[Robert Peirce]

In article ,
Scott wrote:

This is such a surprisingly weird assertion. Had you not told us numerous
times that you record live classical music I would suspect that you have
never been to any sort of live classical performances at all. what exactly
does "live music" sound like? Because in my experience it sounds like a lot
of different things depending on the instruments, the musicians, the venue
and the seat I am sitting in. You seem to be treating the sound of "live
music" as this monolithic unwavering point of reference. It aint that. No
way. I shudder to think someone with a subscription to the overpriced balcony
seats at Davies Hall or Copley Hall would suffer the dire audio consequences
of thinking that their listening experience to live music in such halls from
those seats sets a standard by which playback should be measured and even
worse sets a standard by which they should actually adjust their aesthetic
values. The horror, the horror


You are both right and wrong. I stopped going to one concert series
because the house decided the music needed to be electronically
amplified and the instruments sounded wrong. They sounded wrong no
matter where I was sitting.

It is quite possible that some instruments in some halls will sound
dreadful, but you will still be able to recognize them. Some recordings
are so manipulated that you can't recognize the instruments.

That being said, this is sometimes an improvement. There are some
things you can do in post-production that are impossible in real life.
If that helps, it helps, but you shouldn't think that is the sound of a
real instrument in a real space as some reviewers seem to think.