The sound of Live Orchestral Music.

cnh

Last evening we went to the Ballet here in Beijing. Not a particular fan of that art form but the music was very good.

I spent a lot of my time trying to compare that live performance to just about any and all systems I've heard to this point. The question I was most concerned with was Bright vs. Warm sounding speaker sound reproduction.

As I sat there, I can 'honestly' say that I did NOT hear anything overly 'bright' or even on the 'bright' side during the entire performance. And it made me wonder more and more why 'anyone' would prefer a bright speaker.

It also occurred to me that MOST speakers are 'bright' to my ears, when compared with this 'live' music?

I don't really know where I'm going with this...but while I'm at it...the soundstage is not particularly exaggerated EITHER as many 'supposedly' high end speakers rave about. You can locate the instruments but that is NOT the most important aspect concerning the live sound.

The sound is also clean but it is not OVERLY detailed? Or perhaps my ears are not what they used to be.

I guess what I'm saying is that all of this just reinforced my long time preference for 'warm' speakers, amps, sources, etc.

cnh

concealer404

cnh wrote: »

Last evening we went to the Ballet here in Beijing. Not a particular fan of that art form but the music was very good.

I spent a lot of my time trying to compare that live performance to just about any and all systems I've heard to this point. The question I was most concerned was Bright vs. Warm sounding speakers.

As I sat there, I can 'honestly' say that I did NOT hear anything overly 'bright' or even on the 'bright' side during the entire performance. And it made me wonder more and more why 'anyone' would prefer a bright speaker.

It also occurred to me that MOST speakers are 'bright' to my ears, when compared with this 'live' music?

I don't really know where I'm going with this...but while I'm at it...the soundstage is not particularly exaggerated EITHER as many 'supposedly' high end speakers rave about. You can locate the instruments but that is NOT the most important aspect concerning the live sound.

The sound is also clean but it is not OVERLY detailed? Or perhaps my ears are not what they used to be.

I guess what I'm saying is that all of this just reinforced my long time preference for 'warm' speakers, amps, sources, etc.

cnh

You think room treatments make a difference in your small living room? You should get your ears on some different concert halls...

MOST acoustic instruments are not "bright" as we normally conceive the term to be. The most varying in that spectrum would be the higher brass instruments.

I've listened/performed in over 20 concert halls, and they all sounded wildly different. Some were really "live" and bright, some were dead and sterile, some were live and warm at the same time. I imagine you probably got the live and warm effect, which would be my preference as well.

Also explains my stereo setup. It's insanely warm, and i wouldn't have it any other way.

As for the soundstage... that same aspect is also why i don't personally like gear that makes the soundstage so clear that it's almost "etched." You can't point out within 2" where the oboe player is with your eyes closed at a live performance, so you shouldn't be able to when listening on your stereo, either. I like a smoother transition from voice to voice, because as you say, it sounds closer to live, "blends" better.

Ern Dog

I also tend to like a little warmth. There is a balance here because gear that produces too much warmth is not accurate either. I try to shoot for the warm side of nuetral.

Pycroft

The sound of a live orchestra is often times very warm. When they are playing on instruments that cost more than my car, it is a beautifully warm sound. Consider, however, that acoustics in a live hall have a lot to do it. I performed Verdi's Requiem once in Eastern Europe, and the way we were positioned was interesting. I was actually sitting right behind the timpanist (Which was very exciting). This had been the third time I'd perfomed the piece, and perhaps the 20th time I'd performed with a professional orchestra. The sound was totally different than I had ever heard. It was actually quite bright...especially the horns. Even the violins, which tend to be the brightest string in the orchestra to my ears were quite bright compared to, the Philadelphia Orchestra string sound (As an example). It may also surprise you, but the conductor has a lot to do with the timbre of an orchestra. I have heard the NY Philharmonic under the baton of Kurt Masur...quite a bright sound. Under the current director, Loren Maazel, totally different.

