Drifting Away from Home Theatre

[Mallette]

>I never minded applause coming from the front - who listens for the applause anyway? I know when I am impressed without it.

Granted, though still weird and destructive of the illusion to my ears, and I, for one DO listen to the applause as less than successful recordings inevitably have applause that sounds like frying bacon or rain rather than very difficult to capture and reproduce hand clapping.

However, if you were interested in pipe organs the sound of a bombarde division coming from the front would be downright maddening. Same for hall acoustics even when the musicians are all in the front. Since most of that is phase canceled and unrecovered in 2 channel playback it is less of an issue, but I have heard many records I've made as well as commercial recordings in halls I know where the 2 channel only version simply failed to capture the magic due to reflections that should be coming from behind being reproduced in the front.

That reminds me. There is a 2 channel recording of French Organ Music made in NYC. During a quite session there is the sound of a diesel truck passing outside. Of course, this sounds like it's coming from the organ chamber in 2 channel only...but when played through Hafler passive or Pro Logic II it is suddenly not only coming from the rear, but obviously from outside. Much better. Never cared for truck stops (sorry about that!).

OK, picky, picky. Yes, I am or I would probably be happy with Bose rather than Klipsch. It is about the MUSIC to me, and I want it all. Not only do I want it all but I want it coming from where it originated.

Regards,

Dave

[maxg]

Last night I was alone at home and listened to 10cc Live and let live - a live recording from the Hammersmith Palace.

Yup - all the applause was upfront and with the music - but spreading out a fair bit from the main speakers. Volume was pretty intense by my standards - dont know how much - but the volume control was at 3 o'clock. Anyway - it got me up and playing an air guitar - so I guess it worked for me.

The layout of the band and the sonics certainly gave me the impression of being there - the applause diminished it a touch - but as that ain't really part of the music I hardly felt like I was being let down.

Now if I thought that I could get the same quality for the music reproduction as I enjoyed there AND properly placement of sound in 3d space then that is something I would look at. I have just never found that combo....

[Mallette]

Max:

Knowing your standards and, to some degree, your listening habits I understand your dilemma. I find even highly regarded labels selling surround recordings like AIX poorly mixed (and "mixed" is part of the problem since it cannot improve on correct mikeing in the first place). My Six Cardinal Rules for Sound Recording from a few years back offers a method to provide correct imaging for acoustic instruments and spaces. It is so simple that I cannot understand why releases are so unsatisfying.

I guess we are just picky...

I hope to have the time and money to resume my experiments in the next year or to. Perhaps I'll be able to provide you with something to critique.

Dave

[maxg]

Dave,

We are largely on the same page I am sure. I didn't set out to be picky - its just that I managed to achieve a given quality of sound in a certain way and am left scratching my head as to how to achieve this another way.

I may beat the vinyl drum ad nauseam - but not through a previously held religious conviction. I would ADORE it if I could package up all these recordings into an easy to use digital form that allowed me to save my vinyl records for posterity - if not for best.

When things are less tight financially I will be having another run at digital along the lines of a previous thread - ripping my vinyl at a higher than 44.1/16 level and then playing them back from some kind of computerized system. If it works I will be bragging all about it on this forum.

Hope reigns eternal.

[Mallette]

Max:

I can guarantee that, unless you are biased, you will find transfers to a first class ADAC at 24/176.4 will sound as good as whatever you played them with, and would be willing to bet you'd be satisfied with 24/88.2. I prefer those rates as they offer easy downsampling with minimum impact to Redbook with (to my ears) undetectable loss of quality from the multiples of 48 the higher rates are based on.

Good luck in your quest. I'll be most interested to hear what finally satisfies your higly developed senses.

Regards,
Dave

[ClaudeJ1]

am fairly sure my sub plays back as it is supposed to - its just that I dont need that much bass - whatever the originating sound engineers thought.

The issue is a 10 db standard Sub boost in the Dolby Mastering Specification. It is applied and misapplied on DVD music recordings, which make PCM to AVreceiver to 2.1 the choice for me. Also, many of the "boom boom" complaints stem from the widespread use of active subwoofers, which were amusically designed to just go boom, that's their only job.

I control my passive 6 subs (4 of them Big Horns) with incremental amplifier turn-on or off, which tempers the freqency response, room modes, etc. and I'm happy using the 0.1 channel below 120 hz. since the high pass portion of the Xover in the receiver (Mode 1 Sub) tames the nasty 110 Hz peak in the LaScala in my room. The LaScala in the middle and the two unseen rears are only used for 5.1 movies (rarely). Subs 5 and 6 are large VMPS underneath the rear channel horns. They go down to the 20's and are only used for movies, not music. They only provide additonal "feel in the butt" on music and, since they are Direct Radiator/Bass reflex/Drone Cone design, they are tuned to be very subtle so as to not muddy up the terrific detail from bass horns.

