Loading ...
Sorry, an error occurred while loading the content.

Re: [regsaudioforum] Re: The LA Walt Disney Hall

Expand Messages
  • Rob Gold
    The LA Walt Disney Concert Hall s acoustics were done by Nagata Acoustics of Japan, a followup to their stunning success at Tokyo s 2006-seat Suntory Hall,
    Message 1 of 16 , Mar 1, 2009
    • 0 Attachment
      The LA Walt Disney Concert Hall's acoustics were done by Nagata Acoustics of Japan, a followup to their stunning success at Tokyo's 2006-seat Suntory Hall, opened in 1986.  It's basic design was not the traditional "shoebox" shape of Amsterdam's Concertgebouw or Vienna's Musikvereinsaal, but the "vineyeard" shape pioneered by Berlin's Philharmonie.
       
      Here is Nagata's website, which includes photos, a frequency response curve and decay times:
       
       
      Rob Gold
       
       


      --- On Sun, 3/1/09, Robert Greene <regonaudio@...> wrote:
      From: Robert Greene <regonaudio@...>
      Subject: [regsaudioforum] Re: The LA Walt Disney Hall
      To: regsaudioforum@yahoogroups.com
      Date: Sunday, March 1, 2009, 8:37 PM

      The thing here is that I KNOW that people inside the organization
      are worried about the bass. And I have sat all over the hall. The
      bass is not really satisfactory anywhere much. Things got messed up.
      And the people in charge know--they just do not want to say in public.

      This is not a question of my personal taste--it is the consensus
      view of people who know the great concert halls and know what
      concert halls for orchestral music should sound like.

      The technical reason for this is simple:
      The hall was designed inspired by the Concertgebouw in Amsterdam--as
      far as having some seats behind the orchestra and for general shape.
      Now the Concertgebouw has satisfactory bass--because it has a really
      long bass reverb time.
      (2.6 seconds at 125 Hz, from Beranek). This brings up the bass to a
      satisfactory level in spite of the attenuation of back wall
      reinforcement.

      But Disney does not have the rising reverb time in the bottom end--
      its reverb time is long enough overall (it is quite "live") but it
      does not rise in the bass enough --it is too high in the mids and
      lower treble for what it is in the bass. This makes it sound like a
      minimonitor.

      Everyone knows this. They just do not want to talk about it, because
      it is embarrassing and troublesome to the whole community of
      orchestral people. If an expensive and much ballyhooed concert hall
      that was dedicated to a single purpose did not work out well...
      you can see it undermines the whole picture. Who would want to donate
      to a concert hall for their city after that?

      Whatever one thinks of the looks(I think the ceiling looks like the
      bottom of a caterpillar- -really ugly), it was a SERIOUS ERROR to open
      the upper corners for visual reasons. Frank Gehry(the architect) no
      doubt liked that look(he knew nothing about acoustics when he started
      I think), but it sounds BAD. The hall is like a speaker that is
      almost all midrange and top--it has no natural weight at all. People
      (who know I am interested in concert halls) constantly say to me
      "How come Disney sounds so weird?" or things like that--and these
      are not self styled connoisseurs or critics, just ordinary people.

      But Keith Jarrett perhaps said it best(after his trio played there)
      "We will play anywhere--once. "

      I know the whole thing is embarrassing and it is surely mortifying to
      me personally since I am stuck with this as my primary orchestral
      listening venue at least until Paige and I retire to a farm in
      Maryland. But that is going to be a long time from now!

      Truth is truth. One may think it looks cool(it surely looks unsual
      unless you are familiar with Gehry's other buildings in which case it
      is just Gehry being Gehry). But it does not sound really good, and
      everybody knows this. Someone put my letter to the LA Times
      (published) about this and put it on the orchestra's bulletin board.
      But the management took it down soon after--truth hurts sometimes.
      Better to pretend.

