Do You Prefer 2-Channel or Multichannel Music Recordings? - Page 10 - AVS Forum
View Poll Results: Do You Prefer 2-Channel or Multichannel Music Recordings?
2-channel 180 35.86%
Multichannel, audience perspective 184 36.65%
Multichannel, stage perspective 96 19.12%
I've never heard a multichannel music recording 42 8.37%
Voters: 502. You may not vote on this poll

Forum Jump: 
 125Likes
Reply
 
Thread Tools
post #271 of 363 Old 07-21-2014, 02:18 PM
AVS Special Member
 
Ovation's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2004
Location: St. Hubert, Quebec, Canada
Posts: 3,270
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 35 Post(s)
Liked: 28
Quote:
Originally Posted by eljr View Post
This is so ridiculous.

What room ambiance are you trying to capture in a typical recording studio?

Tracks can be fused from days or even years apart. What is it you capture in this kind of "performance?"

How about when the sound hits your room? LOL

This is so so ridiculous.

I have hundreds of MCH recordings of classical music and jazz performances that were recorded in concert halls, churches or other performance spaces (some live in concert, others in those venues without an audience). Those are the room ambience recordings MCH reproduces far better than any 2 channel mix could ever hope to do.
Ovation is offline  
Sponsored Links
Advertisement
 
post #272 of 363 Old 07-21-2014, 04:28 PM
AVS Special Member
 
lovinthehd's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2007
Location: OROR
Posts: 7,296
Mentioned: 1 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 496 Post(s)
Liked: 1003
eljr - What happened to Harvey? Why back to Alex? I think you should go for Donnie Darko now as a more logical progression?

"I realize that somebody playing free music isn't as commercial as a hamburger stand. But is it because you can eat a hamburger and hold it in your hand and you can't do that with music? Is it too free to control?" - Don Van Vliet (aka Captain Beefheart) discussing commercial success in the music biz


lovinthehd is offline  
post #273 of 363 Old 07-21-2014, 04:36 PM
Senior Member
 
Dude111's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2010
Posts: 344
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 42 Post(s)
Liked: 42
Quote:
Originally Posted by eljr
I don't think that is allowed.
Ah man!!
Dude111 is offline  
post #274 of 363 Old 07-21-2014, 05:06 PM
AVS Special Member
 
8mile13's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2009
Posts: 4,150
Mentioned: 2 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 406 Post(s)
Liked: 269
Quote:
Originally Posted by Ovation
I have hundreds of MCH recordings of classical music and jazz performances that were recorded in concert halls, churches or other performance spaces (some live in concert, others in those venues without an audience). Those are the room ambience recordings MCH reproduces far better than any 2 channel mix could ever hope to do.
What you are saying is that with MCH you can create a room within your audio listening room, a hologram-ish audio experience so to speek. You must admit that sounds a bit weird.

eljr has a point. What percentage of MCH recordings are fit to create a room in room experience?

I do not like live recordings. There are a few, just a few, live performance DVDs that i like. Live CDs i do not like at all. I simply do not buy them. Does that mean that i would have very little benefit from MCH?
8mile13 is offline  
post #275 of 363 Old 07-21-2014, 05:35 PM
AVS Special Member
 
Gecko85's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2005
Location: California
Posts: 2,230
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 155 Post(s)
Liked: 95
Quote:
Originally Posted by 8mile13 View Post

I do not like live recordings. There are a few, just a few, live performance DVDs that i like. Live CDs i do not like at all. I simply do not buy them. Does that mean that i would have very little benefit from MCH?
Not all MCH is live. Find someone to let you borrow the new Who Quadraphenia release, or something like Beck's Sea Change - both are excellent multichannel examples. You may find that you just don't like it (both releases have 2 ch on the disc as well), and that's fine. But it's anything but a "novelty" as some have surmised.

Panasonic TC-P60ST60, Pioneer SC-1523-K, Oppo BDP-103D, Pioneer PL-550 + Cambridge Audio Azur 640P, B&W CM1 (fronts), B&W CM Centre, Athena Point 5 Mk II (rears), Hsu VTF-2
----------------------------------------
Sony 34XBR960, Onkyo TX-NR414, Sony PS3, Athena Point 5 Mk II (center and fronts), Wharfedale WH-2 (rears), Polk PSW10
Gecko85 is offline  
post #276 of 363 Old 07-21-2014, 05:51 PM
AVS Special Member
 
