"Things that cannot be measured"

[Geert]

Who here is listening to private recordings?

You're asking the wrong person:

maybe spending hundreds of hours behind a mixing console and messing around in digital audio workstations made me somewhat less inclined to regard a commercial recording as a sacrosanct thing.

 

[Kal Rubinson]

Who here is listening to private recordings?

I have more than a few in which the mic setup and the mastering suite are known.

 

[Blumlein 88]

Who here is listening to private recordings?

I've recorded a few things. So I know what the original sound was and how these were recorded.

 

[rwortman]

You're asking the wrong person:

Touche. I guess what I meant was that most of what we listen to are commercial recordings.

 

[MattHooper]

I don't know anyone who actively listens to all styles of music, from classic chamber music to orchestral, to jazz over folk and rock to pop, rap, house and techno. (And certainly not someone using a tube amplifier to do so).

That would be me

So I'm not that sure about the experience of 'many other people'.

By "many other" I mean the many audiophiles who prefer tube amplification (non-neutral), hence adding constant "distortion" in that respect.
(And most audiophiles I know have a very wide range of music taste).

What I do see is many people constantly switching gear.

Sure, it's common among audiophiles. Part of the hobby as it were. If the pursuit of accuracy actually stopped the intrigue with different equipment, you wouldn't see so many people here (Amirm included) playing with so much different gear, measuring, testing etc. It's just another way of playing with the gear. You can see people on this forum who've had gear for short or long periods of time, same with on other audio forums. (I've had my amps for 22 years BTW).

I don't have a problem with applying permanent low and high end eq to taste. As already mentioned before, even if you go the more objective route choosing a certain target house curve already involves preference.

But this discussion took the direction of adding distortion.

Altering a previously accurate reproduction to taste via EQ is just another way of distorting the signal - whether you do it sometimes, or leave it on a certain setting.

Adding permanent distortion is something I don't consider to be effective in all situations.

But you already acknowledge choosing a certain house curve EQ may not be objectively accurate - yet that would apply it to all situations (that is, to all the music).

Also, I totally get that you personally may not consider some blanket coloration is effective in all situations (depending on what you mean by that). But in my case I've found a slight "flavouring" of the sound IS effective in essentially all situations (that is, in all the music I play, from symphonic to electronic and everything in between). Horses for courses.

As a recording engineer you also don't apply tape saturation to all input channels and recordings, although it can be very effective in specific use cases. As a customer it's also very difficult to add the right type and amount of distortion by selecting different types of gear. But if it works for you, fine by me.


That's why in my argumentation I referred to 'well respected' engineers and studio's. Crap in is crap out.

Do you select which music you listen to based on whether it was produced by an "engineer that you respect?"

I don't. I listen to all types of music, mostly recordings from about 1960 onwards in my case, and I have no control whatsoever over the systems used to produce that music, or who even recorded it, or their competence. I can only control things on my end. And I just know what things I have done in my system to increase my enjoyment of the music on that system.

It's obvious that if we want to break the circle of confusion an effort is needed at both ends of the recording process. The process needs to be well executed. People making music in home studio's is a given, you can only hope they collaborate with a competent mastering engineer. He takes care of providing a consistent sound, and he typically doesn't use NS10's to do so. If that fails and sound character is all over the place, then I don't see how adding permanent distortion would solve this (unless it's meant to hide imperfections). It's even more reason for custom eq (and replay gain).

As I've said, the flavoring I perceive with my tube amps wasn't something I could directly duplicate with my EQ. Further, since I like it on everything it relieves me of even bothering with EQ at all. Works for me. I completely understand why it wouldn't work for you.

Again, to be clear: I'm not attacking anyone else's rational in how they approach their system. I think your approach and others is entirely reasonable too. Most people on this forum acknowledge anyone can have any preference they want in regards to their system. I'm just explaining my own (since the issue came up in the thread about why add a blanket distortion to a system?).

Cheers.

 

[Holmz]

… still, after that, it gets “locked” in this final form, and often even digitally signed to prevent modification.)
…

This is a digital expression similar to people saying, “trust me.”

The flat response does not exist. The day it happens, the speakers industry will be sick

Maybe the step function and impulse response can be tackled after that?

I have never found that adding distortion in any way improves sound quality.
Keith

If the dish is too sweet, then addiction of vinegar becomes a sweet-n-sour flavour.
That is often better than too sweet.

In many ways a tube amp does either improve the perceived quality of the sound, or masks other objectionable qualities.

But in general, I agree that one should have the output match the input to be considered to be faithful or HiFi.

 

[Geert]

That would be me

That's the answer I expected And you count me in.

Altering a previously accurate reproduction to taste via EQ is just another way of distorting the signal

I prefer to make a distinction between the terms eq and distortion, like almost everyone in the pro industry does and like how they relate to different kinds of measurements (freq. response versus IMD and TMD). EQ can be used to fix things, like in DRC or anachonic response correction. Distortion in practise always ... distorts, so better to handle with care.

