Your loudspeakers are too small!

[rdenney]

As a former tuba player who had to sit next to a lot of percussion, that poor, poor man.

Heh. If he begged and complained through the union, he might get a plexiglass shield behind his chair.

In the wind ensembles and orchestras of my experience, I can feel tympani strikes through the instrument, against my lips, interacting with the buzz. And if the tympanist has a tin ear (I play in amateur groups), poor tymp intonation really messes me up. I’m sure you know what I mean.

But I’ve also sat in front of premiere military band tympanists and they can play as loud as they want, as far as I’m concerned.

Rick “amateurs play too loud during the soft bits and sound less than stellar during the loud parts” Denney

 

[MattHooper]

Detailed?

I don't see how that makes the distinction.

Take a system that can adequately reproduce the playing of a guitar, but can not adequately produce the dynamic realism of an orchestra.

How does the term "detailed" distinguish this?

 

[Frgirard]

I don't see how that makes the distinction.

Take a system that can adequately reproduce the playing of a guitar, but can not adequately produce the dynamic realism of an orchestra.

How does the term "detailed" distinguish this?

No speakers reproduces a piano realistically.

 

[SIY]

Early Telarc recordings on the Soundstream machine? No digital compression then. I can't be 100% certain they didn't use other techniques, though.

Not sure what you mean by "digital compression," but the Telarc recordings had dynamic compression. Otherwise, they couldn't have been put on disk.

 

[puppet]

MattHooper ... A loudspeaker can be dynamic and also lack detail and vice versa. Your example loudspeaker that reproduces guitar accurately may loose it's composure when turned up to levels matching an orchestra, as you state. The sense of power/energy (dynamics) vs the ability to distinguish separate sounds (detail).

So, one could say "Loudspeaker X is dynamic but lacks detail." and vice versa. The use of the term "micro dynamics" should instead be "detail" and "macro dynamics" just "dynamics" to define a loudspeakers power/energy or lack thereof.

 

[Mart68]

So...out of curiosity: what terms would you use to describe the difference between the "dynamics that any system can produce" (e.g. acoustic guitar) and the "dynamics most systems would struggle with"?"

There is no specific term for those things, the inability of a system to reproduce the full dynamic range of a recording is a function of a variety of factors.

Subjective review terms like 'micro' and 'macro' dynamics have no correlation to anything in the real world. They are just terms that came into some writer's mind when he was penning his waffle and then passed into the lexicon.

You defined what those terms mean to you, fair enough, but I wonder if other people's definitions of them would be different? I suspect many of them would be.

 

[Bill Brown]

Not sure what you mean by "digital compression," but the Telarc recordings had dynamic compression. Otherwise, they couldn't have been put on disk.

Digital compression like currently implemented in a DAW, etc. Maybe they rode the gain? Transferred and edited in analog? That is why I initially hedged with the "?" as I don't know.

Bill

 

[Pdxwayne]

Based on my experience with my own speakers, in term of macro dynamics, where I want the ability to go loud without compression in a large room, definitely bigger woofer surface is better than smaller.

But, having larger speakers do not automatically provide better micro dynamics. I will take my 2 ways bookshelves with 7" woofer over my 3 ways with 7" mid and 10" woofer any time. Quality of speakers matter more to me in this case.

 

[Digby]

No speakers reproduces a piano realistically.

True, but there are degrees of realism (...anxiously wait for technically minded to scream at me for bad terminology.....is the coast clear guys?). Some speakers reproduce the piano better than others, why? Are the reasons for this related to SPL, compression and distortion. All things that larger speakers, on average, all being similar (to whatever extent that is possible), do/measure better than smaller ones.

Obviously the only place you have total realism is with a real piano.

 

[AdamG]

That’s Nils Lofgren “Keith don’t go” from his “Acoustic Live” album. That whole album is great.

Of course it is! The moment I read your reply I . Yes agreed the entire album is one of my favorites. Exactly why I. Thank you for the reply.

