The Holy Grail

[goodman]

<font color='#000000'>Friday night the g-f and I went to a performance of Hayden, Levin and Tchaikovski by the Albany (New York) Symphony Orchestra.  The ASO was playing in a venue that is renowned for its excellent acoustics, the Troy Music Hall.  Partly by luck, we ended up in fifth row center.
Since live music is the &quot;holy grail&quot; we all aspire to, as soon as we got home, we turned on the sound system for a comparison.  If I had a recording of the live performance I just heard I would have played it, but since I didn't, I put on one of my favorites, a Telarc SACD called &quot;Rossini Overtures.&quot;  My initial impression was that my system playing this software compared very well with the live performance.  The soundstage was not as wide as in the live concert, but my room is not 100' wide either.  Nor was the soundstage as deep, but at the venue, I had the benefit of actually seeing the depth of the soundstage, which no doubt assisted my ears.  The bass was more extended at home, and the midrange and treble seemed very lifelike, if more forward and in-your-face.  If anything, transient speed and dynamics seemed better at home!
However, after a few minutes of listening, I realized that I had sat through 2 1/2 hours of live performance without listener fatique, something I cannot do at home.  And why does my system push the midrange forward and why do I have the illusion of greater transient speed and dynamics.  Is it because the treble reaches my ears before the midrange and the midrange before the bass?  Is it because my speakers are not time-aligned?  I also realized that when I listen at home, I am actually listening at levels louder than at the live performance, so I turned the volume down a bit.
So, maybe it's worth the time and expense to go to a live concert once in a while, to remind ourselves what it is we are striving for.</font>

 

[7_V]

<font color='#000000'>I agree absolutely that this sort of &quot;listening test&quot; is the way to go.

It's also interesting to sit at various different places in the hall (nearer and further from the orchestra) and in different halls.

We're trying to get closer to the truth with our hi-fi systems but it's not always too clear what the truth is.</font>

 

[Rob Babcock]

<font color='#8D38C9'>The hyper-exaggerated-type of imaging where you can point to the precise spot a sound is coming from is another amusing fixation with audiophools- you can almost never hear localization like that with real music. &nbsp;No matter how good the system, I've never heard reproduction that would fool me into thinking I was hearing live, unamplified music.

Rock music, however, often sounds much better at home, IMO. &nbsp;Maybe that's not realistism, per se, but I've been to many venues for rock shows with absolutely horrendous acoustics. &nbsp;And they're often so loud all you can hear is the sizzle (but I always wear earplugs to rock shows, fortunately).</font>

 

[Rip Van Woofer]

<font color='#000000'>Amen. Unamplified live music performance is THE &quot;reference system&quot;. Not to mention a good reason to get dressed up, get out of the freakin' house and be with other people!

You mentioned that the bass seemed more &quot;extended&quot; at home and that &quot;transient speed and dynamics&quot; were better on your system too, but that your ears were less fatigued at the concert. Hmmm...

I might suggest that the &quot;extended bass&quot; and &quot;better transient speed and dynamics&quot; etc. are actually, at base, distortion -- the kind that seduces many audiophiles with a glossy, &quot;technicolor&quot; rendering of the performance. Is the bass really extended (meaning, I presume, goes deeper) or is it merely falsely emphasised or boomy? Are you hearing faster transients, or just exaggerated midrange or treble that &quot;snap&quot; and give the illusion? BTW, I'm very skeptical of speaker time alignment having audible effects.

As for dynamics (the difference between loud and soft), I submit that nothing has more dynamic range than a live concert. But the proof isn't in the loud passages -- it's in the soft! I think we 'philes crank up the volume (with the resultant aural fatigue) on our systems because those whisper soft passages get lost in the inevitable dynamic compression that occurs 'twixt the recording mic and our speakers.</font>

 

[av_phile]

<font color='#000000'>Do you have an SPL meter?  Do you conduct a reading at a hall concert where you are seated, compared with a reading from your sweet spot at home?

I've read on the net that at the podium a conductor receives as much as 140 db at full orchestral might. (Threshold of listeing pain in 160db, right?  Jet engine up close is 180 db.)  On the first few seat rows, it could be less.  Farther back, it could be much less, approximating home listening.

Regarding dynamics, is your listening room as quiet as the concert hall?  Live music has the most dynamics, often above 120 db between the loudest and the softest (though that is eaasily ruined by a controlled but still audible cough nearby).  With CD music at home, the dynamics is only 90-94 db at best.  And if the aircon or fan is operating, you'd be strained to hear the softest passage.  SACD and DVD-A can duplicate live dynamics, but your amp and speakers must be up to the job of delivering transient peaks exceeding twice their RMS power rating.  

Regarding &quot;extended bass&quot; I am inclined to think we can have more bass at home since the controls on the subwoofer or amp allows us to increase the SPLs of LF relative to the other frequencies and far exceeding what a real live classical performance has. &nbsp;Whether that is &quot;extended&quot; or just &quot;elevated&quot; bass SPLs, I think the latter is more apt. &nbsp;

I've always wanted my home music to be as loud as i recall being at the back of a symphony rehearsal.  That was more than 25 years ago when that experience gave me goose bumps all over.  So far, i have not been fortunate enough to repeat that sensation at home.  I don't think home systems can really equal a live classical or jazz performance. (forget about pop/rock concerts, all you hear there are shouts, jeers, distorted electric guitars and bombastic artifical bass.)

I agree that listening to live classical or jazz music will never give one listening fatigue (unless the music and the musicians are amateurishly lousy to begin with).  So now, while I hold live music to be the standard, I found out that a sound system that won't give listening fatigue is the best I can achieve.  And listening for 5-8 hours straight on weekends  on my humble system have yet to drive me crazy.</font>