8mile13's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2009
Posts: 4,150
Mentioned: 2 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 406 Post(s)
Liked: 269
Quote:
Originally Posted by Gecko85 View Post
Not all MCH is live. Find someone to let you borrow the new Who Quadraphenia release, or something like Beck's Sea Change - both are excellent multichannel examples. You may find that you just don't like it (both releases have 2 ch on the disc as well), and that's fine. But it's anything but a "novelty" as some have surmised.
The only live album that i ever loved was Live at Leeds
8mile13 is offline  
post #277 of 363 Old 07-21-2014, 05:53 PM
AVS Special Member
 
eljr's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2006
Location: Futuristic London
Posts: 4,375
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 266 Post(s)
Liked: 1392
Quote:
Originally Posted by Ovation View Post
I have hundreds of MCH recordings of classical music and jazz performances that were recorded in concert halls, churches or other performance spaces (some live in concert, others in those venues without an audience). Those are the room ambience recordings MCH reproduces far better than any 2 channel mix could ever hope to do.
yeah, i dig the "cubical ambiance" captured on the mCH recordings.

What you got back home, little sister, to play your fuzzy warbles on? I bet you got little save pitiful, portable picnic players. Come with uncle and hear all proper! Hear angel trumpets and devil trombones. You are invited.
eljr is offline  
post #278 of 363 Old 07-21-2014, 05:56 PM
AVS Special Member
 
eljr's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2006
Location: Futuristic London
Posts: 4,375
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 266 Post(s)
Liked: 1392
Quote:
Originally Posted by lovinthehd View Post
eljr - What happened to Harvey? Why back to Alex? I think you should go for Donnie Darko now as a more logical progression?
i had to toughen up for when i leave the music thread and post in threads like this
lovinthehd likes this.

What you got back home, little sister, to play your fuzzy warbles on? I bet you got little save pitiful, portable picnic players. Come with uncle and hear all proper! Hear angel trumpets and devil trombones. You are invited.
eljr is offline  
post #279 of 363 Old 07-21-2014, 06:45 PM
AVS Special Member
 
lovinthehd's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2007
Location: OROR
Posts: 7,296
Mentioned: 1 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 496 Post(s)
Liked: 1003
Quote:
Originally Posted by 8mile13 View Post
What you are saying is that with MCH you can create a room within your audio listening room, a hologram-ish audio experience so to speek. You must admit that sounds a bit weird.

eljr has a point. What percentage of MCH recordings are fit to create a room in room experience?

I do not like live recordings. There are a few, just a few, live performance DVDs that i like. Live CDs i do not like at all. I simply do not buy them. Does that mean that i would have very little benefit from MCH?
Isn't that hologram-ish experience just what one would desire with playback? A recreation of the space as it were? Isn't that why 2-ch superceded 1-ch? I think some call it staging or presence.

A well recorded live show is a good thing and I think multi-ch does help recreate it like you say (assuming the video part of the DVD didn't suffice alone). Speaking of Ronnie Scott's club, the Jeff Beck BluRay of his show there is very nice, especially with the DTS-HD Master Audio. It also has LPCM 2ch, your choice.

"I realize that somebody playing free music isn't as commercial as a hamburger stand. But is it because you can eat a hamburger and hold it in your hand and you can't do that with music? Is it too free to control?" - Don Van Vliet (aka Captain Beefheart) discussing commercial success in the music biz


lovinthehd is offline  
post #280 of 363 Old 07-21-2014, 06:58 PM
Advanced Member
 
brwsaw's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2012
Posts: 721
Mentioned: 1 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 147 Post(s)
Liked: 96
2 channel but there can't be anyone around. I have to have a clear head and a good recording otherwise I'd vote some music over no music.


Edit: it should be "No room within a room". This would be a more accurate description. And wow is that ever cool when it happens.

Still 2.0

Last edited by brwsaw; 07-22-2014 at 07:39 PM.
brwsaw is offline  
post #281 of 363 Old 07-21-2014, 07:21 PM
Advanced Member
 
HockeyoAJB's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2013
Posts: 750
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 218 Post(s)
Liked: 240
Quote:
Originally Posted by 8mile13 View Post
What you are saying is that with MCH you can create a room within your audio listening room, a hologram-ish audio experience so to speek. You must admit that sounds a bit weird.

eljr has a point. What percentage of MCH recordings are fit to create a room in room experience?

I do not like live recordings. There are a few, just a few, live performance DVDs that i like. Live CDs i do not like at all. I simply do not buy them. Does that mean that i would have very little benefit from MCH?
It's not really intended to create a room within a room. It's intended to transform your listening space into a concert hall, arena, or whatever environment the recording engineer/artist wishes.

The majority of MCH music is mixed and recorded with this purpose in mind.

