Reply
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
  #81   Report Post  
Howard Ferstler
 
Posts: n/a
Default

Sander deWaal wrote:

Howard Ferstler said:


There is no way I would trust a rock-music recording to give
me meaningful data on speaker soundstaging, imaging, focus,
depth, or even spectral balance.


While I agree with you here, it's an established fact that there are
people out there who use their audio system to listen to rock music
exclusively.


For sure. And those people really do not need for their
audio systems to be genuinely high fidelity items, or even
high-quality items. I suppose this works out quite well for
some of the lunatics who post here and laud the performance
of sub-par hardware. Admittedly, many of them paid way too
much for that gear.

A suitable system for those listeners could well deviate from a system
that's optimalized for classical music.


Yep. While the latter should be optimized for accurate
performance, or, if DSP ambiance emendations are applied,
optimized to allow for the most realistic concert hall
simulation, the former need only deliver head-banging sound.

I do not particularly think that having a familiarity with
popular music is all that useful - for reviewing audio gear
or much of anything else.


What would you recommend to someone asking for a system that will be
used for rock music only?


Stick with automotive systems.

Things like imaging, focusing and spectral balance could be utterly
meaningless to such a person.......


I agree completely. Yes, there are some "pop" recordings
that need high-fidelity treatment, and of course a lot of
acoustic jazz also benefits from playback on really fine
systems. However, rock freaks need not shop for truly exotic
gear, and those who listen to such music and laud the
performance of exotic wires, super-duper CD players,
overpriced amps, and the like are kidding themselves.

Howard Ferstler
  #82   Report Post  
Howard Ferstler
 
Posts: n/a
Default

MINe 109 wrote:

In article ,
Howard Ferstler wrote:

OK, Dave, you tell me just how many rock recordings are
engineered to sound like a live-music performance?


The Who Live at Leeds
Live at Kelvin Hall The Kinks
Cowboy Junkies Trinity Sessions
Simon and Garfunkel Concert in Central Park

There's four...


Out of thousands. Sorry, but the exceptions in this case do
not bend the rule.

Howard Ferstler
  #83   Report Post  
Howard Ferstler
 
Posts: n/a
Default

dave weil wrote:

On Sun, 06 Mar 2005 13:14:26 GMT, MINe 109
wrote:

In article ,
Howard Ferstler wrote:

OK, Dave, you tell me just how many rock recordings are
engineered to sound like a live-music performance?


The Who Live at Leeds
Live at Kelvin Hall The Kinks
Cowboy Junkies Trinity Sessions
Simon and Garfunkel Concert in Central Park

There's four...

Stephen


Well, in the context of the question, I'd say only the third one is
relevant.

I was referring to the normal presentation of many rock albums; a
presentation that mimics a theoretical on-stage set-up. You know,
drums in the back, guitars either right, left or center, bass center
left/right, lead vocal center or close to center, and background
vocals either left or right or paired with the lead vocal in the
center.

I'd argue that almost every Dire Straits album has this sort of
presentation. If you close your eyes, you could imagine them on stage.
I daresay that The Eagles have the same sort of presentation as well.


Understand that these are two groups that I have
acknowledged have produced some fine-sounding recordings.
Most of the rest, however, make no attempt to mimic a
live-music situation. And as I noted, most of the rest
really do not attempt to sound like a live-music situation
even when performing live. And, no, I am not joking.

Howard has never been to a recent rock show, and may have NEVER been
to a rock show EVER,


They had a few on campus years ago. I thought the music, the
musicians, and the patrons were both infantile and loutish
at the same time.

so he's basically talking out of his ass when it
comes to how a system can mimic a live event.


Rock music when performed "live" usually involves a bank of
speakers up front, with the performers sending virtually all
of their output through those speakers. Because the speakers
are usually set up for volume instead of pure sound quality,
I would say that any rock recording that sounds like a
"live" performance when played back at home is delivering
junk sound.

Of course, he's only
been to 2 classical shows in the last decade, so his opinions on ANY
kind of live show are very suspect at best.


But I manage to still get my record reviews published, Dave,
both in magazines and in two books. What's more, those who
reviewed my two review books in several magazine articles
were impressed as hell with my ability to hit the nail on
the head when it came to evaluating sound quality.

Haw, haw, hawwww....

Howard Ferstler
  #84   Report Post  
MINe 109
 
Posts: n/a
Default

In article ,
Howard Ferstler wrote:

MINe 109 wrote:

In article ,
Howard Ferstler wrote:

OK, Dave, you tell me just how many rock recordings are
engineered to sound like a live-music performance?


The Who Live at Leeds
Live at Kelvin Hall The Kinks
Cowboy Junkies Trinity Sessions
Simon and Garfunkel Concert in Central Park

There's four...


Out of thousands. Sorry, but the exceptions in this case do
not bend the rule.


That's not a rule, that's a snobbish prejudice.

One could argue that a system needs to be accurate to reflect the
artist's intentions most faithfully.

