Can a speaker ever perfectly replicate live music?

[Rob Babcock]

I thought since another thread was meanering off in this general direction, I'd start a new thread. Do you feel the best loudspeakers of today are to to being able or are able to perfectly replicate a live event? If not, how close are they now, as a percentage? How good can a preproduction be?

If if can be done, then how many speakers will it require?

I'm sure you guys have some opinions!

 

[Rock&Roll Ninja]

It depends on the live event. You'd simply have to re-create the event equipment. Then your speakers would be 100% acurate and you'd just need source material.

 

[Rip Van Woofer]

No. Probably never will, no matter how accurate the freqency response or how many channels we have, or how sophisticated the DSP. But frankly (and this may seem blasphemous to many 'philes), I don't expect them to. The best I hope for is a good approximation. I hope better approximations will be possible with progress. Anyway, I make the necessary allowances in my head and enjoy.

When I want the real deal, I buy some concert tix, grab the Mrs., go out for a good dinner, and head for the concert hall!

 

[cornelius]

I hope I remember correctly, but I think Mark Levinson used to (and still may) record someone and then immediately play the event back on his system. I also think Richard Vandersteen used to do blindfold tests with live sound vs. his speakers.

 

[Rob Babcock]

In the case of live rock music, we may often get far better than the sound we'd get at the concert. Obviously at a large arena rock show, we're simply hearing the P.A. system.

As far as I know, the only facets of sound we can perceive are frequency, amplitude and time. All other things we hear or think we hear can only be functions of these things. Given this, would it really be unbelievable that we someday could recreate this?

Many things that audiophools drool over don't really exist in real live music. The hyper-pinpoint imaging is one such artifice of recorded music.

 

[O'Shag]

I've often thought about that question myself. I think we can get very close to reproducing the sound of an event using the best audio technology.

I may be talking out of my hat here, but I think there is more than pure sonics involved in creating a thoroughly believable reproduction. For instance, when we listen to a live performance, could the air be charged with vibrations that we feel and not just hear? If you've ever experienced the opening of an italian opera with strings, woodwinds, brass and timpany you can literally feel the vibrations in the music (and I'm not taking about bass rumble). My point is that perhaps we experience more than just sound, and feel vibrations through the air when experiencing live music.

Maybe a new forefront of home audio will be to bring us closer to the original event using technology that focuses on more than pure sound.

O'Shag

Austin Powers of Audio

 

[Rip Van Woofer]

As far as I know, the only facets of sound we can perceive are frequency, amplitude and time. All other things we hear or think we hear can only be functions of these things.

Ah yes, but the interactions of those three simple things are endlessly complex. Kind of like saying weather is only temperature, atmospheric pressure, and moisture so why can't we make it rain when we want to, or even predict it with near 100% accuracy? (OK, so weather is a bit more than that but I'm makin' a point here!) Heck, I think they're still finding out stuff about how our ears work.

Until we can implant a chip in our brains that can replicate all the stimuli of a live event directly into our noggins, I still think the best we'll ever do is 'pretty good'.

As someone rightly pointed out in another thread, transducer technology hasn't undergone any real revolutions in the past several decades and the current ones are pretty mature and possibly approaching their ultimate potential. Other contenders for the "transducer of the future" have either not panned out or are still highly experimental and preliminary with uncertain prospects at best.

 

[savelife]

In the case of live rock music, we may often get far better than the sound we'd get at the concert. Obviously at a large arena rock show, we're simply hearing the P.A. system.

As far as I know, the only facets of sound we can perceive are frequency, amplitude and time. All other things we hear or think we hear can only be functions of these things. Given this, would it really be unbelievable that we someday could recreate this?

Many things that audiophools drool over don't really exist in real live music. The hyper-pinpoint imaging is one such artifice of recorded music.

Consider this (from savelife, Dr. Bob)... it doesn't matter if the live rock is coming over a horn p.a. system... you do not need a horn p.a. system to reproduce the horn p.a. system rock sound with enough accuracy to make you "believe" you are hearing the sound system used in a rock concert. JBL makes very efficient dynamic drivers which will match the decible output of a horn system, that when played in the same open field sound nearly alike. What you need is a noise reproducing system (speaker) which will match the decible output of the p.a. system that is capable of the same pitch and tember.

Regarding audiophile drool... your absolutely right. The hi-fi industry is telling us how and what we should hear to determine what is good sound. All we really need to do is simply listen to more "live" music and use that as our reference source. I have attended concerts which sounded like two demensional cardboard because of the seat location in the hall... but it was live sound which is something no speaker can accurately reproduce today.