When you say you don't like live music, what specifically is it that you don't like? Is it the poor performance by bands who just don't sound good live and need multiple takes and/or help from the recording engineer/software to get it right? Is it the sound of a live audience?
HockeyoAJB is offline  
post #282 of 363 Old 07-22-2014, 06:07 AM
AVS Special Member
 
8mile13's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2009
Posts: 4,150
Mentioned: 2 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 406 Post(s)
Liked: 269
Quote:
Originally Posted by HockeyoAJB
It's not really intended to create a room within a room. It's intended to transform your listening space into a concert hall, arena, or whatever environment the recording engineer/artist wishes.
What happens is that you turn your room in something that is is not. Question is what the accurate desciption is here.
Quote:
Originally Posted by HockeyoAJB
The majority of MCH music is mixed and recorded with this purpose in mind.
Quote:
Originally Posted by HockeyoAJB
When you say you don't like live music, what specifically is it that you don't like? Is it the poor performance by bands who just don't sound good live and need multiple takes and/or help from the recording engineer/software to get it right? Is it the sound of a live audience?
I have a problem with live audience. I do not want to hear live audience when listening to a CD (has nothing to do with material). The whole point of recording seems to be presenting your material in the best possible way. The live recording turns that principle on its head. It comes across as putting very little efford in the recording of your material. Just plug-in, play and record..I probably spend way to much time listening to that Brain Wilson recordings stuff
8mile13 is offline  
post #283 of 363 Old 07-22-2014, 06:27 AM
AVS Special Member
 
hernanu's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2007
Location: Boston Suburbs
Posts: 2,640
Mentioned: 1 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 111 Post(s)
Liked: 228
Quote:
Originally Posted by 8mile13 View Post
What happens is that you turn your room in something that is is not. Question is what the accurate desciption is here.
You're already turning your room into something that it's not. And I think you want to.

Your room is not a recording studio, or a concert hall, or a church, or (fill in the area where your favorite music is transcribed to be mixed, modified and put on media). And even if it was, you'd still want to nullify its effect if you want to hear the music as it was recorded.

The whole intent (and most valued function, outside of amplification) in an AVR is room correction. The point of room correction is to correct your room. It needs to be corrected, not because it's been naughty, but because it will alter the sound of the music being played.

So you attempt to subtract your room as an influence with good speakers, carpets, room treatments, speaker placement, cutting down wall reflections, etc. And applying room correction.

This gives you the least influence from your room and allows the music to most clearly reflect the dynamics of the room that the music was recorded in, which is embedded in the recording. This includes selection of a properly set up studio or concert hall with great acoustics as well as other parameters that recording professionals know and deal with.

That doesn't change whether we're talking two, six, eight or 100 channels. We live in a physical world and if you want to hear music as it was when the recording was done, then you cut down the variables of your room.
lovinthehd likes this.
hernanu is offline  
post #284 of 363 Old 07-22-2014, 07:24 AM
Advanced Member
 
HockeyoAJB's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2013
Posts: 750
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 218 Post(s)
Liked: 240
Quote:
Originally Posted by 8mile13 View Post
I have a problem with live audience. I do not want to hear live audience when listening to a CD (has nothing to do with material). The whole point of recording seems to be presenting your material in the best possible way. The live recording turns that principle on its head. It comes across as putting very little efford in the recording of your material. Just plug-in, play and record..I probably spend way to much time listening to that Brain Wilson recordings stuff
I don't necessarily agree that the point of recording is to present your material in the best possible way. IMO, that is the goal of the performance. And the goal of recording is to capture the performance in such a way as to allow that performance to be reproduced as accurately as possible. Sadly, I think most recording engineers agree with your thoughts on the purpose of recording. They feel that they can take anybody, no matter how bad they sound in real life, and make them a star.

I don't typically mind crowd noise. But, I do mind it when the performance sounds like $%^&, either because they can't stay on beat with each other, can't hit the right notes, the mic's weren't properly located, or the levels not properly set. It's not as big of a deal when I am at the live concert, because the atmosphere and the rest of the performance can make up for it to an extent. However, I am fairly selective when it comes to recordings of live performances. Some sound better than any studio recording I have heard by that same artist, i.e. Peter Frampton's "Do you feel like we do" (Live). Some sound equally good live and in studio. But many sound significantly worse live than they do in studio. Of course, this is true of both stereo and multichannel recordings.
HockeyoAJB is offline  
post #285 of 363 Old 07-22-2014, 08:19 AM
AVS Special Member
 
eljr's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2006
Location: Futuristic London
Posts: 4,375
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 266 Post(s)
Liked: 1392
Quote:
Originally Posted by lovinthehd View Post
Isn't that hologram-ish experience just what one would desire with playback? A recreation of the space as it were? Isn't that why 2-ch superceded 1-ch? I think some call it staging or presence.