      Even Mark Swed, the cheerleader, has written a lot about how visiting
      orchestras have to do a lot of adjusting for Disney's
      "superior" acoustics. But one has to read "superior" to mean just
      weird and peculiar. Concert halls are not supposed to sound peculiar -
      -they are supposed to sound like the other great halls. As Menuhin
      said
      "Concert halls are a solved problem. You find one you like and vopy
      it"

      Unfortunately, the people who built Disney only copied partly--and
      lost one of the essentials in the process of their only partial copy.

      REG

      PS What is wrong with it cannot be adjusted away.
      It is not a speaker system that can be DSPed! (at least in the bottom
      end).

      --- In regsaudioforum@ yahoogroups. com, Rob Gold <rgvivace@.. .> wrote:
      >
      > LA's Disney Hall was designed as a "pure" concert hall.  It
      replaces the Dorothy Chandler Pavilion, which WAS designed as a multi-
      purpose venue (and continues to serve as the home of the LA Opera
      and dance productions) .  Disney Hall, without an orchestra pit or the
      staging and wing areas, is not at all usable for either theatrical or
      dance productions.
      >  
      > Disney Hall, with the adjustable stage ceiling and wall treatments
      now common in modern acoustical design, is adaptable to ensembles of
      various size, from chamber emsembles to huge orchestras with
      choruses.  This adjustability, along with a large enough stage to
      change placement of bass instruments (contrabass, percussion, etc.)
      and solid reflective walls, are sufficient to provide deep bass. 
      That it has not produced bass results that REG prefers could be a
      matter of either his seating position or the stage placement of
      instruments, or both.  This is, unfortunately, too controlled by the
      conducting staff of the resident orchestra, who spend their time on
      the podium, and not in the seats.
      >  
      > Rob Gold
      >  
      > ~~~~~~~~~~~~ ~~~~~~~~~ ~~~~~~~~~ ~~~~~~~~~ ~~~~~~~~~ ~~~~~~~~~ ~~
      >
      > --- On Sun, 3/1/09, Robert Greene <regonaudio@ ...> wrote:
      >
      > From: Robert Greene <regonaudio@ ...>
      > Subject: [regsaudioforum] Re: The LA Walt Disney Hall
      > To: regsaudioforum@ yahoogroups. com
      > Date: Sunday, March 1, 2009, 6:27 PM
      >
      >
      >
      >
      >
      >
      > The design of an auitorium is partly a matter of technical expertise
      > (how can we get what we want?), and partly a matter of artistic
      > judgment(what do we want?).
      > About the former one can use the phrase "state of the art", and one
      > could argue that Disney got close in that regard.
      > About the latter, one can not use that phrase. That part is art,
      not
      > science or engineering.
      >
      > Of course Disney is better than the average civic auditorium in
      many
      > regards. Good grief! It had better be. It cost $275 million!
      >
      > But it is not really a mulitpurpose hall. It is the concert home of
      > the Los Angeles Philharmonic and that is its dominant, albeit not
      > exclusive use. It should sound good on orchestral music. Indeed, it
      > ought to sound as nearly ideal on orchestral music as a hall can
      > sound by systematic design.
      >
      > The problem is, it does not. Not, at least, unless you reformulate
      > what is regarded as ideal.
      >
      > Part of this was deliberate decision. I think Salonen wanted a
      > somewhat "hi fi" hall because he wanted the sound to be
      > very "transparent" on things like "The Rite of Spring".
      > But part of it is screw-up. I think that no one,not even EPS,
      wanted
      > a hall that was that bass shy. I actually know for a fact(I live
      here
      > and am close to the musical community) that even before the hall
      > opened--and since of course--people on the inside were worried
      about
      > the lack of bass.
      >
      > Of course you can read the newspapers and never find out because
      > Swed et. al. either do not know anything about concert hall sound
      > and/or wanted to paper over the problems about the bass.
      >
      > But problems there are.
      >
      > REG
      >
      > PS I have a lot of technical information in my hands about the hall.
      > Believe me, these problems are really there. But I have some of
      this
      > in confidence in some cases and also I want to eat breakfast and
      read
      > the Sunday paper. But more on this later if people are interested
      to
      > the extent that I can without violating confidentiality.
      > --- In regsaudioforum@ yahoogroups. com, Rob Gold <rgvivace@ .>
      wrote:
      > >
      > > The Walt Disney Hall represents to current state-of-the- art for
      > acoustical design.  This guarantees good sound, but not ideal sound
      > for every size ensemble.  Believe me, compared to the majority of
      > America's multi-purpose civic auditoriums, it is a VAST
      improvement! 
      > Remember, the architecture and acoustical design are really
      separate
      > issues.  I will say, however, that Gehry's design in LA is gorgeous
      > (and functional).
      > >  
      > > Rob Gold
      > >  
      > > ~~~~~~~~~~~~ ~~~~~~~~~ ~~~~~~~~~ ~~~~~~~~~ ~~~~~~~~~ ~~~~~~~~~ ~~
      > >
      > > --- On Sun, 3/1/09, ymm <yipmangmeng@ ...> wrote:
      > >
      > > From: ymm <yipmangmeng@ ...>
      > > Subject: [regsaudioforum] The LA Walt Disney Hall
      > > To: regsaudioforum@ yahoogroups. com
      > > Date: Sunday, March 1, 2009, 4:16 PM
      > >
      > >
      > >
      > >
      > >
      > >
      > >
      > >
      > >
      > >
      > >
      > > http://en.wikipedia .org/wiki/ File:WaltDisneyC oncertHall. jpeg
      > >  
      > > Anyone likes the design?
      > >  
      > > best,
      > > Yip
      > >
      > >
      > > New Email names for you!
      > > Get the Email name you've always wanted on the new @ymail and
      > @rocketmail.
      > > Hurry before someone else does!
      > >
      >