Fortunately, according to you, pretty much all equipment is
automatically accurate.

Stephen
  #85   Report Post  
Howard Ferstler
 
Posts: n/a
Default

MINe 109 wrote:

While I'm sure he could find much to object to at a typical Austin club
show (excessive volume levels, clipping, PA horns, etc), another point
is that even rock has commonly recognized sound ideals such as the one
you described above. I read one description that claimed room size and
volume level at which the drums do not require amplification as an
ideal, which reminds me of another Terry Manning anecdote, this one
about Led Zeppelin: Bonham preferred the mics some distance from the
drum kit because he wanted to control his dynamics, not the engineer.


Most "live" rock performances have the sound emitting from a
huge bank of speakers on, behind, or in front of the stage.
Nearly all of the sound is electronically amplified and sent
out via those loud-is-better speakers.

Now, if some moron wants that kind of "live performance"
sound from his audio system at home, then, well, he is
getting exactly what he deserves when he spends big bucks on
overkill gear.

Howard Ferstler


  #86   Report Post  
dave weil
 
Posts: n/a
Default

On Mon, 07 Mar 2005 16:04:29 -0500, Howard Ferstler
wrote:

A suitable system for those listeners could well deviate from a system
that's optimalized for classical music.


Yep. While the latter should be optimized for accurate
performance, or, if DSP ambiance emendations are applied,
optimized to allow for the most realistic concert hall
simulation, the former need only deliver head-banging sound.


Yes, because everyone knows that James Taylor's live album requires
head-banging sound.
  #87   Report Post  
dave weil
 
Posts: n/a
Default

On Mon, 07 Mar 2005 16:06:11 -0500, Howard Ferstler
wrote:

MINe 109 wrote:

In article ,
Howard Ferstler wrote:

OK, Dave, you tell me just how many rock recordings are
engineered to sound like a live-music performance?


The Who Live at Leeds
Live at Kelvin Hall The Kinks
Cowboy Junkies Trinity Sessions
Simon and Garfunkel Concert in Central Park

There's four...


Out of thousands. Sorry, but the exceptions in this case do
not bend the rule.

Howard Ferstler


Try every studio Dire Straits album ever recorded.
  #88   Report Post  
dave weil
 
Posts: n/a
Default

On Mon, 07 Mar 2005 16:12:24 -0500, Howard Ferstler
wrote:

I'd argue that almost every Dire Straits album has this sort of
presentation. If you close your eyes, you could imagine them on stage.
I daresay that The Eagles have the same sort of presentation as well.


Understand that these are two groups that I have
acknowledged have produced some fine-sounding recordings.
Most of the rest, however, make no attempt to mimic a
live-music situation. And as I noted, most of the rest
really do not attempt to sound like a live-music situation
even when performing live. And, no, I am not joking.


You simply don't know what you're talking about, because you have no
experience with anything other than about .0000025% of all "rock
recordings".

It's sort of like your classical live concert going experience, which
is virtually nil. Heck, I've been to more classical concerts in the
past 6 months than you've gone to in the last decade.
  #89   Report Post  
dave weil
 
Posts: n/a
Default

On Mon, 07 Mar 2005 16:12:24 -0500, Howard Ferstler
wrote:

so he's basically talking out of his ass when it
comes to how a system can mimic a live event.


Rock music when performed "live" usually involves a bank of
speakers up front, with the performers sending virtually all
of their output through those speakers. Because the speakers
are usually set up for volume instead of pure sound quality,
I would say that any rock recording that sounds like a
"live" performance when played back at home is delivering
junk sound.


Yes, because those hi-fi systems are sending virtually all of their
output through speakers.

But of course, this occurs when you are listening to YOUR "bank of
speakers" when listening to Corelli. Unless of course, you have some
of the output being sent to your toaster.

So, I think we can dismiss your point out of hand.
  #90   Report Post  
dave weil
 
Posts: n/a
Default

On Mon, 07 Mar 2005 16:12:24 -0500, Howard Ferstler
wrote:

But I manage to still get my record reviews published, Dave,
both in magazines and in two books. What's more, those who
reviewed my two review books in several magazine articles
were impressed as hell with my ability to hit the nail on
the head when it came to evaluating sound quality.

Haw, haw, hawwww....

Howard Ferstler


Brayed like a true jackass...

Of course, the true transliteration should be "Hee haw, hee haw".

Get an editor, Howard.


  #91   Report Post  
Howard Ferstler
 
Posts: n/a
Default

MINe 109 wrote:

In article ,
Howard Ferstler wrote:

MINe 109 wrote:

In article ,
Howard Ferstler wrote:

OK, Dave, you tell me just how many rock recordings are
engineered to sound like a live-music performance?

The Who Live at Leeds
Live at Kelvin Hall The Kinks
Cowboy Junkies Trinity Sessions
Simon and Garfunkel Concert in Central Park

There's four...


Out of thousands. Sorry, but the exceptions in this case do
not bend the rule.