A well recorded live show is a good thing and I think multi-ch does help recreate it like you say (assuming the video part of the DVD didn't suffice alone). Speaking of Ronnie Scott's club, the Jeff Beck BluRay of his show there is very nice, especially with the DTS-HD Master Audio. It also has LPCM 2ch, your choice.
but you have your own room to deal with that is going to impart it's own sound

isn't the idea of duplicating "room ambiance" in multi channel impossible since it's in your room with the effects of your room?

Are you not better off just enjoying the presentation from the front as music is traditionally presented and enjoy your own "room ambiance."

At best this "room ambiance" thing seems redundant, at worst a potential twisting of a true presentation.

These are questions for consideration.

Reasoned replies are appreciated.

Thanks all

What you got back home, little sister, to play your fuzzy warbles on? I bet you got little save pitiful, portable picnic players. Come with uncle and hear all proper! Hear angel trumpets and devil trombones. You are invited.
eljr is offline  
post #286 of 363 Old 07-22-2014, 08:37 AM
AVS Special Member
 
Frank Derks's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2002
Location: Region A,B,C
Posts: 1,897
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 103 Post(s)
Liked: 89
Quote:
Originally Posted by eljr View Post
but you have your own room to deal with that is going to impart it's own sound
True for both stereo and multichannel


Quote:
Originally Posted by eljr View Post
isn't the idea of duplicating "room ambiance" in multi channel impossible since it's in your room with the effects of your room?
Not impossible, Tthe ambiance from the surround channels dominates over the room ambiance because it arrives first. Because off this the later arriving room ambiance is interpreted as part of the first arriving sound. (Haas effect)


Quote:
Originally Posted by eljr View Post
Are you not better off just enjoying the presentation from the front as music is traditionally presented and enjoy your own "room ambiance."

No, better of with the multichannel. see previous point


Quote:
Originally Posted by eljr View Post
At best this "room ambiance" thing seems redundant, at worst a potential twisting of a true presentation.

True for both stereo and multichannel. Both are twisting the reality. Stereo is missing half the information in comparison to multichannel and the bit of ambiance that is in the stereo mix is coming from the wrong direction. ( That's why "Stereo is multichannel done badly" )
You will be surprised at the amount of artificial 'ambiance' added to a stereo mix by means of a reverb effect box/plug in in the studio.


Quote:
Originally Posted by eljr View Post
These are questions for consideration.

True but some won't like the answer that multichannel is truly superior regardless.


Quote:
Originally Posted by eljr View Post
Reasoned replies are appreciated.

Thanks all
CruelInventions likes this.
Frank Derks is offline  
post #287 of 363 Old 07-22-2014, 08:56 AM
AVS Special Member
 
eljr's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2006
Location: Futuristic London
Posts: 4,375
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 266 Post(s)
Liked: 1392
Quote:
Originally Posted by Frank Derks View Post





True but some won't like the answer that multichannel is truly superior regardless.
rotflmAO

I laughed so hard reading this FRank.

You had a fine considered and reasoned response and then this. LOL

Very much like something I would do.

AS to the specifics of your reply, it would seem to me that multi channel would be far more corruptive of the "ambiance" sound given it's redundancy and number of additional sources of sound.

So, in this regard stereo would definitely be superior.

stereo is not missing information, that is a terrible characterization and wholly untrue.

multi channel simply looks to capture an extra quality, out debate is if this is "better" or not.

AS I have said, to me the best sound would be 3.2 but it's just not made.

What you got back home, little sister, to play your fuzzy warbles on? I bet you got little save pitiful, portable picnic players. Come with uncle and hear all proper! Hear angel trumpets and devil trombones. You are invited.
eljr is offline  
post #288 of 363 Old 07-22-2014, 09:07 AM
AVS Special Member
 
Gecko85's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2005
Location: California
Posts: 2,230
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 155 Post(s)
Liked: 95
Quote:
Originally Posted by HockeyoAJB View Post

I don't typically mind crowd noise. But, I do mind it when the performance sounds like $%^&, either because they can't stay on beat with each other, can't hit the right notes, the mic's weren't properly located, or the levels not properly set. It's not as big of a deal when I am at the live concert, because the atmosphere and the rest of the performance can make up for it to an extent. However, I am fairly selective when it comes to recordings of live performances. Some sound better than any studio recording I have heard by that same artist, i.e. Peter Frampton's "Do you feel like we do" (Live). Some sound equally good live and in studio. But many sound significantly worse live than they do in studio. Of course, this is true of both stereo and multichannel recordings.
For a really good live performance/recording, try Barenaked Ladies "Rock Spectacle". It's sort of a greatest hits from their early days, when they had no more than a cult following, released before any of their big "hits" were recorded. It's by far their best release. They're one of those bands who are better live than in a studio, and it shows on this disc. One of the best live rock/pop recordings I've heard.