 

[Rob Babcock]

Hey, I never said it would be simple! And even I know weather is a lot more factors that those few. I'm only stating that the human organism can percieve sound in those terms. Any audiophool term we wish to apply to the sound we hear (PRaT, air, lushness, etc) is just a way to describe that interaction. And yes, it's complicated to us know, but look how new hi fi is. Depending on where you say hifi started (eg is it the Edison wax cylinder? The invention of the 45? The advent of stereo LPs?) it's between 50 and 100 years old. Look at what's been achieved in aviation in that amount of time- you wanna make any bets as to the next 100 years? Same for sound. I disagree that transducers haven't evolved much over the last couple decades, but even if that was true it doesn't mean the next 100-500 years won't see any change!

Who knows? It's possible that we'll never acheive a virtual reality type of sound, but I've learned that virtually nothing is impossible. Anything that's not specifically banned by the laws of physics will likely be done, given time.

 

[Rip Van Woofer]

If you've ever experienced the opening of an italian opera with strings, woodwinds, brass and timpany you can literally feel the vibrations in the music (and I'm not taking about bass rumble).

It's called PASTA POWER!! The same mysterious force that made Italians the greatest artists, Italian sportscars the coolest, Italian design the most cutting-edge, and Italian men...well, ask any woman!

Ciao!

Silliness aside, you're right; there's definately something going on in a good live performance, in a good hall, that will probably not be 100% reproducable in a home environment in my lifetime. Nothing mystical, mind you: just that capturing and reproducing the totality of sound in a specific environment is well-nigh impossible.

(Those who foolishly disagree with any of the above can expect a visit from my cousin Guido)

 

[ruadmaa]

Quality of home audio

Can I be the only one that PREFERS home audio to a live performance??? Quite frankly, I find live performances way, way too loud. The last time I saw the Moody Blues at our local Star Theatre my ears rang for a half hour after the performance. From my personal point of view a high quality home audio system is infinitely superior to a live, blow back your hair, and hurt your ears performance. Not to mention that I don't have to put up with all the ignorant discourteous crap, like people always standing up in front of you so you can't see. Just my opinion.

 

[cornelius]

Not me. The last time I saw Elvin Jones play was a wonderful experience. What I (and many others that night) felt, cannot be translated on any sytem. I was floating down the street, walking home after that gig.

I've never felt that listening to any system.

 

[Rob Babcock]

There are vibrations in the air at a live performance- it's called "sound"! If there was some mystical energy that we don't percieve as sound, why would it apply only to certain instruments & at certain times?

There are many reasons to go to a concert aside from the sound, obviously. There's seeing & in some cases interacting with the performers, etc. That's beyond the scope of this debate. I'm talking only about being able to blindfold you and you not know if you're hearing it live or via some technological filter.

 

[av_phile]

Those speakers we fondly invest on at home are part of the Hi-Fidelity Plaback chain. They are meant to deliver the sound pressure levels analogous to the electronic signals of a RECORDING. Whether LP, Open Reel, CD, Cassette, DVD, SACD. I don't epect them to sound anyhwere near a live concert event (accoustic, not amplified).

It is the objective of a recording engineer to CAPTURE a live performance into a medium that can be played at home. Between a live acoustic performance and the RECORDED medium can already be miles apart. But the recorded information can be an excellent REPLICA. It IS a REPLICA of the real thing. It is not and will never be the REAL thing.

Now at home, audiophiles are engaged in attaining the objective of a Hi-fidelity PLAYBACK system - to reproduce the RECORDING - the REPLICA as it was "heard" and mixed by the recording engineer. And that's all they are going to get - a REPLICA of the sounds of the real thing. Never the real thing. Some gears can deliver the sonics approaching what was intended in the REPLICA. Most equipment have varying degrees of coloration to do justice to the REPLICA. But it's a replica just the same.

If I want to hear the real thing, I buy a concert ticket. And if I can afford one, I'd invite an classical or jazz ensemble to perform at home.

Having said that, my remembrance of how a live accoustic performance sounds can be used as a standard in judging a speaker. Such a remembrance has its bias and limitations, coloured to say the least. Hence, judging a speaker or amp to sound like the real thing is a most subjective and personal opinion. And it remains in the realm of opinion. What is accurate, transparent and neutral to me, may sound cold, clinical, grating, piercing and unmusical to another. My treasure can be someone's garbage, so to speak.