    • Robert Greene
      Have you actually heard an orchestra concert in Disney? or is this just carrying on via reputation of the firm and so on? As to tech specs, have a look at this
      Message 2 of 16 , Mar 1, 2009
      • 0 Attachment
        Have you actually heard an orchestra concert in Disney?
        or is this just carrying on via reputation of the firm and so on?


        As to tech specs, have a look at this carefully

        http://www.nagata.co.jp/sakuhin/factsheets/wdch.pdf

        This is just WRONG. The reverb time occupied is flat into the bass.
        But a hall needs a rise in reverb in the bass
        when the orchestra is out into the room some and thus is not being
        supported in the bass by the back wall.(Such a rise is a good idea
        wherever the orchestra is, but it is absolutely deeply needed when
        the orchestra is out in the hall).

        Of course it is nice that the orchestra members can hear each other,
        but what counts too is what the audience hears! And what they hear
        sounds definitely midrange-y.

        I have been in this hall often, starting before it opened(an
        invitation only audience for a rehearsal) and many times sense. It
        really sounds bass shy.

        I was SHOCKED by the opening of the Mahler 2nd at that rehearsal
        (first thing I heard). The celli were playing their hearts out but
        they were almost inaudible. No heft at all.


        There are spots(the balcony up against the back wall, the behind the
        orchestra seats that are close to the back wall) where the balance is
        plausible. But mostly it is really not very good.

        If you look at the reverb times of halls shown in
        http://www.regonaudio.com/Records%20and%20Reality.html
        (which are not chosen for being particularly warm and nice, just as
        fairly typical), they rise a lot in the bottom end relative to
        midrange levels.

        I am not trying to suggest that reverb time as a function of
        frequency tells the whole story. In particular, where the orchestra
        IS in the hall counts a lot, just as it does for speakers in a room.

        But the proof of the pudding is in the sound. Everyone knows that
        Disney lacks bass.

        Again, have you heard it? Did it not sound bass shy and midrange-y to
        you in most locations?

