Collarspace Discussion Forums


Home  Login  Search 

RE: When music was real


View related threads: (in this forum | in all forums)

Logged in as: Guest
 
All Forums >> [Casual Banter] >> Off the Grid >> RE: When music was real Page: <<   < prev  1 [2]
Login
Message << Older Topic   Newer Topic >>
RE: When music was real - 2/28/2009 10:13:08 AM   
slaveluci


Posts: 4294
Joined: 3/2/2007
From: Little Rock, AR
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: Aileen1968
Black Crowes were great at a Jersey shore bar.
Johnny Winter in one of those dinner show places. He sounded pretty fucking good.
Buddy Guy and Jonny Lang.

Wow, I'm jealous.  Master saw the Black Crowes in Memphis several years back and we saw Jonny Lang last year at Riverfest here in Little Rock.  He wasn't nearly as good as I'd hoped but it could've been an off night.  Johnny Winter is a god.  Neither of us have seen him live but to see him play "Come On In My Kitchen" would be a dream come true!

luci

_____________________________

To choose a good book, look in an inquisitor’s prohibited list. ~John Aikin

(in reply to Aileen1968)
Profile   Post #: 21
RE: When music was real - 2/28/2009 10:38:57 AM   
MistresseLotus


Posts: 443
Joined: 9/19/2008
From: (aka LotusSong)
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: Termyn8or

Lotus, was that late enough that you heard the sequel to Taxi ? I think it an excellent piece, and fits so well. I have both Taxi and Sequel and would like to merge them into one file so they play consecutively except for one problem, Taxi is live and Sequel is studio. I don't even know if there is a live version of sequel.


That was the debut of Sequel.  Damn I miss that guy!

_____________________________

I leave it to the 20-somethings to do the "open-minded, total unconditional acceptance thing" for it's how THEY learn that all the things others older than they have deemed BS, are in fact BS. What a waste of a decade.

(in reply to Termyn8or)
Profile   Post #: 22
RE: When music was real - 2/28/2009 10:51:31 AM   
Termyn8or


Posts: 18681
Joined: 11/12/2005
Status: offline
I remember when people used to complain that Aerosmith was out of time when they played live. This was because they needed a soundman to setup the foldback monitors correctly. This is not all that easy, you need EQs and feedback finders to do it right and they can't have truly good fidelity because of the feedback problem.

The problem was the slow speed of sound, that they were primarily hearing an echo of themselves, and therefore were not able to keep accurate timing. I got Aerosmith live in a small hall playing Walking The Dog and it is great. They are in perfect time and sound good. But that is a small hall. Sound travels at 1,100 FPS, slower than most bullets actually. So if your echo is coming off a wall say 400 feet away, you are hearing the sound about ¾ of a second late, which is totally unacceptable.

Once the foldback problem was solved, Aerosmith was just fine.

There is alot to music production and reproduction, and many Man hours have been spent to improve the quality. I saw Golden Earring in a small hall,  actually the Variety Theater on Lorain Avenue in Cleveland and they sounded great ! Loud as hell too, but they had to ask the band to turn down because the plaster was literally getting vibrated off of the cieling. The only problem I had with the show was that it was not long enough and they did not play the old stuff, like off the Moontan album.

Venues of concerts and all that are not the only aspect of sound reproduction either. I had the European version of Moontan and it was made off of a different master, on better vinyl and really sounded alot better than the US version. It was also recorded at a lower level, and since back then everybody almost had cheap turntables, feedback became an issue. There was not enough insulation and damping and most people were actually better off with the US version, even though it has alot more distortion in it. It was also compressed alot more, but that seems sometimes to be what Americans like.

Even CDs are compressed, the 80Db dynamic range simply still isn't enough for some material. It's just that CDs are compressed less. I hear there are audio formats (which come on DVDs) now that can actually do it, but then there is the issue of the amp and speakers. You would need thousands of watts per channel to reproduce it accurately.

When you think of sound remember two things (this is one area I do know what I'm talking about).