That's not a rule, that's a snobbish prejudice.


Why is it when someone has a rational approach to a subject
like music those who have a less rational approach typecast
him as "snobbish?"

One could argue that a system needs to be accurate to reflect the
artist's intentions most faithfully.


Yes. Which system does the best job of reproducing all of
that noise?

Fortunately, according to you, pretty much all equipment is
automatically accurate.

Stephen


Amps, wires, CD players, for sure, barring defects, of
course, or intentional design anomalies. If you think I
believe in automatic accuracy when it comes to speakers or
surround processors, or speaker/room interactions, you need
to scare up some of my magazine articles and reports, or
books, and get up to date.

Howard Ferstler
  #92   Report Post  
Howard Ferstler
 
Posts: n/a
Default

dave weil wrote:

On Mon, 07 Mar 2005 16:04:29 -0500, Howard Ferstler
wrote:

A suitable system for those listeners could well deviate from a system
that's optimalized for classical music.


Yep. While the latter should be optimized for accurate
performance, or, if DSP ambiance emendations are applied,
optimized to allow for the most realistic concert hall
simulation, the former need only deliver head-banging sound.


Yes, because everyone knows that James Taylor's live album requires
head-banging sound.


That is a terrific DVD video presentation, with mostly
demo-grade sound. (Would you believe that getting the full
program sound also requires the use of a superb subwoofer?)
I reviewed it in TSS some time ago, and said that it was an
example of how a center-channel feed should be properly
handled. All recording engineers who are paranoid about the
center channel when it comes to recording surround-sound
material need to audition that disc.

Incidentally, the version I have was done in Dolby Digital
(at 448 kbps), and the per-channel sound is on par with the
best I have heard from any CD, DVD-A, or SACD release.

Howard Ferstler
  #93   Report Post  
Howard Ferstler
 
Posts: n/a
Default

dave weil wrote:

On Mon, 07 Mar 2005 16:06:11 -0500, Howard Ferstler
wrote:

MINe 109 wrote:

In article ,
Howard Ferstler wrote:

OK, Dave, you tell me just how many rock recordings are
engineered to sound like a live-music performance?

The Who Live at Leeds
Live at Kelvin Hall The Kinks
Cowboy Junkies Trinity Sessions
Simon and Garfunkel Concert in Central Park

There's four...


Out of thousands. Sorry, but the exceptions in this case do
not bend the rule.

Howard Ferstler


Try every studio Dire Straits album ever recorded.


Still but a small fraction of the total. Yes, there are
exceptions, but most rock freaks commute with the rule and
not the exceptions.

Also, even the Dire Straits concerts are probably mostly
electronically amplified, and so we really do not have a way
to discover just what such "live" performances are supposed
to sound like. There is not way a home audio system can
accurately simulate live programs that are themselves
electronically amplified.

Howard Ferstler
  #94   Report Post  
dave weil
 
Posts: n/a
Default

On Mon, 07 Mar 2005 16:38:47 -0500, Howard Ferstler
wrote:

dave weil wrote:

On Mon, 07 Mar 2005 16:04:29 -0500, Howard Ferstler
wrote:

A suitable system for those listeners could well deviate from a system
that's optimalized for classical music.

Yep. While the latter should be optimized for accurate
performance, or, if DSP ambiance emendations are applied,
optimized to allow for the most realistic concert hall
simulation, the former need only deliver head-banging sound.


Yes, because everyone knows that James Taylor's live album requires
head-banging sound.


That is a terrific DVD video presentation, with mostly
demo-grade sound. (Would you believe that getting the full
program sound also requires the use of a superb subwoofer?)
I reviewed it in TSS some time ago, and said that it was an
example of how a center-channel feed should be properly
handled. All recording engineers who are paranoid about the
center channel when it comes to recording surround-sound
material need to audition that disc.


So that's classical music, right? No "electronic" enhancements to the
sound. No "banks of speakers" on the stage to blare out the sound,
right?

  #95   Report Post  
Howard Ferstler
 
Posts: n/a
Default

dave weil wrote:

On Mon, 07 Mar 2005 16:12:24 -0500, Howard Ferstler
wrote:

I'd argue that almost every Dire Straits album has this sort of
presentation. If you close your eyes, you could imagine them on stage.
I daresay that The Eagles have the same sort of presentation as well.


Understand that these are two groups that I have
acknowledged have produced some fine-sounding recordings.
Most of the rest, however, make no attempt to mimic a
live-music situation. And as I noted, most of the rest
really do not attempt to sound like a live-music situation
even when performing live. And, no, I am not joking.


You simply don't know what you're talking about, because you have no
experience with anything other than about .0000025% of all "rock
recordings".


And you are looking to justify your obsession with upscale
audio, even though upscale audio systems are simply not
needed to listen to most rock music. Mid-fi does the job
just fine.

It's sort of like your classical live concert going experience, which
is virtually nil. Heck, I've been to more classical concerts in the
past 6 months than you've gone to in the last decade.