        There is no point in using buzz words like "vineyard" or whatever.
        Sound is sound, lack of bass is lack of bass.

        It is just a bummer.

        REG




        --- In regsaudioforum@yahoogroups.com, Rob Gold <rgvivace@...> wrote:
        >
        > The LA Walt Disney Concert Hall's acoustics were done by Nagata
        Acoustics of Japan, a followup to their stunning success at Tokyo's
        2006-seat Suntory Hall, opened in 1986.  It's basic design was not
        the traditional "shoebox" shape of Amsterdam's Concertgebouw or
        Vienna's Musikvereinsaal, but the "vineyeard" shape pioneered by
        Berlin's Philharmonie.
        >  
        > Here is Nagata's website, which includes photos, a frequency
        response curve and decay times:
        >  
        >      http://www.nagata.co.jp/e_sakuhin/factsheets/suntory.pdf
        >  
        > Rob Gold
        >  
        >  
        >
        >
        > --- On Sun, 3/1/09, Robert Greene <regonaudio@...> wrote:
        >
        > From: Robert Greene <regonaudio@...>
        > Subject: [regsaudioforum] Re: The LA Walt Disney Hall
        > To: regsaudioforum@yahoogroups.com
        > Date: Sunday, March 1, 2009, 8:37 PM
        >
        >
        >
        >
        >
        >
        > The thing here is that I KNOW that people inside the organization
        > are worried about the bass. And I have sat all over the hall. The
        > bass is not really satisfactory anywhere much. Things got messed
        up.
        > And the people in charge know--they just do not want to say in
        public.
        >
        > This is not a question of my personal taste--it is the consensus
        > view of people who know the great concert halls and know what
        > concert halls for orchestral music should sound like.
        >
        > The technical reason for this is simple:
        > The hall was designed inspired by the Concertgebouw in Amsterdam--
        as
        > far as having some seats behind the orchestra and for general
        shape.
        > Now the Concertgebouw has satisfactory bass--because it has a
        really
        > long bass reverb time.
        > (2.6 seconds at 125 Hz, from Beranek). This brings up the bass to a
        > satisfactory level in spite of the attenuation of back wall
        > reinforcement.
        >
        > But Disney does not have the rising reverb time in the bottom end--
        > its reverb time is long enough overall (it is quite "live") but it
        > does not rise in the bass enough --it is too high in the mids and
        > lower treble for what it is in the bass. This makes it sound like a
        > minimonitor.
        >
        > Everyone knows this. They just do not want to talk about it,
        because
        > it is embarrassing and troublesome to the whole community of
        > orchestral people. If an expensive and much ballyhooed concert hall
        > that was dedicated to a single purpose did not work out well...
        > you can see it undermines the whole picture. Who would want to
        donate
        > to a concert hall for their city after that?
        >
        > Whatever one thinks of the looks(I think the ceiling looks like the
        > bottom of a caterpillar- -really ugly), it was a SERIOUS ERROR to
        open
        > the upper corners for visual reasons. Frank Gehry(the architect) no
        > doubt liked that look(he knew nothing about acoustics when he
        started
        > I think), but it sounds BAD. The hall is like a speaker that is
        > almost all midrange and top--it has no natural weight at all.
        People
        > (who know I am interested in concert halls) constantly say to me
        > "How come Disney sounds so weird?" or things like that--and these
        > are not self styled connoisseurs or critics, just ordinary people.
        >
        > But Keith Jarrett perhaps said it best(after his trio played there)
        > "We will play anywhere--once. "
        >