 

[SIY]

Digital compression like currently implemented in a DAW, etc. Maybe they rode the gain? Transferred and edited in analog? That is why I initially hedged with the "?" as I don't know.

Bill

I visited them a few times in their early days. Their editing system was absolutely digital, but they also had just about every (real, not virtual) plug-in that you could imagine.

 

[Bill Brown]

Interesting. I didn't realize that there were processors that could do compression in the digital domain in that very early era of the PCM1630 and Soundstream recorders. Learn something every day.

 

[mightycicadalord]

No speakers reproduces a piano realistically.

You get a bingo token!

 

[puppet]

No speakers reproduces a piano realistically.

I'm not sure I buy that. My loudspeaker pair is a homebrew 15" woofer with a Heil amt on top. If I play Jacques Loosier at realistic levels and am downstairs listening it does sound as if he's up there playing. May have to do with his recordings, they are well done, or just the size of the loudspeaker pair.

In fact, there are many other combinations of ensemble size, jazz trios ... groups in small clubs, etc. that can be very convincing on my system. I can see where an even larger array of drivers could expand that sense of realism even further to include medium sized orchestras. Energy defines realism.

 

[SIY]

Interesting. I didn't realize that there were processors that could do compression in the digital domain in that very early era of the PCM1630 and Soundstream recorders. Learn something every day.

The thing that got me was the editing capabilities. I was still running a 351 and using tape and a razor blade. They were doing it on-screen.

At the time, I was doing a lot of signal processing work for my main occupation- compression, crossfeed, fades, and EQ were very doable with 1976 technology, albeit large units at high cost.

 

[Andysu]

Loudspeakers like penis is how you use it?

Maybe OP needs to get some erection pills for his small speakers to make them large and throbbing.

 

[Robin L]

Can you give some examples of commercial uncompressed recordings? There's that one French company that's done a few (promoted here), and past that.... I can't think of any. I don't compress mine, but I haven't yet recorded anything symphonic, just soloists and small ensembles, and they are decidedly not commercial.

I've done recordings of all types of classical music without compression. Some were issued as CDs. Most were intended for broadcast. All those were compressed by the radio stations limiters before making their way to the transmitter. I know that some of my projects had compression in post-production, but the bulk of the recordings had no compression. I only started messing with compression when recording Rock bands, this to contain the drum sound within reasonable limits. Just about all forms of Pop music involve compression, but I'd bet the bulk of Classical music does not require compression. Orchestral recordings are more likely to use compression, but I own a number of classical recordings of orchestra that apparently have no compression. This is not really to their advantage; one needs to fiddle with the volume control to keep the sound at a rational level. But otherwise, for solo instruments and chamber music, compression is not necessary and as far as I can tell, is not used.

 

[Digby]

You get a bingo token!

Can we have a bingo "token" (spanning three vertical tokens) with text that starts large and gets smaller, something like:

What do you mean by x,
I've never heard of it,
That isn't a thing!,
That's not a technical term, that's a subjective description,
It doesn't matter if Amir uses it too,
Oh, the term you're looking for is x!

All in good fun guys, all in good fun

 

[Robin L]

Non-classical music I would not be surprised if it was all compressed to a degree, and more 'mainstream' classical releases from London (Decca) etc are probably compressed because mainstream releases are not meant to be 'purist'.

The Chailly/RCO Mahler recordings are not compressed [as far as I can tell], the Chailly/Leipzig Gewandhaus Orchestra Beethoven cycle is.

 

[Digby]

Orchestral recordings are more likely to use compression, but I own a number of classical recordings of orchestra that apparently have no compression. This is not really to their advantage; one needs to fiddle with the volume control to keep the sound at a rational level.

Why do you need to fiddle with the volume at home, but there is (presumably) no problem with uncompressed music played live in the concert hall. Something to do with mic placement?