James

cnh

That's interesting...I have heard a few different halls but the listening has been too far apart to compare them. I would imagine that designs and treatments can affect the sound. But I should also add that, though I am no musician in a professional sense, I've fiddled around with both a good clarinet and a high quality Classic Guitar in my time and again I find them--in most rooms in a house...to be warmer in general?

Also, I would imagine that what a performer hears in the pit may be different from what we in the audience hear when all the instruments blend together.

I don't quite understand exactly how a conductor could 'brighten' the sound of an orchestra much though.

cnh

Pycroft

Cnh -

Tough, good question. A conductor, in a meaningful way, has an effect on the overall sound of the ensemble. I first understood this when working with my first real good pianist. She and her teacher were in a coaching with me while singing. He told her to play the piano and make it sound like a violin, like a tuba, all different instruments. It's amazing to think that something as subtle as how they stroke the keys can have such a huge effect on the instrument. The same piano can sound bright, deep, dark, etc. Now, the orchestra is the conductor's instrument, and he or she has a direct impact on how they sound. The subtle nuances of a movement can change the sound. Tempo has something to do with it, but it all first begins with the conductor's analysis. There is no 1+1=2 answer, but when you work in the art form, it becomes more evident. That's why this hobby has been so tough for me because I'm constantly looking for an ideal sound in my head that I'm having trouble finding.

James

BlueFox

Nice thread. There is actually something to learn here.

Although I almost exclusively listen to classical now, I have only been to one concert, and that was in college. I have always wondered what the conductor did. Watching concerts on TV, it seems as if the musicians are in one world, and the conductor is just flailing away with nobody watching.

cnh

Pycroft wrote: »

Cnh -

Tough, good question. A conductor, in a meaningful way, has an effect on the overall sound of the ensemble. I first understood this when working with my first real good pianist. She and her teacher were in a coaching with me while singing. He told her to play the piano and make it sound like a violin, like a tuba, all different instruments. It's amazing to think that something as subtle as how they stroke the keys can have such a huge effect on the instrument. The same piano can sound bright, deep, dark, etc. Now, the orchestra is the conductor's instrument, and he or she has a direct impact on how they sound. The subtle nuances of a movement can change the sound. Tempo has something to do with it, but it all first begins with the conductor's analysis. There is no 1+1=2 answer, but when you work in the art form, it becomes more evident. That's why this hobby has been so tough for me because I'm constantly looking for an ideal sound in my head that I'm having trouble finding.

James

That's very interesting James. It reminds me of an interview I once saw with the great Andres Segovia where he retorted, 'the guitar is like a small orchestra it can sound like many instruments'. He then went on to demonstrate--strings, bass, brass, bells and so on...using different techniques and parts of the instrument. It was quite eye-opening. And one of the reasons that his transcriptions for the guitar were amazing. Not only was he a great guitarist he was also a great interpreter of the instrument--in some ways he 'conducted' the guitar in the way you describe the condutor and his orchestra above. It makes sense to me.

cnh

ben62670

Thanks for a useful thread. One of my favorite explanations is a live sax has a sharp bite to it when you are near one. Some feel this is overly bright when reproduced on a stereo setup. Since tubes my setup has warmed, but I still have the sharpness the "hit" of a sax can deliver.
Again thanks
Ben

Pycroft

My pleasure, offering up my view. When someone asks me what I want to be when I grow up, I always said, "Leonard Bernstein". I'm a basically insignificant conductor in the musical world, but consider myself quite good at it. It's my love

Pycroft

I have a lot of DVD's of von Karajan towards the end of his life conducting the greats. I particularly like the Verdi requiem (Which I have him conducting when he was like 35 as well). I'm not a huge fan of von Karajan...I think he was very controlling, and in a way, it was about him. Many would say Bernstein was like that too, until you see him actually working with a group and understand it really is about the music.

One of my teachers was a student of Bernstein, and I love to hear him talk about it.