 

[O'Shag]

Rip,

Well I can't argue with you there. There must be something in the Pasta, because any country that can produce the Ferrari Enzo, Pagani Zonda, Maserati Ghibli, Lamborgini Gallardo, Fiat Panda, Italian Opera, ...the Borgias, and The Inquisition - its got to be said - has a LOT of Mojo.

Ciao

O'Shag

Austin Powers of Audio

 

[Rob Babcock]

Hey, you forgot Mussolini & Roberto Bennini!

 

[O'Shag]

Those speakers we fondly invest on at home are part of the Hi-Fidelity Plaback chain. They are meant to deliver the sound pressure levels analogous to the electronic signals of a RECORDING. Whether LP, Open Reel, CD, Cassette, DVD, SACD. I don't epect them to sound anyhwere near a live concert event (accoustic, not amplified).

Maybe we're not yet at that point where a 3-dimensional sonic image can be exactly duplicated. We're close though. I've listened to an SACD release of an acoustical performance by Al De Moela, John McLaughlin and Paco Lucia, and I was convinced. In fact it sounded so real, I thought Al de Meola was going to tap me on the shoulder and ask me if I'd like a beer.

Take multi-channel SACD as the format, or DVD-audio for that matter, or even 2-channel 24bit CD.

Julia Childs recipe for a believable replica of acoustic music goes as follows:

'Throw together a few well matched components - the TEAC Esoteric SACD player and Yamaha RX-Z9 will do nicely. Carefully add 7.1 teaspoons of KEF speakers with two presence speakers for additional flare. Carefully fold the electronic culinary concoction together with some quality cable spagetti (Nordost or JP labs is good for those with a more expensive pallette - but cheaper cable such as the GE or RCA 'specials' - you know the ones with the flashy silver braiding you can find at Frys - they'll do nicely). Now for the secret ingredient. Carefully process the mixture using the Yamaha YPAO equalization device. Sprinkle some salt and pepper to taste. Voila - you will now have a sonic experience to whet the appetite every night after a hard slog at work.'

Julia may look a bit like an older guy with a wig that puts on a high female-like voice but when it comes down to cooking and audio, 'She' knows her stuff.

Best,

O'Shag

Austin Powers of Audio

 

[jeffsg4mac]

I can tell you a couple of things that are absolute truth If it is ever done it will be a multi-channel setup, 5.1 or greater and it will not be with conventional drivers, i.e. woofers and tweeters. It will be with some unknown as of now technology. We have come about as far as we are going to with conventional drivers.

Put that in your pipe and smoke all you two channel, golden eared, turntable loving audio snobs

 

[Rob Babcock]

I'd be wary about that prediction, Jeff. Around the end of the 19th century, the head of the US Patent Office advised the president that the dept should be closed as everything useful had already been invented! I think "conventional" drivers have a lot of evolution to go thru, even still. But I no longer think the driver technology is the limiting factor.

IMOHO, I think Hi Rez MC, DSP & all-digital amplification are going to be the keys to greater realism in the future. As we become able to take a digital source, apply DSP & room correction still in digital domain, and pass that still-digital stream right to the speaker, then we'll start to realize the full promise of the new formats. Hopefully this will be combined with an understanding of the value of physically treating the room.

I guess it's easy to predict that things will advance- in human history, the only constant has been change. Who knows if we'll acheive a perfect facimile of the actual event? I'm just saying, I wouldn't bet against it.

Of course, if we ever do, this hobby will be finished. Would would a dyed-in-the-wool audiophool do if there was no more snake oil to apply? Wouldn't perfection be a miserable state of affairs for "Audiophoolus Tweakosaurus"?

 

[av_phile]

I'd be wary about that prediction, Jeff.
I guess it's easy to predict that things will advance- in human history, the only constant has been change. Who knows if we'll acheive a perfect facimile of the actual event? I'm just saying, I wouldn't bet against it.

Of course, if we ever do, this hobby will be finished. Would would a dyed-in-the-wool audiophool do if there was no more snake oil to apply? Wouldn't perfection be a miserable state of affairs for "Audiophoolus Tweakosaurus"?

Even if we get there, knowing human nature and his quest for perfection, there will always be a further want to impove. He'll always find something to tweak to his heart's contnet. There'd be no end to it. Nothing is perfect in this world. At least none that an imperfect man can manufacturer. Or at least none that humans can easily accept.