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

Re: Stereo recordings playback and why it does not usually work right

Expand Messages
  • Robert
    The trouble with lots of sound bounced around your listening room is that it is wrong sound--not diffuse enough, not time delayed enough, balanced
    Message 1 of 7 , Apr 8, 2012
    • 0 Attachment
      The trouble with lots of sound bounced around your listening
      room is that it is wrong sound--not diffuse enough, not
      time delayed enough, balanced wrong(usually).
      The trouble with direct arrival stereo is that
      1 recordings are seldom made to sound right that way
      and
      2 even if they are, two channels do not generate a diffuse
      field--time-diffuse is not the same as spatially diffuse!

      This is why if you listen to recorded orchestral music
      in a quite large room , even over quite bad speakers, it
      sounds in some ways both more realistic (in terms of truth
      to concert experience) and more beautiful than stereo
      at home does. (I just returned from a play where
      the closing was the end of Tris. und Is. seguing into
      "You can't always get what you want--you had to be there
      to understand why anyone would want to do this--played on rather bad speakers. But the Wagner sounded ecstatically beautiful anyway.
      Of course it is one of the most beautiful pieces of music ever,
      but the point is that it SOUNDED beautiful, because it was
      diffuse field sound.

      You can do this at home. Deaden your room abd also make
      it highly diffusive(discrete reflections are always bad in
      a home listening room) and use some extra speakers
      with time delays to generate some diffuse field.
      Audiophiles will dislike it, but musicians will love it.
      And it will be what you hear in concert, or pretty close--
      direct arrival followed by a WHOLE LOT of delayed diffuse field.
      All explained on www.regonaudio.com.
      Nothing has changed.

      REG

      --- In regsaudioforum@yahoogroups.com, "Robert" <regtas43@...> wrote:
      >
      > This subject is one that I think most of us agree
      > on--that reduced reflection is better.
      > Most of us here, I mean.
      > The problem is that the audio world at large
      > does not agree on this at all.
      > People wnat to have wide radiation for multi listeners,
      > and they want to have "spaciousness" from sound
      > off the walls. Or so it seems.
      >
      > Fortunately, one can get what one wants.
      >
      > Unfortunately, one cannot control how people
      > make recordings and all too many are made
      > too dry with the expectation that the listening
      > room will "fill in" the sound.
      >
      > Even High End audiophile ones.
      >
      > Time for dogs and off to class, but more
      > on this later.
      >
      > REG
      >
      > --- In regsaudioforum@yahoogroups.com, Tom Mallin <tmallin4@> wrote:
      > >
      > > At least with speakers like the Harbeths, which are not extremely
      > > directional and in fact project a lot of presence range sound to the sides
      > > and up, I like listening in a well-damped room. I actually find the
      > > vertical height illusion with such speakers to be significantly enhanced by
      > > damping both the floor and ceiling reflections with thick acoustical foam.
      > > Only once did I ever listen to my own stereo playing outside and that was
      > > 40+ years ago, but I do not dislike the sound of PA speakers playing
      > > outdoors. One of my musically favorite pop recordings from the late 1970s
      > > (Kenny Loggins, "Outside From the
      > > Redwoods<http://www.amazon.com/Outside-From-Redwoods-Kenny-Loggins/dp/B0000029BV/ref=sr_1_6?ie=UTF8&qid=1333720472&sr=8-6>")
      > > was recorded live outdoors and sounds very fine indeed.
      > >
      > > I think we have to remember that concert hall reverberation often helps the
      > > listening experience since most of the reverb is later in time than the
      > > reverb in a small listening room, which often just sounds nasty and thus
      > > subtracts from listening pleasure, not to mention covering up any concert
      > > hall acoustics actually captured on the recording.
      > >
      > > On Fri, Apr 6, 2012 at 3:19 AM, ymm <yipmangmeng@> wrote:
      > >
      > > > **
      > > >
      > > >
      > > > Thanks for your reply. Now to wait for other members' input .
      > > >
      > > > ( Could it be the absence of height info? )
      > > >
      > > > Yip
      > > >
      > > > ------------------------------
      > > > *From:* russelldawkins <rdawkins@>
      > > > *To:* regsaudioforum@yahoogroups.com
      > > > *Sent:* Friday, 6 April 2012, 15:45
      > > > *Subject:* [regsaudioforum] Re: Stereo recordings evaluation.
      > > >
      > > >
      > > >
      > > >
      > > > --- In regsaudioforum@yahoogroups.com, ymm <yipmangmeng@> wrote:
      > > > >
      > > > >
      > > > http://sg.news.yahoo.com/blogs/unplugged/quietest-place-earth-mutes-sounds-messes-head-212556719.html
      > > > >
      > > > >
      > > > > Why isn't it correct to listen to stereo recordings outdoors or in an
      > > > anechoic chamber for evaluation of the recordings,
      > > > >
      > > > > when it is correct to measure speakers in those ways?
      > > > >
      > > > > Yip
      > > > >
      > > > I admit to preferring the sound of my speakers in a dry acoustic. I
      > > > actually enjoy outdoors most of all. I find I can really hear the hall or
      > > > ambiance on the recording when my room sound is not superimposed on it.
      > > >
      > > >
      > > >
      > > >
      > > >
      > >
      >
    Your message has been successfully submitted and would be delivered to recipients shortly.