Panasonic TC-P60ST60, Pioneer SC-1523-K, Oppo BDP-103D, Pioneer PL-550 + Cambridge Audio Azur 640P, B&W CM1 (fronts), B&W CM Centre, Athena Point 5 Mk II (rears), Hsu VTF-2
----------------------------------------
Sony 34XBR960, Onkyo TX-NR414, Sony PS3, Athena Point 5 Mk II (center and fronts), Wharfedale WH-2 (rears), Polk PSW10
Gecko85 is offline  
post #289 of 363 Old 07-22-2014, 09:27 AM
Advanced Member
 
HockeyoAJB's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2013
Posts: 750
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 218 Post(s)
Liked: 240
Quote:
Originally Posted by eljr View Post
but you have your own room to deal with that is going to impart it's own sound

isn't the idea of duplicating "room ambiance" in multi channel impossible since it's in your room with the effects of your room?

Are you not better off just enjoying the presentation from the front as music is traditionally presented and enjoy your own "room ambiance."

At best this "room ambiance" thing seems redundant, at worst a potential twisting of a true presentation.

These are questions for consideration.

Reasoned replies are appreciated.

Thanks all
This is why you treat your listening room to reduce the impact it has on the sound. When a performance is recorded, it isn't just recording the sounds as they come from each discrete instrument/source. It is recording the overall sound of the performance in that room, including any ambiance the room itself creates, whether it be a concert hall, arena, or studio. The recording engineer can increase, decrease, or otherwise adjust the effect of the performance space if they wish during the mixing stage. In some cases, their goal might be to simply capture the performance with no alteration at all, with the intent that the listener will play it back in a treated room. In others, they make adjustments to get the sound they want you to hear when played back with with a stereo setup in the "average" listening environment. In the former case, a MCH mix played back on a multichannel system in a treated room does the best job of reproducing the original performance. In the later case, a stereo mix played back on a stereo system in whatever they consider the average listening environment to be would give you the most accurate reproduction of the intended sound, regardless of what the original performance sounded like. With that in mind, neither MCH nor stereo are always the best from the standpoint of reproducing what the artist/engineer intended. The best playback method and listening environment depends on the content you listen to.
HockeyoAJB is offline  
post #290 of 363 Old 07-22-2014, 11:05 AM
AVS Special Member
 
lovinthehd's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2007
Location: OROR
Posts: 7,296
Mentioned: 1 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 496 Post(s)
Liked: 1003
Quote:
Originally Posted by eljr View Post
but you have your own room to deal with that is going to impart it's own sound
isn't the idea of duplicating "room ambiance" in multi channel impossible since it's in your room with the effects of your room?
Are you not better off just enjoying the presentation from the front as music is traditionally presented and enjoy your own "room ambiance."
At best this "room ambiance" thing seems redundant, at worst a potential twisting of a true presentation.
These are questions for consideration.
Reasoned replies are appreciated.
Thanks all
How is your room more friendly to 2ch playback? How could a change over to more channels make that any more impossible than with only 2? Your room and your equipment are already a huge compromise compared to a live performance and your room and equipment differ from that used by those producing the performance or recording. The manipulation of individually recorded tracks such as is often done in a recording studio is an artifice and why is 2 ch any better for such than multich?

I don't agree that presentation from the front aurally is always the case nor always the best presentation. I've attended concerts in venues where even that presentation from the front didn't take the rest of the space into account and that's not necessarily a good thing sitting in the audience. I personally like venues that help fill the room with sound, sometimes with the help of additional monitors placed strategically in the room, sometimes by the design of the space itself. Venues are not always good acoustic spaces.

I think if all recording studios had multich mixing rooms and more mixers experienced in using them you'd see an improvement overall in technique and presentation in recordings; certainly more options.

IMHO.

"I realize that somebody playing free music isn't as commercial as a hamburger stand. But is it because you can eat a hamburger and hold it in your hand and you can't do that with music? Is it too free to control?" - Don Van Vliet (aka Captain Beefheart) discussing commercial success in the music biz


lovinthehd is offline  
post #291 of 363 Old 07-22-2014, 11:24 AM
AVS Special Member
 
eljr's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2006
Location: Futuristic London
Posts: 4,375
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 266 Post(s)
Liked: 1392
How is your room more friendly to 2ch playback?

It's not.

The manipulation of individually recorded tracks such as is often done in a recording studio is an artifice and why is 2 ch any better for such than multich?

it's not

I don't agree that presentation from the front aurally is always the case nor always the best presentation.

