Analogue perfection vs. DEQX perfection (Off Topic)

by PeterSt. , Netherlands, Sunday, December 30, 2007, 12:50 (5961 days ago) @ GC

From http://forum.bd-design.nl/index.php?id=14938&page=0&category=0&order=last_a... :

PS: Now start thinking about what you would prefer :
1. An exact copy of the hall etc. where the recording took place (fake in
90 % of cases anyway)
2. Let your room act as the room where the recording took place.

Hint : When you don't choose 2, you get a headache.

GC,

I thing these are our options. Anything in between would be the worse, or the most fake.

To my experience option 2 can be achieved, and it goes by a kinf of automation. That is, I myself never experienced that the church ect. expanded beyond the walls of ny room, no matter the church *is* bigger (yep, even compared to mt room :satisfied.

On the other hand, where the recording captured the size (= hall) from the church, something must be wrong afterall. That is, if the hall indeed would extend to beyond the walls of the room. But is it ? will it ? can it ?
Somehow it is not working like that. Maybe this is because of this :

As I said elsewhere (and it's just my opinion), only "real flat" can be judged as wrong in an absolute sense; And, all which is not real flat caNot be easily judged for reality (unless you were there at the recording). Now :
It seems to me that any large hall is perceived as being in the middle of the sound. And mind you, I mean *not* being on the sweet spot. On that matter people might know that I explicitly stribe for listening not being (necessary) on the sweet spot (in fact I don't have one, unless a barstool is appointed for it :prankster.

When you take the assumption that indeed it is not necessary to be on the sweetspot to perceive all there is to perceive, it becomes a bit more easy to understand that there's only one thing really (and in fact explicitly) influencing this : the "hall". Or better : the projected size of the recording room.
From this theory comes that the smaller that recording room was, the more far away the sound(stage) is at listening at a relative far distance from the speakers.

At judging this phenomenon, I'm always at 10-12 meters from the speakers, those being 5.5 meters apart, the projected sweetspot being at some 6 meters.

Although my (3m heigh) room has quite an amount of hall itself, I am very sure that this is not what "we" perceive as the hall I'm talking about here. This is just in the data of the music.
Note : when you want to hear the hall of your room, go stand in between the speakers with your eyes in the same direction the speakers radiate.

The above can be proven by turning your system in a lousy playback system (or have a very bad recording) so that all (the stage) is completely flat. If the room would contribute so much to the perceived hall / size of the recording room, it would be impossible to have such a flat stage ever.

Lastly, and I said this quite a few times before, when you can pinpoint a sound somewhere in the 3d space of your room, you can walk around it and it keeps on its place. Well, I can, in my room with my playback means.

To summ it all up :
With unprocessed (and good) playback means, the size of the recording room caNot (will not) be bigger than the room you are listeing in;
The smaller the listening room, the less recording rooms you will be able to listen to for reality (you'll miss out on the larger rooms).
When you have really large rooms for playback (like a church), things will go the other way around : the small recording room will start echoing indeed.

Whether the last is really true I don't know; anyway I recall myself playing classical music via my playback system in a church. I don't recall anything else than natural perceivement of the enormeous hall an undecorated church would produce. The recording sure wasn't taken from a church, but from an acoustically well treated concert hall.

Peter

Tags:
0