        > I know the whole thing is embarrassing and it is surely mortifying
        to
        > me personally since I am stuck with this as my primary orchestral
        > listening venue at least until Paige and I retire to a farm in
        > Maryland. But that is going to be a long time from now!
        >
        > Truth is truth. One may think it looks cool(it surely looks unsual
        > unless you are familiar with Gehry's other buildings in which case
        it
        > is just Gehry being Gehry). But it does not sound really good, and
        > everybody knows this. Someone put my letter to the LA Times
        > (published) about this and put it on the orchestra's bulletin
        board.
        > But the management took it down soon after--truth hurts sometimes.
        > Better to pretend.
        >
        > Even Mark Swed, the cheerleader, has written a lot about how
        visiting
        > orchestras have to do a lot of adjusting for Disney's
        > "superior" acoustics. But one has to read "superior" to mean just
        > weird and peculiar. Concert halls are not supposed to sound
        peculiar -
        > -they are supposed to sound like the other great halls. As Menuhin
        > said
        > "Concert halls are a solved problem. You find one you like and vopy
        > it"
        >
        > Unfortunately, the people who built Disney only copied partly--and
        > lost one of the essentials in the process of their only partial
        copy.
        >
        > REG
        >
        > PS What is wrong with it cannot be adjusted away.
        > It is not a speaker system that can be DSPed! (at least in the
        bottom
        > end).
        >
        > --- In regsaudioforum@ yahoogroups. com, Rob Gold <rgvivace@ .>
        wrote:
        > >
        > > LA's Disney Hall was designed as a "pure" concert hall.  It
        > replaces the Dorothy Chandler Pavilion, which WAS designed as a
        multi-
        > purpose venue (and continues to serve as the home of the LA Opera
        > and dance productions) .  Disney Hall, without an orchestra pit or
        the
        > staging and wing areas, is not at all usable for either theatrical
        or
        > dance productions.
        > >  
        > > Disney Hall, with the adjustable stage ceiling and wall
        treatments
        > now common in modern acoustical design, is adaptable to ensembles
        of
        > various size, from chamber emsembles to huge orchestras with
        > choruses.  This adjustability, along with a large enough stage to
        > change placement of bass instruments (contrabass, percussion, etc.)
        > and solid reflective walls, are sufficient to provide deep bass. 
        > That it has not produced bass results that REG prefers could be a
        > matter of either his seating position or the stage placement of
        > instruments, or both.  This is, unfortunately, too controlled by
        the
        > conducting staff of the resident orchestra, who spend their time on
        > the podium, and not in the seats.
        > >  
        > > Rob Gold
        > >  
        > > ~~~~~~~~~~~~ ~~~~~~~~~ ~~~~~~~~~ ~~~~~~~~~ ~~~~~~~~~ ~~~~~~~~~ ~~
        > >
        > > --- On Sun, 3/1/09, Robert Greene <regonaudio@ ...> wrote:
        > >
        > > From: Robert Greene <regonaudio@ ...>
        > > Subject: [regsaudioforum] Re: The LA Walt Disney Hall
        > > To: regsaudioforum@ yahoogroups. com
        > > Date: Sunday, March 1, 2009, 6:27 PM
        > >
        > >
        > >
        > >
        > >
        > >
        > > The design of an auitorium is partly a matter of technical
        expertise
        > > (how can we get what we want?), and partly a matter of artistic
        > > judgment(what do we want?).
        > > About the former one can use the phrase "state of the art", and
        one
        > > could argue that Disney got close in that regard.
        > > About the latter, one can not use that phrase. That part is art,