Pick on the messenger, Dave. That is your style, and it has
been your style for quite some time. Rather than debate
issues, you pick on me and point out my supposed
inadequacies. However, whatever you may think, my publishers
liked what I do and continue to like what I do when it comes
to reviewing recordings. I will also point out that a number
of reviewers gave those record-review books very positive in
assorted magazine writeups.

Look, rock concerts are electronically amplified. There is
no way a home audio system can "accurately" reproduce music
that was not accurately reproduced at a live concert to
begin with. The stuff is electronic from stem to stern, and
just about all rock recordings are designed to be "ends in
themselves," rather than simulations of live performances.
But, as I said before, even those live performances are not
really live. They are electronically amplified, with all
sorts of concurrent distortions piling on.

And, Dave (trust me on this), there are musicians out there
who go to and participate in live music situations all the
time, and they have not a clue what an audio system is
supposed to do when they listen to recordings. If they fail,
how can you claim to have the golden-ear answer just because
you attend lots of live performances. You also have to know
something, Dave.

As for you, well, you have this belief in super wires and
super amps, and probably super CD players, and that tells me
that, your concert concert-hall goings notwithstanding, you
do not have any kind of solid grasp of what you are
listening to on your audio system. Period.

Howard Ferstler


  #96   Report Post  
dave weil
 
Posts: n/a
Default

On Mon, 07 Mar 2005 16:41:13 -0500, Howard Ferstler
wrote:

Out of thousands. Sorry, but the exceptions in this case do
not bend the rule.

Howard Ferstler


Try every studio Dire Straits album ever recorded.


Still but a small fraction of the total. Yes, there are
exceptions, but most rock freaks commute with the rule and
not the exceptions.


Sorry, but I'm not willing to list the multitude of rock albums
designed with a similar presentation. You wouldn't know about them
anyway.

I'd go as far as to say that the *majority* of rock recordings are
fairly conventional in their soundstage simulation.
  #97   Report Post  
Howard Ferstler
 
Posts: n/a
Default

dave weil wrote:

On Mon, 07 Mar 2005 16:12:24 -0500, Howard Ferstler
wrote:

so he's basically talking out of his ass when it
comes to how a system can mimic a live event.


Rock music when performed "live" usually involves a bank of
speakers up front, with the performers sending virtually all
of their output through those speakers. Because the speakers
are usually set up for volume instead of pure sound quality,
I would say that any rock recording that sounds like a
"live" performance when played back at home is delivering
junk sound.


Yes, because those hi-fi systems are sending virtually all of their
output through speakers.

But of course, this occurs when you are listening to YOUR "bank of
speakers" when listening to Corelli. Unless of course, you have some
of the output being sent to your toaster.

So, I think we can dismiss your point out of hand.


You can, but that does not make your correct. Quit thinking
that you are a spokesperson for the omnipresent "we."

For me, a rock concert is an end in itself, and so are rock
recordings. There is no way such recordings can be
configured to simulate a live-music experience, because the
live-music experience itself is loaded up with electronic
distortions right there in the hall or auditorium.

Howard Ferstler
  #98   Report Post  
Howard Ferstler
 
Posts: n/a
Default

dave weil wrote:

On Mon, 07 Mar 2005 16:12:24 -0500, Howard Ferstler
wrote:

But I manage to still get my record reviews published, Dave,
both in magazines and in two books. What's more, those who
reviewed my two review books in several magazine articles
were impressed as hell with my ability to hit the nail on
the head when it came to evaluating sound quality.

Haw, haw, hawwww....

Howard Ferstler


Brayed like a true jackass...

Of course, the true transliteration should be "Hee haw, hee haw".

Get an editor, Howard.


I have several, Dave. You need such individuals when you
actually publish books and magazine articles.

Howard Ferstler
  #99   Report Post  
Howard Ferstler
 
Posts: n/a
Default

dave weil wrote:

On Mon, 07 Mar 2005 16:38:47 -0500, Howard Ferstler
wrote:

dave weil wrote:

On Mon, 07 Mar 2005 16:04:29 -0500, Howard Ferstler
wrote:

A suitable system for those listeners could well deviate from a system
that's optimalized for classical music.

Yep. While the latter should be optimized for accurate
performance, or, if DSP ambiance emendations are applied,
optimized to allow for the most realistic concert hall
simulation, the former need only deliver head-banging sound.


Yes, because everyone knows that James Taylor's live album requires
head-banging sound.


That is a terrific DVD video presentation, with mostly
demo-grade sound. (Would you believe that getting the full
program sound also requires the use of a superb subwoofer?)
I reviewed it in TSS some time ago, and said that it was an
example of how a center-channel feed should be properly
handled. All recording engineers who are paranoid about the
center channel when it comes to recording surround-sound
material need to audition that disc.


So that's classical music, right? No "electronic" enhancements to the
sound. No "banks of speakers" on the stage to blare out the sound,
right?


As I have noted, there are exceptions to every rule.
However, those exceptions do not dictate the rules.

