[Steven Sullivan]

wrote:
On May 4, 7:59?am, "Arny Krueger" wrote:
wrote in message




If it is real it follows that it sounds real.

That would be a truism. Not a lot of help in our quest for truth.

It was meant to help Steve who seems to be asserting that even with
live music there are different degrees of "realism" depending on the
amount of reverb. So in this case it is a truism that may be of some
help in correcting that false notion.

You're misstating what I wrote. I referred to 'realism' (in quotes)
via two loudspeakers at home as requiring some reflections --
certainly if there is any sense of 'live' recorded space to reproduce.
But even if you like 'dry' playback of close-miked or direct-to-board
studio recordings -- recordings that do not attempt to capture the way
instruments are typically heard 'live' -- you almost certainly would
not like it over loudspeakers in an anaechoic chamber.

Then I talked about how *good sound* in a *live* venue does not
necessarily mean *maximizing' the direct to reflected sound (the
ultimate 'maximization' would mean eliminating all reflections --
making it an anaechoic chamber). I didn't say there were 'different
degrees of realism' in live music. There is a lot of work on the role
of reflected sound and its relationship to 'good sound' in convert
halls, studios, and more recently home listening rooms, and if you are
really interested in it you could spend a few weeks with Floyd Toole's
'Sound Reproduction', which attempts a summary.