        > not
        > > science or engineering.
        > >
        > > Of course Disney is better than the average civic auditorium in
        > many
        > > regards. Good grief! It had better be. It cost $275 million!
        > >
        > > But it is not really a mulitpurpose hall. It is the concert home
        of
        > > the Los Angeles Philharmonic and that is its dominant, albeit not
        > > exclusive use. It should sound good on orchestral music. Indeed,
        it
        > > ought to sound as nearly ideal on orchestral music as a hall can
        > > sound by systematic design.
        > >
        > > The problem is, it does not. Not, at least, unless you
        reformulate
        > > what is regarded as ideal.
        > >
        > > Part of this was deliberate decision. I think Salonen wanted a
        > > somewhat "hi fi" hall because he wanted the sound to be
        > > very "transparent" on things like "The Rite of Spring".
        > > But part of it is screw-up. I think that no one,not even EPS,
        > wanted
        > > a hall that was that bass shy. I actually know for a fact(I live
        > here
        > > and am close to the musical community) that even before the hall
        > > opened--and since of course--people on the inside were worried
        > about
        > > the lack of bass.
        > >
        > > Of course you can read the newspapers and never find out because
        > > Swed et. al. either do not know anything about concert hall sound
        > > and/or wanted to paper over the problems about the bass.
        > >
        > > But problems there are.
        > >
        > > REG
        > >
        > > PS I have a lot of technical information in my hands about the
        hall.
        > > Believe me, these problems are really there. But I have some of
        > this
        > > in confidence in some cases and also I want to eat breakfast and
        > read
        > > the Sunday paper. But more on this later if people are interested
        > to
        > > the extent that I can without violating confidentiality.
        > > --- In regsaudioforum@ yahoogroups. com, Rob Gold <rgvivace@ .>
        > wrote:
        > > >
        > > > The Walt Disney Hall represents to current state-of-the- art
        for
        > > acoustical design.  This guarantees good sound, but not ideal
        sound
        > > for every size ensemble.  Believe me, compared to the majority of
        > > America's multi-purpose civic auditoriums, it is a VAST
        > improvement! 
        > > Remember, the architecture and acoustical design are really
        > separate
        > > issues.  I will say, however, that Gehry's design in LA is
        gorgeous
        > > (and functional).
        > > >  
        > > > Rob Gold
        > > >  
        > > > ~~~~~~~~~~~~ ~~~~~~~~~ ~~~~~~~~~ ~~~~~~~~~ ~~~~~~~~~ ~~~~~~~~~
        ~~
        > > >
        > > > --- On Sun, 3/1/09, ymm <yipmangmeng@ ...> wrote:
        > > >
        > > > From: ymm <yipmangmeng@ ...>
        > > > Subject: [regsaudioforum] The LA Walt Disney Hall
        > > > To: regsaudioforum@ yahoogroups. com
        > > > Date: Sunday, March 1, 2009, 4:16 PM
        > > >
        > > >
        > > >
        > > >
        > > >
        > > >
        > > >
        > > >
        > > >
        > > >
        > > >
        > > > http://en.wikipedia .org/wiki/ File:WaltDisneyC oncertHall. jpeg
        > > >  
        > > > Anyone likes the design?
        > > >  
        > > > best,
        > > > Yip
        > > >
        > > >
        > > > New Email names for you!
        > > > Get the Email name you've always wanted on the new @ymail and
        > > @rocketmail.
        > > > Hurry before someone else does!
        > > >
        > >
        >
      • Ken Holder
        ... I thought it was designed to be adjustable? Ken Holder Just a Poor, Old, Simple, Country, Music-Lover
        Message 3 of 16 , Mar 1, 2009
        • 0 Attachment
          At 11:27 AM 3/1/2009, Robert Greene wrote:

          The problem is, it does not. Not, at least, unless you reformulate
          what is regarded as ideal.


          I thought it was designed to be adjustable?

          Ken Holder
          Just a Poor, Old, Simple, Country, Music-Lover



        • Fred
          Ugh - not really - but there are worse building designs, I suppose. http://www.scottish.parliament.uk/vli/holyrood/index.htm Fred.
          Message 4 of 16 , Mar 1, 2009
          • 0 Attachment
            Ugh - not really - but there are worse building designs, I suppose.

            http://www.scottish.parliament.uk/vli/holyrood/index.htm


            Fred.



            ________________________________
            From: ymm <yipmangmeng@...>
            To: regsaudioforum@yahoogroups.com
            Sent: Sunday, 1 March, 2009 16:16:46
            Subject: [regsaudioforum] The LA Walt Disney Hall


            http://en.wikipedia .org/wiki/ File:WaltDisneyC oncertHall. jpeg

            Anyone likes the design?

            best,
            Yip

            ________________________________
            New Email names for you!
            Get the Email name you've always wanted on the new @ymail and @rocketmail.
            Hurry before someone else does!
          • Robert Greene
            Good grief! This is really and truly awful. Somewhere in here architecture went nuts... REG ... @rocketmail.
            Message 5 of 16 , Mar 1, 2009
            • 0 Attachment
              Good grief! This is really and truly awful.
              Somewhere in here architecture went nuts...

              REG



              -- In regsaudioforum@yahoogroups.com, Fred <glenndriech@...> wrote:
              >
              > Ugh - not really - but there are worse building designs, I suppose.
              >
              > http://www.scottish.parliament.uk/vli/holyrood/index.htm
              >
              >
              > Fred.
              >
              >
              >
              > ________________________________
              > From: ymm <yipmangmeng@...>
              > To: regsaudioforum@yahoogroups.com
              > Sent: Sunday, 1 March, 2009 16:16:46
              > Subject: [regsaudioforum] The LA Walt Disney Hall
              >
              >
              > http://en.wikipedia .org/wiki/ File:WaltDisneyC oncertHall. jpeg
              >
              > Anyone likes the design?
              >
              > best,
              > Yip
              >
              > ________________________________
              > New Email names for you!
              > Get the Email name you've always wanted on the new @ymail and
              @rocketmail.
              > Hurry before someone else does!
              >
            • Fred
              It gets worse...and see the $800,000,000+ cost we poor Scottish taxpayers have had to bear? http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Scottish_Parliament_Building And the
              Message 6 of 16 , Mar 1, 2009
              • 0 Attachment
                It gets worse...and see the $800,000,000+ cost we poor Scottish taxpayers have had to bear?

                http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Scottish_Parliament_Building

                And the performers (primadonnas) don't even sing in tune!

                G'nite :-)

                Fred.


                ________________________________
                From: Robert Greene <regonaudio@...>
                To: regsaudioforum@yahoogroups.com
                Sent: Monday, 2 March, 2009 4:48:31
                Subject: [regsaudioforum] Re: The LA Walt Disney Hall


                Good grief! This is really and truly awful.
                Somewhere in here architecture went nuts...

                REG

                -- In regsaudioforum@ yahoogroups. com, Fred <glenndriech@ ...> wrote:
                >
                > Ugh - not really - but there are worse building designs, I suppose.
                >
                > http://www.scottish .parliament. uk/vli/holyrood/ index.htm
                >
                >
                > Fred.
                >
                >
                >
                > ____________ _________ _________ __
                > From: ymm <yipmangmeng@ ...>
                > To: regsaudioforum@ yahoogroups. com
                > Sent: Sunday, 1 March, 2009 16:16:46
                > Subject: [regsaudioforum] The LA Walt Disney Hall
                >
                >
                > http://en.wikipedia .org/wiki/ File:WaltDisneyC oncertHall. jpeg
                >
                > Anyone likes the design?
                >
                > best,
                > Yip
                >
                > ____________ _________ _________ __
                > New Email names for you!
                > Get the Email name you've always wanted on the new @ymail and
                @rocketmail.
                > Hurry before someone else does!
                >
              • Robert Greene
                There is no way to adjust the bass to a satisfactory level. This adjustment stuff is largely a scam for a hall with only one purpose(like Disney which is a
                Message 7 of 16 , Mar 1, 2009
                • 0 Attachment
                  There is no way to adjust the bass to a satisfactory level.
                  This adjustment stuff is largely a scam for a hall with only one
                  purpose(like Disney which is a concert venue period--and mostly for
                  the LA Phil, although smaller scaled concerts are given there).
                  Some of the adjustable halls have worked out well , it seems(people
                  tell me that Dallas is good, though I have not been there).
                  But mostly it seems to be a way for people to avoid facing
                  up to the fact that they messed up.
                  No one seems to want to adjust Vienna or Boston!