Howard Ferstler
  #100   Report Post  
Howard Ferstler
 
Posts: n/a
Default

dave weil wrote:

On Mon, 07 Mar 2005 16:41:13 -0500, Howard Ferstler
wrote:

Out of thousands. Sorry, but the exceptions in this case do
not bend the rule.

Howard Ferstler

Try every studio Dire Straits album ever recorded.


Still but a small fraction of the total. Yes, there are
exceptions, but most rock freaks commute with the rule and
not the exceptions.


Sorry, but I'm not willing to list the multitude of rock albums
designed with a similar presentation. You wouldn't know about them
anyway.


You hit the mark with the above comment.

I'd go as far as to say that the *majority* of rock recordings are
fairly conventional in their soundstage simulation.


Funny, every time I drop in (every few days, but sometimes
not for several days) I will post some fast responses to
some of the idiotic responses that were posted in response
to my earlier responses (!!!) and virtually every time you
come up with responses of your own that are posted almost
immediately. My take on this is that you are glued to your
keyboard from the moment you get home to the final minutes
before you retire for the evening.

Get a life, Dave.

Howard Ferstler


  #101   Report Post  
dave weil
 
Posts: n/a
Default

On Mon, 07 Mar 2005 16:50:53 -0500, Howard Ferstler
wrote:


As for you, well, you have this belief in super wires and
super amps, and probably super CD players, and that tells me
that, your concert concert-hall goings notwithstanding, you
do not have any kind of solid grasp of what you are
listening to on your audio system. Period.


Yes, that's why I have a Denon receiver hooked up to Allison speakers,
with a Sony 200 disc CD changer I suppose.
  #102   Report Post  
dave weil
 
Posts: n/a
Default

On Mon, 07 Mar 2005 16:52:46 -0500, Howard Ferstler
wrote:

For me, a rock concert is an end in itself, and so are rock
recordings. There is no way such recordings can be
configured to simulate a live-music experience, because the
live-music experience itself is loaded up with electronic
distortions right there in the hall or auditorium.


You are apparently laboring under the impression that recording
engineers put microphones in front of the bank of PA speakers to
record the concert.

You're wrong, you know. You MIGHT get some ancillary microphones in
the soundfield to help with the ambience that you crave for such
things as "surround sound", but the majority of the recording never
leaves the soundboard, except to be transferred to the recording
medium.

It's still important to be able to accurately record the sound of
"distortions", since guitars and amps have distinctive sound
characteristics that are important to the sound of the group. A
Marshall stack sounds different than a Vox AC-30 for instance.
  #103   Report Post  
dave weil
 
Posts: n/a
Default

On Mon, 07 Mar 2005 16:59:09 -0500, Howard Ferstler
wrote:

Funny, every time I drop in (every few days, but sometimes
not for several days) I will post some fast responses to
some of the idiotic responses that were posted in response
to my earlier responses (!!!) and virtually every time you
come up with responses of your own that are posted almost
immediately.


You mean like THIS almost immediate response to MY post?

Don't you have a wife and cat or something?
  #104   Report Post  
Howard Ferstler
 
Posts: n/a
Default

dave weil wrote:

On Mon, 07 Mar 2005 16:50:53 -0500, Howard Ferstler
wrote:


As for you, well, you have this belief in super wires and
super amps, and probably super CD players, and that tells me
that, your concert concert-hall goings notwithstanding, you
do not have any kind of solid grasp of what you are
listening to on your audio system. Period.


Yes, that's why I have a Denon receiver hooked up to Allison speakers,
with a Sony 200 disc CD changer I suppose.


Yes, you are an odd bird. In some ways you appear to be
rational, as evidenced by your selection of components. My
take on this is that you simply feel obligated to defend
principles that make no sense for reasons that probably even
you do not understand. I do know that you do not like ME,
and that probably would force you to argue with me even if I
changed sides and joined the tweakos. However, your problem,
Dave, is you, and not me.

Howard Ferstler
  #105   Report Post  
Howard Ferstler
 
Posts: n/a
Default

dave weil wrote:

On Mon, 07 Mar 2005 16:52:46 -0500, Howard Ferstler
wrote:

For me, a rock concert is an end in itself, and so are rock
recordings. There is no way such recordings can be
configured to simulate a live-music experience, because the
live-music experience itself is loaded up with electronic
distortions right there in the hall or auditorium.


You are apparently laboring under the impression that recording
engineers put microphones in front of the bank of PA speakers to
record the concert.


Obviously, they do not. You need to scare up a copy of my
The Digital Audio Music List (A-R Editions, 1999), Dave.

You're wrong, you know. You MIGHT get some ancillary microphones in
the soundfield to help with the ambience that you crave for such
things as "surround sound", but the majority of the recording never
leaves the soundboard, except to be transferred to the recording
medium.