The MWM's operate only below 120 Hz, ahead of a "reflection V dip" in their response curve. The response of this setup blows away my Khorns, even when I had my JBL's on top with the K77's disconnected. room loading makes the MWM's super efficient and I only measure about 4 volt peaks from the amplifiers, so they never draw more than about 5 W per woofer. The LaScalas short horn with the K33 woofer (same as the Khorns) provide superior mid-bass with better handoff to the K-400, running on just the original AA choke on the LaScala Bass, a good 14 uf poly capacitor on the K55 driver, and a John Warren Xover on the JBL's. Yes, I know it's the same mid horn as on the Khorns, but with the LS, I can direct them at different angles rather than being stuck at 45 degrees with a Khorn. The MWM's have both K43 and K33 woofers, with difffent gains. I have ridiculously low distortion, EXTREME bass DEFINITION, and TRANSIENT response with the MWM's. Probably because they are 6-foot horns and they are aimed right at you, like the LaScalas. THE LS's are upside down in a "quasi-D'Appolito" configuration because the K-400's would be too high up (6 feet in the air) with normal positon. This seemingly goofy collection of odds and ends just plain sounds terrific, even to audio engineers that have heard it. Most of my listening is between 80-90 db. on the Radio Shack meter. I want to hear into my 90's if I live that long.

[jt1stcav]

Claude, what a fascinating setup. So what if your components are considered odds and ends if the entire assemblage meshes together into one cohesive unit of sound! And adding subwoofers to music-only stereo playback is IMHO a good thing (whether active or passive) as long as it's done in moderation...but that's me. For my pipe organ recordings I require to hear the full spectrum of frequencies an organ can produce, and if my bookshelf monitors can't recreate the lowest frequencies in order to achieve a most realistic representation of these instruments, then adding a subwoofer (or two) and carefully placing and adjusting them so that they blend in (and not stand out) with the music is the goal I am trying to reach. My Dayton subs may very well be cheap, but due to them being gracefully tuned in with my system, they are anything but "boom boom"!

As for Dave's comment on multichannel recordings, I can relate to what he's saying. Back in the '70s I helped my dad tune an Austin pipe organ in a large church in Hartford, CT that had a high pressure, horizontally displayed Trompette en Chamade rank that was set up high in the rear of the sancuary, as opposed to the remainder of the instrument that was up front in the chancel. After we finished tuning, it was rather late and we pretty much had the church all to ourselves...my dad sometimes brought along his Pioneer RT-707 reel-to-reel and a pair of Shure mics and we'd record a few bursts of what little music we both could actually play (just for our own amusement...we are certainly NOT organists). I recorded the first half of my dad fumbling through the toccata of Bach's great Toccata and Fugue in D Minor...the last major chord he pulled out all the stops and used full organ, and also fired up the monster chamade pipes at the rear wall for a spectacular effect!

But I noticed the next day when we listened to our tape played back thru my dad's stereo system (when his Cornwalls were brand-spankin' new), the effect of the added Trompette en Chamade just wasn't as great in the recording as it was when the organ was being played live in that grand space! It wasn't like the recording levels were off or anything like that, for the levels were set correctly within the tape's parameters...it just didn't have that air and openess about it like when we heard it being played live way back at the rear gallery wall. I guess the recording lacked the ambience we both heard when the trompette rank was used that night, and it sounded like the chamade pipes were being projected from the chancel area. Obviously, our amateurish mic placement didn't help any, but for what it was, the tape recording did sound pretty good...it just lacked what I guess a good multichannel recording today can achieve, a sense of space relative to the environment in which the recording is made. Like listening to a CD or stereo LP of the huge NYC-based Riverside Church Aeolian-Skinner organ when its own gallery-mounted chamade stop is used (which is an entire city block away from the rest of the organ). No stereo recording can faithfully reproduce its majestic sounds from the rear of the church and will only be convincing when recorded in multichannel where a more life-like representation can be realized.

Thank goodness not all my organ recordings are like this!

[ClaudeJ1]

Good comment, JT. I agree that active subs can sound musical, but most people use subs like sledgehammers, if you know what I mean.

It's like the old saying, good technology (multichannel and subs) is never as bad as poor practitioners (stupid mixing and sledgehammer users), nor ever as good as the demo that caused you to buy it in the fiest place.

Peace, Love, Beatles

[Mallette]

It seems to go without saying that if accuracy is ones goal, if you can detect a sub it is too loud.

Dave

[oldbuckster]

if you can detect a sub it is too loud.

Has always been my comment on SUBs ......... thought I was alone, or worse, I was wrong !!!!!!!!!!!

[ClaudeJ1]

if you can detect a sub it is too loud.

Has always been my comment on SUBs ......... thought I was alone, or worse, I was wrong !!!!!!!!!!!

We all thought we were alone, but, as it turns out, there are more of us than we thought. Right is right.

[maxg]

if you can detect a sub it is too loud.

Has always been my comment on SUBs ......... thought I was alone, or worse, I was wrong !!!!!!!!!!!

We all thought we were alone, but, as it turns out, there are more of us than we thought. Right is right.

And a not particuarly valuable - me too.

No-one ever seems to remember I have a sub - till I switch it off.

[Mallette]

I have a standard way to set my sub. I have an organ recording I made that has a sustained 32hz pedal note. Since I know exactly what this is supposed to sound and feel like, I simply adjust the sub until it sounds that way. Then, it's perfect for any well-made recording. Beats instruments any day...

[jt1stcav]

Spot on, Dave![Y]

Once having a residence pipe organ at one's disposal also helped! Knowing how the instrument sounded live in the house, along with recordings of organs I'm familiar with, is an excellent source for adjusting my subs as well. You only hear 'em when they're needed...no sledgehammer usage here!

[Cut-Throat]

It seems to go without saying that if accuracy is ones goal, if you can detect a sub it is too loud.

Dave

I always say "Subwoofers should be seen and not heard" !

[oldtimer]

Yes, coffee tables should be seen and not heard.

[oldtimer]

Haha. Good one mark. I have never owned a sub so yes I don't remember! And I don't want to hear my coffee table now either. [H]