Nor do I.

I've attended concerts in venues where even that presentation from the front didn't take the rest of the space into account and that's not necessarily a good thing sitting in the audience. I personally like venues that help fill the room with sound, sometimes with the help of additional monitors placed strategically in the room, sometimes by the design of the space itself. Venues are not always good acoustic spaces.

Agree but I would not like more monitors to try and fix a bad hall.


I think if all recording studios had multich mixing rooms and more mixers experienced in using them you'd see an improvement overall in technique and presentation in recordings; certainly more options.

I agree.

so it's comes down to preferance

for me, and me alone, i prefer stereo philosophically (really 3.2)

surround for performance art and movies that are created specifically for multi channel

hendrix i listen to in stereo, he would have used the hell out of multiI track and i would then prefer to listen to him in multi track


here is something that gets lost, isn't someone on a limited budget (almost everyone) better off with two better speakers rather than 4 lesser speakers? Most always the answer is yes because of simple physics.

I guess my real point in all this is live and let live.

What you got back home, little sister, to play your fuzzy warbles on? I bet you got little save pitiful, portable picnic players. Come with uncle and hear all proper! Hear angel trumpets and devil trombones. You are invited.
eljr is offline  
post #292 of 363 Old 07-22-2014, 11:30 AM
AVS Special Member
 
eljr's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2006
Location: Futuristic London
Posts: 4,375
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 266 Post(s)
Liked: 1392
Quote:
Originally Posted by Gecko85 View Post
For a really good live performance... try Barenaked Ladies ...who are better live

bare naked ladies you say...

I'll look into it.

What you got back home, little sister, to play your fuzzy warbles on? I bet you got little save pitiful, portable picnic players. Come with uncle and hear all proper! Hear angel trumpets and devil trombones. You are invited.
eljr is offline  
post #293 of 363 Old 07-22-2014, 11:48 AM
AVS Special Member
 
eljr's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2006
Location: Futuristic London
Posts: 4,375
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 266 Post(s)
Liked: 1392
Quote:
Originally Posted by Gecko85 View Post
For a really good live performance/recording, try Barenaked Ladies "Rock Spectacle". It's sort of a greatest hits from their early days, when they had no more than a cult following, released before any of their big "hits" were recorded. It's by far their best release. They're one of those bands who are better live than in a studio, and it shows on this disc. One of the best live rock/pop recordings I've heard.
I am spinning it now, come on over to the music thread and discuss it!

What you got back home, little sister, to play your fuzzy warbles on? I bet you got little save pitiful, portable picnic players. Come with uncle and hear all proper! Hear angel trumpets and devil trombones. You are invited.
eljr is offline  
post #294 of 363 Old 07-22-2014, 12:06 PM
AVS Special Member
 
Gecko85's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2005
Location: California
Posts: 2,230
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 155 Post(s)
Liked: 95
Quote:
Originally Posted by eljr View Post
I am spinning it now, come on over to the music thread and discuss it!
Heading to a meeting (followed by another meeting). Post your thoughts and I'll check back later this afternoon.

Panasonic TC-P60ST60, Pioneer SC-1523-K, Oppo BDP-103D, Pioneer PL-550 + Cambridge Audio Azur 640P, B&W CM1 (fronts), B&W CM Centre, Athena Point 5 Mk II (rears), Hsu VTF-2
----------------------------------------
Sony 34XBR960, Onkyo TX-NR414, Sony PS3, Athena Point 5 Mk II (center and fronts), Wharfedale WH-2 (rears), Polk PSW10
Gecko85 is offline  
post #295 of 363 Old 07-22-2014, 01:06 PM
AVS Special Member
 
8mile13's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2009
Posts: 4,150
Mentioned: 2 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 406 Post(s)
Liked: 269
Quote:
Originally Posted by hernanu View Post
You're already turning your room into something that it's not. And I think you want to.

Your room is not a recording studio, or a concert hall, or a church, or (fill in the area where your favorite music is transcribed to be mixed, modified and put on media). And even if it was, you'd still want to nullify its effect if you want to hear the music as it was recorded.

The whole intent to me (and most valued function, outside of amplification) in an AVR is room correction. The point of room correction is to correct your room. It needs to be corrected, not because it's been naughty, but because it will alter the sound of the music being played.

So you attempt to subtract your room as an influence with good speakers, carpets, room treatments, speaker placement, cutting down wall reflections, etc. And applying room correction.

This gives you the least influence from your room and allows the music to most clearly reflect the dynamics of the room that the music was recorded in, which is embedded in the recording. This includes selection of a properly set up studio or concert hall with great acoustics as well as other parameters that recording professionals know and deal with.