Dave, you miss the point. With most classical and acoustic
jazz music performed live, there is no electronic
amplification, and you get an acoustic soundstage up front
and hall ambiance all around you. A good two-channel
recording tries to at least mimic the sound coming from up
front, and a good surround recording also tries to duplicate
the sense of space. Good DSP can also do a good job of
simulating live-performance space with two-channel
recordings.

However, most rock music uses huge amounts of electronic
amplification and rock recordings basically can do no better
than mimic the existing distortions that one gets at a live
performance.

It is one of the ironies of recording technology that while
most classical recordings (including surround-sound
versions) cannot approach the realism we get at live
performances, rock recordings often actually sound BETTER
than live performances. Yep, this is because said recordings
are usually ends in themselves and not attempts to duplicate
live performances.

It's still important to be able to accurately record the sound of
"distortions", since guitars and amps have distinctive sound
characteristics that are important to the sound of the group. A
Marshall stack sounds different than a Vox AC-30 for instance.


Who cares? Besides, the recordings do not mimic those
artifacts you mention. The rock recordings are ends in
themselves.

Howard Ferstler


  #106   Report Post  
Howard Ferstler
 
Posts: n/a
Default

dave weil wrote:

On Mon, 07 Mar 2005 16:59:09 -0500, Howard Ferstler
wrote:

Funny, every time I drop in (every few days, but sometimes
not for several days) I will post some fast responses to
some of the idiotic responses that were posted in response
to my earlier responses (!!!) and virtually every time you
come up with responses of your own that are posted almost
immediately.


You mean like THIS almost immediate response to MY post?

Don't you have a wife and cat or something?


Dave, the wife is at work and the cats are napping. Unlike
you I drop in for a couple of hours every day or two. I will
scope the responses that were made to my previous posts, and
invariably yours show up almost immediately after they were
posted. On the other hand, my responses to your posts will
usually not show up for several days, because I am not
locked to my computer as you are.

Yes, I did respond rapidly to your latest responses, because
I am here during one of my occasional stopovers. I call up
messages and check responses to my posts in real time and
then pump out a few more responses. After an hour or two I
call it a day and then I stay away from my computer for at
least a couple of days.

On the other hand, you are ALWAYS here, ready to respond
almost immediately. I find it hard to believe that you have
enough spare time away from your waitering job and your
computer to go to all of those concerts.

And, now, it is time to call it a day. Let's see if you can
do the same thing.

Howard Ferstler
  #107   Report Post  
MINe 109
 
Posts: n/a
Default

In article ,
Howard Ferstler wrote:

MINe 109 wrote:

While I'm sure he could find much to object to at a typical Austin club
show (excessive volume levels, clipping, PA horns, etc), another point
is that even rock has commonly recognized sound ideals such as the one
you described above. I read one description that claimed room size and
volume level at which the drums do not require amplification as an
ideal, which reminds me of another Terry Manning anecdote, this one
about Led Zeppelin: Bonham preferred the mics some distance from the
drum kit because he wanted to control his dynamics, not the engineer.


Most "live" rock performances have the sound emitting from a
huge bank of speakers on, behind, or in front of the stage.
Nearly all of the sound is electronically amplified and sent
out via those loud-is-better speakers.


You missed dw and me discussing the so-well-known-it's-boring
description of the standard rock band sound. You've encountered the
phrase "garage band"? Drums in the back, guitars to each side, bass and
singer in the middle. There are thousands of recordings with this or a
very similar perspective.

Now, if some moron wants that kind of "live performance"
sound from his audio system at home, then, well, he is
getting exactly what he deserves when he spends big bucks on
overkill gear.


That kind of moron doesn't buy overkill gear. Cerwin-Vega is still in
business, yes?

Stephen
  #108   Report Post  
MINe 109
 
Posts: n/a
Default

In article ,
Howard Ferstler wrote:

And you are looking to justify your obsession with upscale
audio, even though upscale audio systems are simply not
needed to listen to most rock music. Mid-fi does the job
just fine.


hifi does the job better.

Stephen
  #109   Report Post  
MINe 109
 
Posts: n/a
Default

In article ,
Howard Ferstler wrote:

MINe 109 wrote:

In article ,
Howard Ferstler wrote:

MINe 109 wrote:

In article ,
Howard Ferstler wrote:

OK, Dave, you tell me just how many rock recordings are
engineered to sound like a live-music performance?

The Who Live at Leeds
Live at Kelvin Hall The Kinks
Cowboy Junkies Trinity Sessions
Simon and Garfunkel Concert in Central Park

There's four...


Out of thousands. Sorry, but the exceptions in this case do
not bend the rule.


That's not a rule, that's a snobbish prejudice.


Why is it when someone has a rational approach to a subject
like music those who have a less rational approach typecast
him as "snobbish?"


When that someone dismisses an entire style of music out-of-hand.

One could argue that a system needs to be accurate to reflect the
artist's intentions most faithfully.


Yes. Which system does the best job of reproducing all of
that noise?


Careful, or you'll have Nousaine after you.

Fortunately, according to you, pretty much all equipment is
automatically accurate.