1. To get twice as loud you need ten times the power. Also at high levels distortion ratings of speakers are embarrasing so they are rarely published. Going out and paying more for a 150WPC amp with .003THD rather than less for a 120WPC amp with .007THD is pointless. A speaker that can reproduce at 100 WPC with say ten percent THD is rare and expensive.

2. To reproduce a muted trumpet for example, at the realistic level as live would require near ten thousand watts. Live drums take less actually, until you get to the cymbals.

Last year or so I almost setup a really nice little home recording studio for a buddy of mine, it was going to  happen until he found out how much it was going to cost, and that's just to record it, we are not even talking about reproducing it at live levels uncompressed.

To do that, a 110V 20 amp circuit would never handle it, so we are talking some new electrical wiring and possibly having to get higher rated incoming service. Forget it. It took a half a kilowatt just to HEAR the electric pano in decent fidelity keeping up with the live drums.

Now you are playing a concert and need foldback monitors, think of that. They must be louder than the echo. That is asking alot.

Orchestra music is a whole nother story as well. Here we have Severence, which is built like a big horn. You can hear, but to record it is another matter. They have tried alot more down that road than the rock concert people. They have treid mixing down as many as two hundred mikes and it still wasn't quite right.

So basically, the Pioneer system that hurts your ears and brings the cops has never REALLY "brought it back alive". There is and never will be anything quite like being there.

T

(in reply to slvemike4u)
Profile   Post #: 23
RE: When music was real - 2/28/2009 11:21:24 AM   
Owner59


Posts: 17033
Joined: 3/14/2006
From: Dirty Jersey
Status: offline
 Here`s a great act out`a Manhattan.Un-believable live.

They`ve played packed rooms for years,but few know about Popa.

It`s just the way it is.

If you have talent and the will to put yourself out there,people will come.How successful one is ,is up to the fates to decide.

_____________________________

"As for our common defense, we reject as false the choice between our safety and our ideals"

President Obama

(in reply to slaveluci)
Profile   Post #: 24
RE: When music was real - 2/28/2009 4:27:16 PM   
allyC


Posts: 778
Joined: 6/2/2004
From: Las Vegas
Status: offline
Fast reply... I think part of what has happened is that the music industry has gravitated toward the lyric being more important than the music itself. If you listen to a Cole Porter song, the melody is usually pretty close to perfect.  The melody was the backbone - the driving force behind it making you feel something. In many cases in recent years, the music has become secondary to the message that they artist is trying to put into its words.  Rap is a primary example.  Very little music with a great deal of rhythm and spoken word.  The melody and musicality in a great deal of modern popular music is sorely lacking.  The commercial look of the artist, lyrical hook, and cookie-cutter style has become the norm. That isn't to say that there aren't any standouts.  The last concert I went to was a Tool concert (I'm a big Tool fan).  It was one of the finest I've ever seen.  But then again, Maynard James Keenan views music in a similar fashion to Cole Porter.  He believes the music comes first and then the lyrics are borne from that.  In fact he said something to the effect (paraphrasing)... 'If the lyric was the most important part, arenas would be sold out with people paying to hear the spoken word.' There are some gems out there and occasionally I find someone new that I genuinely enjoy.  I try to move with the ebb and flow of music as time progresses but I find myself more unable as of late to find the quality I long for. I can't even think of a popular/rock band today that could even remotely compare to the complexity and musicality of bands and artists such as Yes, Emerson Lake and Palmer, Nick Drake, The Moody Blues, etc.   (I saw the Moodies last year here in Vegas, btw... they were absolutely phenomenal) Perhaps when the music again becomes the focus, things will shift somewhat.  Until then, we'll just have to weed through to find the diamonds in the rough. Well wishes, Cav's ally    

(in reply to Owner59)
Profile   Post #: 25
RE: When music was real - 2/28/2009 8:06:37 PM   
Sir Daddy


Posts: 53
Joined: 2/7/2009
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: Termyn8or

To do that, a 110V 20 amp circuit would never handle it, so we are talking some new electrical wiring and possibly having to get higher rated incoming service. Forget it. It took a half a kilowatt just to HEAR the electric pano in decent fidelity keeping up with the live drums.