That doesn't change whether we're talking two, six, eight or 100 channels. We live in a physical world and if you want to hear music as it was when the recording was done, then you cut down the variables of your room.
A room is treated for a good representation of recorded music. The natural sound of a room is changed by this proces. Treated becomes the new natural so to speak

When listening in such room to a recording of a choir in a church in stereo you can hear that it is a choir singing in a church in a treated room (in stereo). When you listen to the same record in MCH the treated room becomes the church in which the choir is singing.

The stereo set-up does not mess with the ''natural'' sound of the room. MCH on the other hand does..it adds artificiality to the room. Does it not?
8mile13 is offline  
post #296 of 363 Old 07-22-2014, 01:12 PM
Advanced Member
 
HockeyoAJB's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2013
Posts: 750
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 218 Post(s)
Liked: 240
Quote:
Originally Posted by eljr View Post
here is something that gets lost, isn't someone on a limited budget (almost everyone) better off with two better speakers rather than 4 lesser speakers? Most always the answer is yes because of simple physics.
To an extent, yes. Eventually, you hit the point of diminishing returns, where the addition of more channels does more to improve the experience than spending another $1,000+ on your mains and/or the amps powering them. The point where that happens is likely subjective, but it would be an interesting exercise to come up with a post suggesting how much you should spend on your mains before worrying about adding more channels and then how you would split your budget between your mains and the surrounds beyond that point. IMO, the price point where you should add more channels would be significantly lower for movies than it would for music. And, the importance of matching your surrounds to your mains would be higher with MCH music than it is with movies.
eljr likes this.
HockeyoAJB is offline  
post #297 of 363 Old 07-23-2014, 08:48 AM
AVS Special Member
 
hernanu's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2007
Location: Boston Suburbs
Posts: 2,640
Mentioned: 1 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 111 Post(s)
Liked: 228
Quote:
Originally Posted by 8mile13 View Post
A room is treated for a good representation of recorded music. The natural sound of a room is changed by this proces. Treated becomes the new natural so to speak
Agree, and a nice description.

Quote:
Originally Posted by 8mile13 View Post
When listening in such room to a recording of a choir in a church in stereo you can hear that it is a choir singing in a church in a treated room (in stereo). When you listen to the same record in MCH the treated room becomes the church in which the choir is singing.
Ok.... so...

A stereo performance inherently adds the presence of a treated room as well as the presence of the performance room.

The MCH performance subtracts the treated room and only has the music and the performance room.

While I disagree, I think that room treatments improve both 2 channel and MCH performances by nulling your room and letting the performance (including its performance space) take over, how is the above a bad thing for MCH?

Again - I think 2Ch is aided just as much as MCH by room correction.

Quote:
Originally Posted by 8mile13 View Post
The stereo set-up does not mess with the ''natural'' sound of the room. MCH on the other hand does..it adds artificiality to the room. Does it not?
I don't think it does, since both present a performance in a space that has hopefully been configured to minimize interference.

I have many 2 channel (redbook and SACD) sources that I throughly enjoy. Many MCH's as well, so I don't have a dog in this hunt (not an either/or to me), but do think that given a choice, I would take an MCH recording of the same content. My preference.
hernanu is offline  
post #298 of 363 Old 07-23-2014, 11:46 AM
Senior Member
 
lflorack's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2006
Location: Hilton, NY
Posts: 438
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 35 Post(s)
Liked: 35
Quote:
Originally Posted by 8mile13 View Post
A room is treated for a good representation of recorded music.
Agreed. Further, the room is treated to eliminate acoustic anomalies that are present in many rooms. These anomalies negatively impact the output of the recorded music playback. In other words, the anomalies prevent the playback from sounding as it was recorded because the room removes or adds to the sound that was recorded.


Quote:
Originally Posted by 8mile13 View Post
The natural sound of a room is changed by this proces. Treated becomes the new natural so to speak
Yes, the natural room sound is changed. BUT, proper room treatments are used to correct acoustic problems that prevent you from hearing what the recording and your system and speakers are sending to your ears. The room is incorrectly changing what's being sent toward your ears. So, yes, the 'natural' sound of the room is changed but only to correct what's wrong with it (if done correctly).

Quote:
Originally Posted by 8mile13 View Post
When listening in such room to a recording of a choir in a church in stereo you can hear that it is a choir singing in a church in a treated room (in stereo). When you listen to the same record in MCH the treated room becomes the church in which the choir is singing.
Yes, I'd agree with this too. But, put another way, you're now more accurately hearing what was recorded and intended. It now more closely resembles what the session sounded like when it was recorded.