Amps, wires, CD players, for sure, barring defects, of
course, or intentional design anomalies. If you think I
believe in automatic accuracy when it comes to speakers or
surround processors, or speaker/room interactions, you need
to scare up some of my magazine articles and reports, or
books, and get up to date.


No.

Stephen
  #110   Report Post  
Clyde Slick
 
Posts: n/a
Default


"Howard Ferstler" wrote in message
...

Most "live" rock performances have the sound emitting from a
huge bank of speakers on, behind, or in front of the stage.
Nearly all of the sound is electronically amplified and sent
out via those loud-is-better speakers.

Now, if some moron wants that kind of "live performance"
sound from his audio system at home, then, well, he is
getting exactly what he deserves when he spends big bucks on
overkill gear.


I prefer my hard rock to sound
like a genteel ladies tea party.
Or, better yet, like Mantovani.
I once heard Hendriz through my
friend's Marantz 8B. Yecch!
It did sound like Mantovani.
My Eico HF87 and my Radio Craftsman 500A's
do a lot better.



----== Posted via Newsfeeds.Com - Unlimited-Uncensored-Secure Usenet News==----
http://www.newsfeeds.com The #1 Newsgroup Service in the World! 120,000+ Newsgroups
----= East and West-Coast Server Farms - Total Privacy via Encryption =----


  #111   Report Post  
dave weil
 
Posts: n/a
Default

On Mon, 07 Mar 2005 17:16:44 -0500, Howard Ferstler
wrote:

dave weil wrote:

On Mon, 07 Mar 2005 16:59:09 -0500, Howard Ferstler
wrote:

Funny, every time I drop in (every few days, but sometimes
not for several days) I will post some fast responses to
some of the idiotic responses that were posted in response
to my earlier responses (!!!) and virtually every time you
come up with responses of your own that are posted almost
immediately.


You mean like THIS almost immediate response to MY post?

Don't you have a wife and cat or something?


Dave, the wife is at work and the cats are napping. Unlike
you I drop in for a couple of hours every day or two. I will
scope the responses that were made to my previous posts, and
invariably yours show up almost immediately after they were
posted. On the other hand, my responses to your posts will
usually not show up for several days, because I am not
locked to my computer as you are.

Yes, I did respond rapidly to your latest responses,


And the previous set of responses as well...

because
I am here during one of my occasional stopovers. I call up
messages and check responses to my posts in real time and
then pump out a few more responses. After an hour or two I
call it a day and then I stay away from my computer for at
least a couple of days.


Yes, you tire easily. I understand that.

On the other hand, you are ALWAYS here, ready to respond
almost immediately. I find it hard to believe that you have
enough spare time away from your waitering job and your
computer to go to all of those concerts.


Up until this recent spate of posting, which you shared, I note, I
only posted three times since midnight Sunday night/Monday morning. I
guess that three posts in 15 hours qualifies as ALWAYS posting.
shrug

And, now, it is time to call it a day. Let's see if you can
do the same thing.


Well, I'm back from work now. Did you saysomething?
  #112   Report Post  
Ruud Broens
 
Posts: n/a
Default


"Clyde Slick" wrote in message
...
:
: "Howard Ferstler" wrote in message
: ...
:
: Most "live" rock performances have the sound emitting from a
: huge bank of speakers on, behind, or in front of the stage.
: Nearly all of the sound is electronically amplified and sent
: out via those loud-is-better speakers.
:
: Now, if some moron wants that kind of "live performance"
: sound from his audio system at home, then, well, he is
: getting exactly what he deserves when he spends big bucks on
: overkill gear.
:
:
: I prefer my hard rock to sound
: like a genteel ladies tea party.
: Or, better yet, like Mantovani.
: I once heard Hendriz through my
: friend's Marantz 8B. Yecch!
: It did sound like Mantovani.
: My Eico HF87 and my Radio Craftsman 500A's
: do a lot better.
:

via Encryption =----

i've never heard Hendriz , neither live nor reproduced
;-)
Rudy


  #113   Report Post  
Lionel
 
Posts: n/a
Default

Clyde Slick a écrit :
"Howard Ferstler" wrote in message
...

Most "live" rock performances have the sound emitting from a
huge bank of speakers on, behind, or in front of the stage.
Nearly all of the sound is electronically amplified and sent
out via those loud-is-better speakers.

Now, if some moron wants that kind of "live performance"
sound from his audio system at home, then, well, he is
getting exactly what he deserves when he spends big bucks on
overkill gear.



I prefer my hard rock to sound
like a genteel ladies tea party.
Or, better yet, like Mantovani.
I once heard Hendriz through my
friend's Marantz 8B. Yecch!
It did sound like Mantovani.
My Eico HF87 and my Radio Craftsman 500A's
do a lot better.


You shouldn't bash in your "YalMake" over your ears. :-(
  #114   Report Post  
 
Posts: n/a
Default

Clyde Slick wrote:


snipped
I once heard Hendriz through my
friend's Marantz 8B. Yecch!
It did sound like Mantovani.


