn't even resemble the depth, incredibly fast transient, and sheer expansive impact of the actual sound.

I once told a colleague who had never heard a gun shot, that a lifetime of action movies did not prepare one for the impact of the sound of a high-power rifle discharged close by.

The report of a high-velocity rifle shot is extremely loud and concussive. The bullet emerges from the barrel traveling 2-3 times the speed of sound and produces a miniature sonic boom; no home or theatre sound system can reproduce that effect.

 

[dasdoing]

man I hate fake tits. you even can make them look good, mas as soon as you touch them the ilusion is all over. ilusion is overrated

 

[watchnerd]

I've never understood why Blue Note and Van Gelder's recordings were held in such high esteem. I can only guess that it's the quality of the music, not the recording.

The quality of the performances is why I like them.

And the post-war period was an important one in the evolution of jazz.

Some of the "west coast jazz" albums of the same period were 'better' recorded, but the performances are in a very different artistic direction.

 

[watchnerd]

man I hate fake tits. you even can make them look good, mas as soon as you touch them the ilusion is all over. ilusion is overrated

You've been feeling the cheap ones.

The high quality implants are much better. They've come a long way in the last decades, and I quite like the new ones.

 

[watchnerd]

I once told a colleague who had never heard a gun shot, that a lifetime of action movies did not prepare one for the impact of the sound of a high-power rifle discharged close by.

The report of a high-velocity rifle shot is extremely loud and concussive. The bullet emerges from the barrel traveling 2-3 times the speed of sound and produces a miniature sonic boom; no home or theatre sound system can reproduce that effect.

Hollywood's take on guns is kind of funny.

On the one hand, you're right -- being close to a high caliber rifle shooting a high grain load is louder than people who don't shoot or hunt typically realize.

On the other hand, 9 mm handguns fired outdoors in an open range is much less dramatic sounding (pop pop pop) than Hollywood typically portrays it.

As for firing handguns indoors at point blank range with some guy you're simultaneously kung fu fighting with, well, John Wick should be deaf.

 

[thegeton]

What did you use to sum the L+R channels?

You could use one of these: https://www.farnell.com/datasheets/2895397.pdf

 

[watchnerd]

You could use one of these: https://www.farnell.com/datasheets/2895397.pdf

Outputs in my case would be at the speaker level, not RCA

 

[Robin L]

The reputation of DGG recordings of the '70s has fell quite rapidly, (not to mention Von Karajan's reputation). They sounded pretty bad: a monolith of sound albeit spread from left to right for stereo effect. No attempt was made of producing a natural soundstage or sense of perspective or relative instrument location.

Beginning the '90s after the advent of digital processing DGG began to remaster most of those earlier recordings using a technique they called "Original Image Bit Processing". This technique, I believe, involved exploiting their original massively-microphoned master tapes and digitally adding delays and other enhancements to simulate more realistic a orchestral presentation.

Based on the CDs I owned thus processed, I think they are an improvement over the original LPs and CDs no so processed. But in the end you can't make silk purse out of a sow's tail, (as my grandmother used to say).

Correct. DGG got it right with the first HvK/Berlin Phil Beethoven Symphony cycle around 1961/2 and it was downhill [for HvK] from that moment on. He was Annointed "Golden God" status among conductors [the moral equivalent of being Robert Plant in 1973]. That's when he started taking the reins at recording sessions and it was all downhill from there. I remember "Woody", the record rep from Harmonia Mundi [USA], claiming the first cycle from the Philharmonia was pre-eminent, and if you can put up with the distant microphone pickup you might agree. But the second cycle, conceived as a complete cycle, is probably as good HvK ever got as regards both performance and sonics. That early 1960's pickup was well above average for it time and a decent transfer still sounds good, maybe even a little bit plausible.

 

[Robin L]

You've been feeling the cheap ones.

The high quality implants are much better. They've come a long way in the last decades, and I quite like the new ones.

{I can't "like" this, but I like this }

 

[Kvalsvoll]

Hollywood's take on guns is kind of funny.

On the one hand, you're right -- being close to a high caliber rifle shooting a high grain load is louder than people who don't shoot or hunt typically realize.

On the other hand, 9 mm handguns fired outdoors in an open range is much less dramatic sounding (pop pop pop) than Hollywood typically portrays it.

As for firing handguns indoors at point blank range with some guy you're simultaneously kung fu fighting with, well, John Wick should be deaf.

I was once contacted by a company in the defense industry, they were working on electronic training guns, and wanted a more realistic sound for the simulated firing. Users had reported that the sound was not "realistic", not loud enough. Which does not come as a surprise, considering the physics involved.

 

[thegeton]

Outputs in my case would be at the speaker level, not RCA

Connect the output into a monoblock amp and then into your center speaker, or to a powered center speaker.

 

[MattHooper]

Hollywood's take on guns is kind of funny.

On the one hand, you're right -- being close to a high caliber rifle shooting a high grain load is louder than people who don't shoot or hunt typically realize.

On the other hand, 9 mm handguns fired outdoors in an open range is much less dramatic sounding (pop pop pop) than Hollywood typically portrays it.

As for firing handguns indoors at point blank range with some guy you're simultaneously kung fu fighting with, well, John Wick should be deaf.

I can tell you from experience the common demand from the film-makers is Make It More...Bigger...BIGGER! Not just for guns.

Even when it comes to gore (I've done tons of horror/gore movies, including some of the SAW movies) and they want even bone breaks
to be floor rattling.

I'm sometimes a bit bummed by this. I'm happy to do exaggerated SFX to make dramatic moments. But I also really love achieving a type of realism. And it's interesting how it can affect the experience. For instance I've done some first passes on gore scenes to give more of a subtle impression of reality and when it's done like that it makes it just hideous to watch (especially if the visual FX are convincing). Then I give layers under that which they can push to make everything bigger "to taste." Once things start getting a bit more cartoony sounding it makes the visuals seem a bit less horrifying. I find a lot of film-makers assume the louder the more exaggerated the more impact. Doesn't always work that way.

(BTW, sounds like you know guns and if so, you may be aware that many people - including apparently gun aficionados - hold the downtown street shoot out scene from HEAT to be a high-bar for movie gun sound).