[Scott[_6_]]

On Friday, February 7, 2014 9:38:01 AM UTC-8, wrote=
:
On Wednesday, February 5, 2014 10:40:01 AM UTC-7, news wrote:
=20
The question of is there a correct gain for playback has come up before=
, but=20
=20
I don't think it has been answered conclusively. I bring it up again be=
cause=20
=20
of an interesting experience today.
=20
=20
=20
I was playing back one of my own recordings of our local concert band.=
=20
=20
...
=20
It sounded OK but uninspiring. I'm saying to myself,=20
=20
=20
=20
But I knew that I wasn't playing it at live levels, because I didn't ex=
pect=20
=20
that much from the recorder's mikes, so I grabbed the remote and booste=
d it=20
=20
up a little - then a little more... easy now, just a teense more, and=
=20
=20
suddenly something "clicked" in, and the sound became very real and ver=
y=20
=20
fabulous, to the point where I had to go back through all that I just h=
eard=20
=20
and hear it again, hear it right.
=20
=20
=20
It was just enthralling - everything about the presentation just seemed=
more=20
=20
right. The imaging improved, the balance among instruments, the frequen=
cy=20
=20
response - this was now believable, I could "see" my band again.
=20
=20
=20
So what gives here? I have heard that just the right volume "fills" the=
room=20
=20
just right.=20
=20
=20
=20
I will simply repeat the story an experiment I did some years ago,
=20
one that I have posted here time and again.
=20
=20
=20
I had done a recording of a local moderate sized classical
=20
orchestral performance. In addition to the recording equipment,
=20
I also had precision sound level metering equipment and was
=20
able to make take some good samples of sound levels at
=20
several places during the performance.
=20
=20
=20
At the gathering after the concert, we had available a good=20
=20
playback system in a room apart from where the party was, so=20
=20
I set up the equipment and was playing it back for people.
=20
=20
=20
I asked people, individually and in small groups, to adjust the
=20
volume on the playback until it matched their memory of how loud
=20
it was in the performance venue. Every single person, except one,
=20
adjusted the volume so the playback SPLs were measurably louder=20
=20
than the original performance, some by a substantial amount. And,
=20
now that you mention it, some had a similar "aha" moment where it
=20
could be said that it "clicked" in for them as well. And, my memory
=20
at this point may be fuzzy on this detail because I didn't note it
=20
explicitly at the time, those most cock-sure of the level were the
=20
farthest off, in general.
=20
=20
=20
Not a single person adjusted the volume control so it was lower than
=20
the original playback level.
=20
=20
=20
And the one person who consistently nailed it dead-nuts on was the=20
=20
conductor.
=20
=20
=20
Is it possible that having been there, it "clicked" in=20
=20
because of my memory of the live sound?=20
=20
=20
=20
It has been said, and the research is there to back it
=20
up, that acoustical memory is notoriously unreliable.
=20
=20
=20
I will further suggest that there is NO purely acoustical
=20
memory in situations like the one your are relating. The
=20
entire experience contributes to the memory, the sight,
=20
the surroundings, the woman sitting next to you who's=20
=20
about to ralph her liquid lunch in your lap during a=20
=20
performance of the Back St. Matthew Passion (as happened=20
=20
to me one time), all mix together as the "memory". And each
=20
element colors the other.
=20
=20
=20
If you are going to tell me that you got the actual
=20
acoustic levels matched to within a fair-the-well by
=20
ears and memory, I'm going to tell you that the probability
=20
is very high that, on an objective basis, you're wrong.
=20
=20
=20
If what you're saying is that by adjusting the playback
=20
volume, you found a point where you achieved the same visceral
=20
feelings you experienced during the live performance then
=20
I say, good for you, and have no counter to your claim.
=20
=20
=20
Just don't get yourself upset by bringing out and properly
=20
deploying an SPL meter.
=20
=20
=20
Dick Pierce

Is this a function of failed memory or perhaps some other psychoacoustic ph=
enomenon that involves other reliable differences between the live experien=
ce and the playback? I would think that if it were purely a memory issue th=
en the effect would be somewhat evenly distributed between memories that we=
re above and below the actual levels of the live performance. I think that =
for such a consistent deviation in one direction that this would suggest so=
mething other than audio memory is in play. It seems unlikely that everyone=
would have the same flavor of memory failure. I would also be curious as t=
o what differences in sound levels were present in the live performance fro=
m the various seats in the venue and how that correlated to the perceptions=
of the playback. The differences in sound vary pretty widely depending on =
where one is seated. And not just in levels.