But that's sort of the point. You can't have wide dynamic range without playing loud.
-
WANTED: Happy members who like to discuss audio and other topics related to our interest. Desire to learn and share knowledge of science required. There are many reviews of audio hardware and expert members to help answer your questions. Click here to have your audio equipment measured for free!
The sadness of wasted bits
- Thread starter CapMan
- Start date
But that's sort of the point. You can't have wide dynamic range without playing loud.
Yes, but just playing loud does not give you dynamic range.
- Thread Starter
- #63
Nexus from Canada are worth listing to
Sorry if folks mistook my comments about loud, if folks thought i meant loud just being average loud.
Loud absolutely must include uncompressed, unclipped, undistorted headroom for peaks, above average SPL levels.
I personally like to have +18dB worth of such headroom throughout the entire spectrum....including sub bass and VHF...the hard ends to do so.
I think this what PA can give that home hi-fi almost always can't.
And when that "uncompressed, unclipped, undistorted headroom for peaks, above average SPL levels" is not there throughout the spectrum for a given average SPL level....
well that's the average SPL level at which a speaker starts sounding uncomfortably loud, ime..
Probably a very fair point. I was trying to point out that death metal drummers need skill to do what they do (speed and precision don't just happen on their own)... but my (apparently) wrong assumption was that skill in drumming is easily transferrable between genres.I’d respectfully disagree having heard a few tryIt’d be like retraining a championship golfer to play for the Harlem Globe Trotters
No, but the thread was about recreating a live event up close. That is always loud. So it's about both then.
computer-audiophile
Major Contributor
Having the ALTEC A7 VOTT's at home was a good start to listen lifelike to Jazz records on vinyl. (Just to give an example)
MRC01
Major Contributor
To be more precise, you can't have wide dynamic range without turning up the volume knob. Average levels won't necessarily be loud.
For example, listen to an uncompressed recording of Mahler's 1st with peak levels set to 110 dB SPL, and you'll spend the first 14 minutes with the music at a very moderate 75 dB SPL, until the crescendo rattles your ears and wakes you up.
What mic arrangement did you use for the good-sounding no-compression recordings?
I think this somewhat relates to the earbuds thing, too.
A simple stereo pair of nice condenser mics could probably result in a recording that sounds good, dry, on a system that itself has really good dynamics.
But this is not how most recordings are made, nor is it how most people listen, unfortunately.
I also don't know if that works for rock or pop recordings. An unprocessed stereo pair recording of a rock concert would sound even more like ass than the rock concert itself.
MRC01
Major Contributor
When I was recording local music events (unamplified acoustic music of varying types) I used a matched pair of Rode NT1A mics in Blumlein or ORTF arrangement, depending on the event. Here's an example of a local brass quintet that I have posted before: https://www.audiosciencereview.com/...-classical-music-pros-using.12225/post-935363
Waxx
Major Contributor
It's not really play quietly that is the trick, but it's playing from the wrist while still giving a strong sound. The absolute grandmasters in this were Art Blackey and Tony Allen (the Afrobeat/Jazz drummer, mostly known of Fela Kuti's "Africa 70" band in the 60's and 70's). In this masterclass in London you see very well what i mean. This is independent of the patterns used, and is a key element in the jazz sound. It's also the hardest to learn for drummers who learned first pop or rock or metal. You can play those patterns like a rock drummer (from the elbows or the shoulders), but it won't sound good as jazz. Jazz, rootsreggae and afrobeat should be played from the wrists, not from the shoulders or the elbows.
computer-audiophile
Major Contributor
My favourite pieces with percussion are Rebonds a and b by Xenakis. By the way, these pieces have already been performed in our apartment at a private house concert with the master student of Professor Nakamura who can be seen on the video above. No chance of reproducing this live experience dynamics and attack with loudspeakers. It is impossible.
I stated elsewhere, I favor the Telarc miking approach - reasonably close, simple mic tree.
I had a friend who made digital recordings that way (he was in a unique position to record a lot of chamber music) and those recordings were wonderful. More room, yes, but you could actually compare them to live in terms of dynamic range. Sometimes low frequencies decrease more rapidly than you experience it live, I'm not sure why. If the Cello was in the back of the quartet or string orchestra, the bass can sound more limited (on Telarc as well). Other labels make up for it by mixing in a spot mic.
With a jazz band (with horns) it was hard to mic as close - the levels were too high. So you moved back and captured more room noise.
computer-audiophile
Major Contributor
Yes, I think that's good too sometimes. I was lucky enough to know Prof. Jürg Jecklin (R.I.P.) with whom I could have a good conversation about such things. He was a Swiss sound engineer, music director and university lecturer. He wrote books on recording techniques and loudspeakers, all of which I have read,
My own Photo of Jürg Jecklin:
MRC01
Major Contributor
With the simple 2-mic pole that I used, getting the bass right was tricky. Too close, or if the musicians are near a wall or corner, and the bass is too strong and tubby. Too far, and it gets thin/weak. Also, micing closer than about 6' away changes the timbres of the instruments, they sound bright & edgy (which is a natural effect, same thing happens in actual listening). It took some moving around ("EQ with your feet") of both musicians and mics to get it right. Sometimes we didn't have that time or flexibility. Sometimes what comes out in the recording at home isn't what I heard on the headphones at the event. So there is some luck involved too, especially since I only do this for fun with decent but not SOTA gear.
I listen to a lot of classical music, which has consistently high quality recordings with minimal post-processing compared to other genres. I hear consistent differences in recording style across artists and labels. There are so many ways to assess a "good" recording, very different styles can be equally good, or can be bad for entirely different reasons.
computer-audiophile
Major Contributor
Yes, that's how I see it too. But the question was about dynamics. It is difficult to recreate the dynamics of a classical concert at home. It may sound impressive what comes out of the loudspeaker, but when you actually go to a classical concert, you realise that it's a completely different matter.
What speakers do you have ?
MRC01
Major Contributor
That's part of the fun of this hobby - how close can you get? Of course, if the mastering engineer squashed the recording then you don't even have a chance and all the best equipment can't help you.
16 bit has 2^16 levels, or 65536 (minus one for the sign bit)
24 bit has 2^24 levels, or 16,777,216 (minus 1 for the sign bit)
16777216 / 65536 = 256
---
If a 16bit DAC outputs a maximum of 2 volts at full scale (a common figure), and if the voltage steps were the same, a 24bit DAC should put out about 503 volts at full scale.
They don't.
I was disappointined.
Last edited:
Which is both about reaching high SPL. You need high SPL to reach the dynamic range that makes it sound real.