Phrases like "decent fidelity" are subjective terms.  Most people cannot even detect distortion levels under 2%....much less .007%.  And even that can change depending on the source.  The type of harmonic distortion created by tube amps is drastically different from their solid state counterparts.  I've heard accounts where people had a hard time detecting distortion levels of 8% through particularly well designed tube amps, due to the smooth, more pleasant distortion characteristics.  Now, those were not my personal studies.  Just scientific studies I read about.

Moving on, the human ear is not perfectly linear and creates distortion in coming sound waves.  Air itself is non-linear and distorts a sound wave more with every foot it travels.

I know you already know this...but for the benefit of everyone else reading, it is best to keep the signal as pure as possible, of course.  Every step adds additional distortion.  The pre-amp, power amp, speakers...even the connecting wires can add a bit of distortion.  Not to mention our own ears and the air between our ears and the sound source.  The more accurate we keep each step, the better.

The ear is also not linear in it's frequency response.  We hear in a bell curve.  Most men would be hard pressed to detect a tone above 14khz.  Women tend to have better high frequency sensitivity...but most women can't detect a tone above 15.5khz.  The most interesting part of that tidbit is how we can react to these frequencies even when we cannot consciously detect them.  Pull out everything above 15khz and we definitely notice the lack of upper harmonic content in what we're hearing.

Moving away from frequency to dynamic range, it's important to realize that the human threshold of pain typically lies somewhere between 128-135dbs.  
Now consider the logarithmic scale where power doubles for each 3 dB increase (the smallest increase detectable by the human ear); the 135 dB difference between the thresholds of hearing and pain means the power doubles about 45 times - an increase of 32 trillion in power level. That's a ridiculous dynamic range, and nothing human engineers are capable of creating can reproduce it with 100% accuracy.

Now, much of what you wrote was geared towards a particular definition of "quality sound" - specifically, to reproduce instruments at the same level that they play naturally.  I am of the opinion that such a criterion is both impractical and a little stupid.  First, it would require a wall of speakers and a shit ton of amps.  Secondly, the process of music production deliberately skews that perception in the mixing process.  I mean, do you think for a second you could actually hear some pop singer's voice over the mountain of instrumentation behind it if it weren't for the mix?

I don't want to hear a trumpet solo played at the volume levels of a live performance unless I'm actually attending a live performance.  Live trumpets are ridiculously loud - a passionate performance easily in the 85-110dbs range.  Surely I don't have to remind you that sustained exposure to 85dbs or above will likely result in hearing loss.

Lastly, when the original poster was talking about bands sounding shitty, I'm pretty sure they were talking about off key singers, out of tune guitarists and generally shitty timing - not so much audio quality.  =)



(in reply to Termyn8or)
Profile   Post #: 26
RE: When music was real - 3/2/2009 12:51:37 AM   
DeviantlyD


Posts: 4375
Joined: 5/26/2007
From: Hawai`i
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: Aileen1968

...
Buddy Guy


He's still around!?!?

(in reply to Aileen1968)
Profile   Post #: 27
RE: When music was real - 3/2/2009 1:02:57 AM   
aravain


Posts: 1211
Joined: 8/26/2008
Status: offline
To the OP:

I don't like live music :(

At all.

Not because it's bad, just because it's boring (and this is coming from a musician!)

I don't enjoy listening to music alone. If it's not a whole damned show, it's not remotely interesting to me. If it IS a whole damned show... it costs too much for me to even consider going to :P

For me, music is for listening to while doing other things.

(in reply to GimpinDenial)
Profile   Post #: 28
Page:   <<   < prev  1 [2]
All Forums >> [Casual Banter] >> Off the Grid >> RE: When music was real Page: <<   < prev  1 [2]
Jump to:





New Messages No New Messages
Hot Topic w/ New Messages Hot Topic w/o New Messages
Locked w/ New Messages Locked w/o New Messages
 Post New Thread
 Reply to Message
 Post New Poll
 Submit Vote
 Delete My Own Post
 Delete My Own Thread
 Rate Posts




Collarchat.com © 2025
Terms of Service Privacy Policy Spam Policy

0.078