Quote:
Originally Posted by 8mile13 View Post
The stereo set-up does not mess with the ''natural'' sound of the room. MCH on the other hand does..it adds artificiality to the room. Does it not?
No, I don't agree that stereo doesn't mess with the room and Multi-channel does. As I've already stated, the 'natural' sound of the room isn't always a good thing. The endeavor of a good recording, good equipment, good room treatments (as needed) and all of the money we spend on this fairly expensive hobby of ours, is to recreate the original experience as closely as possible.


Anyone can certainly like whatever format they choose. However, my opinion is that with all the above in mind, the likelihood of a more accurate representation of the original session is with multi-channel.

Links: My System Diagram / System Pix
Yamaha RX-A2010, Samsung UN55B8000, AppleTV, Roku3, Yamaha CDC-685, Oppo BDP-93
Klipsch: (2) RF-83's, (1) RC-64, (2) RVX-54's, (2) RSX-5's
SVS: (1) SB13-Ultra
See links above for additional system details.
lflorack is offline  
post #299 of 363 Old 07-23-2014, 12:35 PM
Advanced Member
 
HockeyoAJB's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2013
Posts: 750
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 218 Post(s)
Liked: 240
Quote:
Originally Posted by 8mile13 View Post
A room is treated for a good representation of recorded music. The natural sound of a room is changed by this proces. Treated becomes the new natural so to speak

When listening in such room to a recording of a choir in a church in stereo you can hear that it is a choir singing in a church in a treated room (in stereo). When you listen to the same record in MCH the treated room becomes the church in which the choir is singing.

The stereo set-up does not mess with the ''natural'' sound of the room. MCH on the other hand does..it adds artificiality to the room. Does it not?
No. Neither 2-channel nor multi-channel setups add artificiality to the room. They are merely playing back what is in the recording. Any artificiality that is added is done so during the mixing process and, in cases where the intent is to actually try to replicate the original performance, is done so in order to make up for the shortcomings of the setup and room used for playback.

Currently, we record in a concert hall or arena, which has it's own special acoustics, in order to capture the ambiance of that room. We position microphones in various places to capture whatever sound is heard in those locations. Note that this is not the same as recording only those sounds that originate from those locations. We then play that back in a treated room, using whatever speakers we have available to us, in whatever positions they happen to be located. The problem is that playback of sounds that were captured in a particular spot, but did not originate from that spot cannot simply be played back from a speaker in that same position or any random position you feel like putting a speaker and have it sound the same as it would have had you been in that room. We try to correct this by identifying which sounds originated from where, including the original source of the sound and all points of reflection then separate those sounds from one another and play them back on a system that reproduces proper phasing, directionality, volume, tone, etc. of not only the original sounds, but of the reflections as well. The reflections have to actually be played back by a speaker or speakers because the room is not capable of recreating those reflections from the original point sources. And since those reflections do not always come from the front, a MCH setup can do this more accurately than a stereo setup.

In a perfect world, we would actually do the opposite of what we currently do. Instead of recording music in a hall and then playing it back in a room that is designed not to impart its own ambiance into the mix, we would record each individual instrument in a treated room, so that only the sound that originates from the instrument would be captured with no reflections or room ambiance. Then we would custom build our listening rooms to be an exact replica of whatever venue we want to hear the instruments play in and place speakers that have the exact same tonal and dispersion characteristics as the instruments they are replacing, in the exact same locations where those instruments would have been. The speakers would play back only the sounds that originated from the instrument they are replacing and the room would create all of the proper reflections itself. This would be the perfect, truest representation of what the artist intended.

Obviously, this is impractical. You'de have to build a different listening room for each venue you want to hear music in and own a boatload of specialized speakers that would be swapped in and out, depending on what instruments are being used, and move them around as necessary. And, unless everybody did the same thing then the music would sound vastly different on everybody's setup. It is much cheaper and easier to establish one reasonably-priced design for a treated room and a limited number of different speaker positions, using your typical speaker at each of those locations, and adjust the mix to compensate.
HockeyoAJB is offline  
post #300 of 363 Old 07-26-2014, 04:04 PM
Senior Member
 
Dude111's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2010
Posts: 344
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 42 Post(s)
Liked: 42
Quote:
Originally Posted by HockeyoAJB
When you say you don't like live music, what specifically is it that you don't like?
Well for ME its mainly due to the fact that live versions of songs DO NOT SOUND THE SAME AS STUDIO VERSIONS! (Which I hear on the radio and love)
Dude111 is offline  
Reply Community News & Polls

Tags
frontpage , Polls

Thread Tools
Show Printable Version Show Printable Version
Email this Page Email this Page


Forum Jump: 

Posting Rules  
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are Off
Pingbacks are Off
Refbacks are Off