Really? And the amplifier was the "culprit"?


My Eico HF87 and my Radio Craftsman 500A's
do a lot better.


In the same room and through the same speakers in the same room
position?


Or are you comparing apples to cannonballs? ;-)

  #115   Report Post  
Clyde Slick
 
Posts: n/a
Default


"Lionel" wrote in message
...
Clyde Slick a écrit :
"Howard Ferstler" wrote in message
...

Most "live" rock performances have the sound emitting from a
huge bank of speakers on, behind, or in front of the stage.
Nearly all of the sound is electronically amplified and sent
out via those loud-is-better speakers.

Now, if some moron wants that kind of "live performance"
sound from his audio system at home, then, well, he is
getting exactly what he deserves when he spends big bucks on
overkill gear.



I prefer my hard rock to sound
like a genteel ladies tea party.
Or, better yet, like Mantovani.
I once heard Hendriz through my
friend's Marantz 8B. Yecch!
It did sound like Mantovani.
My Eico HF87 and my Radio Craftsman 500A's
do a lot better.


You shouldn't bash in your "YalMake" over your ears. :-(


I'll be passing through CDG next Thursday morning, the 17th. If you want to
meet, just go to terminal 2E and look for the tell tale yalmake.



----== Posted via Newsfeeds.Com - Unlimited-Uncensored-Secure Usenet News==----
http://www.newsfeeds.com The #1 Newsgroup Service in the World! 120,000+ Newsgroups
----= East and West-Coast Server Farms - Total Privacy via Encryption =----


  #116   Report Post  
Clyde Slick
 
Posts: n/a
Default


wrote in message
oups.com...
Clyde Slick wrote:


snipped
I once heard Hendriz through my
friend's Marantz 8B. Yecch!
It did sound like Mantovani.


Really? And the amplifier was the "culprit"?


My Eico HF87 and my Radio Craftsman 500A's
do a lot better.


In the same room and through the same speakers in the same room
position?


Or are you comparing apples to cannonballs? ;-)


It was at my friends house, the one with the 8B.
The Eico was there, at the time it was his, and I bought it.
Later on, he brought the 8b over my house for the 3 way comp.



----== Posted via Newsfeeds.Com - Unlimited-Uncensored-Secure Usenet News==----
http://www.newsfeeds.com The #1 Newsgroup Service in the World! 120,000+ Newsgroups
----= East and West-Coast Server Farms - Total Privacy via Encryption =----
  #117   Report Post  
Lionel
 
Posts: n/a
Default

In , Clyde Slick wrote :


I'll be passing through CDG next Thursday morning, the 17th. If you want
to meet, just go to terminal 2E and look for the tell tale yalmake.


Stay prudently in the shelter of the terminal and just watch your feet...
you moron.
  #118   Report Post  
Tom
 
Posts: n/a
Default

"Lionel" wrote

you moron.


Isn't it kind of chicken**** to be insulting an old man like that
when you're thousands of miles away? You probably never
want to meet him in person. But still, what's the point?


  #119   Report Post  
Lionel
 
Posts: n/a
Default

Tom a écrit :
"Lionel" wrote


you moron.



Isn't it kind of chicken**** to be insulting an old man like that
when you're thousands of miles away? You probably never
want to meet him in person. But still, what's the point?


This old man *like* to be insulted. He does a lot of effort
for that.
I simply feel no sympathy for this xenophobic idiot.

What's your point ?

  #120   Report Post  
Clyde Slick
 
Posts: n/a
Default


"Lionel" wrote in message
...
In , Clyde Slick wrote :


I'll be passing through CDG next Thursday morning, the 17th. If you want
to meet, just go to terminal 2E and look for the tell tale yalmake.


Stay prudently in the shelter of the terminal and just watch your feet...
you moron.


So much for French hospitality.



----== Posted via Newsfeeds.Com - Unlimited-Uncensored-Secure Usenet News==----
http://www.newsfeeds.com The #1 Newsgroup Service in the World! 120,000+ Newsgroups
----= East and West-Coast Server Farms - Total Privacy via Encryption =----
Reply
Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules

Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off


Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
Why did the PF reviewer buy his review sample? WENW Marketplace 2 January 9th 05 05:28 AM
James Randi on Stereophile: "The Audio World Is Aroused" [email protected] High End Audio 132 December 17th 04 10:18 PM
The Reviewer Bought The Review Sample... WENW Marketplace 1 October 6th 04 07:51 AM
Does anyone know of this challenge? [email protected] High End Audio 453 June 28th 04 03:43 AM
What causes wobble of center voice? Stig Erik Tangen High End Audio 10 September 14th 03 12:29 AM


All times are GMT +1. The time now is 07:22 PM.

Powered by: vBulletin
Copyright ©2000 - 2024, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Copyright ©2004-2024 AudioBanter.com.
The comments are property of their posters.
 

About Us

"It's about Audio and hi-fi"