Do you select which music you listen to based on whether it was produced by an "engineer that you respect?"

No, but that's not what I was referring to. I meant my arguments about the circle of confusion and the recording process presume a well executed process.

But you already acknowledge choosing a certain house curve EQ may not be objectively accurate

Yes, but not as a permit to apply al kinds of distortion (ref. THD). The Harmann curves describe different preferences for low and highs, and also describes how more experienced listeners tend to prefer a more neutral response. Nothing extraordinary. (EQ-ing ad random to personal taste in the range between high and lows, that's a different story).

As I've said, the flavoring I perceive with my tube amps wasn't something I could directly duplicate with my EQ. Further, since I like it on everything it relieves me of even bothering with EQ at all. Works for me.

Makes perfect sense. I'm familiar with tube distortion. I owned tube mic preamp and power amps.

Again, to be clear: I'm not attacking anyone else's rational in how they approach their system. I think your approach and others is entirely reasonable too.

No attack perceived. I'm also just sharing my perspective, with a foot in both camps.

 

[rdenney]

I enjoy pissing off my classical musician friends by referring to their orchestra as a cover band.

Then who is the original?

Rick “never heard ‘he played lead viola in the Ralph Vaughan Williams Band’” Denney

 

[SIY]

Then who is the original?

Rick “never heard ‘he played lead viola in the Ralph Vaughan Williams Band’” Denney

E.g., Stravinsky conducting Petrouchka.

 

[Kal Rubinson]

E.g., Stravinsky conducting Petrouchka.

Mebbe if you are thinking of his conception of the piece but the premier/original/first performances were in Paris at the Théâtre du Châtelet on June 13, 1911 and they were conducted by Pierre Monteux.

 

[SIY]

Mebbe if you are thinking of his conception of the piece but the premier/original/first performances were in Paris at the Théâtre du Châtelet on June 13, 1911 and they were conducted by Pierre Monteux.

I'm better at jazz historiography.

 

[rwortman]

Possibly/Probably not but that's not practical today. I just downloaded a recording of the 3 major Stravinsky ballet scores although I already have multiple recordings of them in my library with other conductors and orchestras. I am, as always, looking forward to hearing something new and interesting in the interpretation and performance.

There is no possibility that, in my lifetime, there will be a synthetic release of this music that will also incorporate the artistic direction of a particular conductor and/or a particular orchestra, regardless of how convincingly realistic it may seem.

Similarly, I can spot a programmed drum track in about 5 seconds and I just don’t like the sound. Real drummers don’t play like that.

 

[j_j]

Similarly, I can spot a programmed drum track in about 5 seconds and I just don’t like the sound. Real drummers don’t play like that.

Indeed, the near-precision as opposed to 'precision' and the different waveshape every hit is part of the "natural" sound. The universe is chaotic. A single set of sampled drum hits? Not so much.

 

[Emlin]

Indeed, the near-precision as opposed to 'precision' and the different waveshape every hit is part of the "natural" sound. The universe is chaotic. A single set of sampled drum hits? Not so much.

And they always have the bassist and drummer playing in synchrony. Something that's never happened in the real world.

 

[Leporello]

E.g., Stravinsky conducting Petrouchka.

As everyone should know, the originals are located in 'World 3'. See:

Popper's three worlds - Wikipedia

en.wikipedia.org

 

[Andysu]

things . these things can be measured with test gear even a simple bit of copper wire heated up .

 

[ahofer]

Similarly, I can spot a programmed drum track in about 5 seconds and I just don’t like the sound. Real drummers don’t play like that.

Drum machines cannot be "in the pocket".

 

[mhardy6647]

Drum machines cannot be "in the pocket".

1) I don't know what that means -- but I can make an informed guess.
2) NOW I suddenly "understand" (for lack of a better word) the title of an album by the late pianist/percussionist Victor Feldman! I guess...
He spent a fair amount of quality time playing sessions with (for is probably more accurate) Mssrs. Becker and Fagen (i.e., Steely Dan).

 

[ahofer]

I don't know what that means -- but I can make an informed guess.

I think if you ask many musicians you'd get different definitions. Mine (from a jazz background) re drums: Hitting a syncopated beat a tiny bit late (or early in some cases) while not slowing the tempo. For those who want an example go listen to some Bob Marley or Jimmy Cliff and focus on the fourth beat in the measure. It's a little like the temperance zone in a piano - the slight micro-imperfections create overall perfection.

In pop - Stewart Copeland is typically deep in the pocket. Also the famous "Purdie Shuffle".

 

[mhardy6647]

Bernard "Pretty" Purdie did time in the Steely Dan gulag, too.
(EDIT: derp. I just looked at your link, @ahofer. Let's call it synchronicity )

Coincidence?
I think not.