                  I am afraid that the real truth is that people are not willing to go
                  on with what works, as Menuhin suggested. Architects are restless and
                  keep wanting to change things around. They had something that worked,
                  but their egos got in the way.

                  REG


                  --- In regsaudioforum@yahoogroups.com, Ken Holder <ken_holder@...>
                  wrote:
                  >
                  > At 11:27 AM 3/1/2009, Robert Greene wrote:
                  >
                  > >The problem is, it does not. Not, at least, unless you reformulate
                  > >what is regarded as ideal.
                  >
                  >
                  > I thought it was designed to be adjustable?
                  >
                  > Ken Holder
                  > Just a Poor, Old, Simple, Country, Music-Lover
                  >
                • Richard Tuck
                  Hi Yip Looks like the art gallery in Bilbao. Richard _____ From: regsaudioforum@yahoogroups.com [mailto:regsaudioforum@yahoogroups.com] On Behalf Of ymm Sent:
                  Message 8 of 16 , Mar 1, 2009
                  • 0 Attachment
                    Hi Yip
                     
                    Looks like the art gallery in Bilbao.
                     
                    Richard


                    From: regsaudioforum@yahoogroups.com [mailto:regsaudioforum@yahoogroups.com] On Behalf Of ymm
                    Sent: 01 March 2009 16:17
                    To: regsaudioforum@yahoogroups.com
                    Subject: [regsaudioforum] The LA Walt Disney Hall

                     
                    Anyone likes the design?
                     
                    best,
                    Yip


                    New Email names for you!
                    Get the Email name you've always wanted on the new @ymail and @rocketmail.
                    Hurry before someone else does!
                  • Richard Tuck
                    What they ended up doing in the royal festival hall was adding mass behind the wood panels in the hall and making the ceiling of much heavier material than was
                    Message 9 of 16 , Mar 2, 2009
                    • 0 Attachment
                      What they ended up doing in the royal festival hall was adding mass behind
                      the wood panels in the hall and making the ceiling of much heavier material
                      than was used in those cash strapped post war times. As it was a "Listed
                      Building" the end result had to look like exactly like it was before. Thank
                      goodness there is no rule about sounding the same.

                      Richard

                      http://tinyurl.com/bcjzlh



                      -----Original Message-----
                      From: regsaudioforum@yahoogroups.com [mailto:regsaudioforum@yahoogroups.com]
                      On Behalf Of Robert Greene
                      Sent: 02 March 2009 05:12
                      To: regsaudioforum@yahoogroups.com
                      Subject: [regsaudioforum] Re: The LA Walt Disney Hall

                      There is no way to adjust the bass to a satisfactory level.
                      This adjustment stuff is largely a scam for a hall with only one
                      purpose(like Disney which is a concert venue period--and mostly for
                      the LA Phil, although smaller scaled concerts are given there).
                      Some of the adjustable halls have worked out well , it seems(people
                      tell me that Dallas is good, though I have not been there).
                      But mostly it seems to be a way for people to avoid facing
                      up to the fact that they messed up.
                      No one seems to want to adjust Vienna or Boston!

                      I am afraid that the real truth is that people are not willing to go
                      on with what works, as Menuhin suggested. Architects are restless and
                      keep wanting to change things around. They had something that worked,
                      but their egos got in the way.

                      REG


                      --- In regsaudioforum@yahoogroups.com, Ken Holder <ken_holder@...>
                      wrote:
                      >
                      > At 11:27 AM 3/1/2009, Robert Greene wrote:
                      >
                      > >The problem is, it does not. Not, at least, unless you reformulate
                      > >what is regarded as ideal.
                      >
                      >
                      > I thought it was designed to be adjustable?
                      >
                      > Ken Holder
                      > Just a Poor, Old, Simple, Country, Music-Lover
                      >




                      ------------------------------------

                      Yahoo! Groups Links
                    Your message has been successfully submitted and would be delivered to recipients shortly.