[Moderator's note: This subthread has become very repetitive and so is
ended. -- deb ]
On Feb 28, 6:40=A0am, Sebastian Kaliszewski
wrote:
Scott wrote:
=A0 On Feb 18, 6:30=3DA0am, "Arny Krueger" wrote:
=A0 "Scott" wrote in message
=A0
=A0
=A0
=A0
=A0
=A0
=A0 On Feb 16, 5:20=3D3DA0am, "Arny Krueger" =A0 =
wrote:
=A0 "Scott" wrote in message
=A0 On Feb 15, 5:31=3D3D3DA0am, "Arny Krueger"=A0 ar...@hotpop=
..com wrote:
=A0 "Harry Lavo" wrote in message
=A0 Actually, I've heard the clocks sound very real (my
=A0 grandparents had a house full of wind-ups...I've head
=A0 at least eight of various sizes go off at once) to
=A0 sounding very unreal. =3D3D3DA0Using the SACD version.
=A0 =3D3D3DA0And the culprit....the preamp. =3D3D3DA0 Audio
=A0 Research SP6B vs. Onkyo P301. =3D3D3DA0So much for
=A0 big-box store electronics.
=A0 I own a weight-driven grandfather clock with chime
=A0 movement, so I know exactly what one sounds like. I can
=A0 move it in my listening room and list=3D3D3D en to it
=A0 chime, if I want the true live experience.
=A0 Getting the DSOTM clock to sound like it is entirely
=A0 possible with the CD version, mid-fi electronics and
=A0 speakers that are well-configured for the room.
=A0 The DSOTM recording was miced incredibly close, so any
=A0 claims that close-micing bodes poorly for fidelity is
=A0 brought into question by the hi=3D3D3D gh end audiophile
=A0 comments on this thread.-
=A0 Do you have any pictures or first hand accounts of the
=A0 mic positions for the recording of the clocks on DSOTM?
=A0 No experienced recording engineer would need such a
=A0 thing to reach the conclusion that I've provided.
=A0 Hmmm. That may very well be true. But the fact is *you*
=A0 reached completely eroneous conclusions.
=A0 Only in your opinion. =3DA0Now, you're overreaching your position a=
nd
prete=3D
=A0 nding
=A0 to be a cosmic authority.
=A0
=A0 No Arny not in my opinion. You see (or maybe you don't) DSOTM is a
=A0 very popular album and there actually is a great deal of fact based
=A0 inofrmation on how it was recorded out there for anyone to read up o=
n
=A0 or even watch on DVD. Your eroneous conclusions are not a matter of
=A0 opinion. They are a matter of varifiable fact. Just because you didn=
't
=A0 do your homework on the subject of how DSOTM was recorded doesn't me=
an
=A0 it is a mystery to all and subject purely to opinion. one does not
=A0 need to be a cosmic authority just basically educated on the subject=
..
=A0 Clearly I am and you are not.
It might be clear to you, but not necesaritly to others. More below.
Yes it is clear to me. I did my homework on the subject. If it isn't
clear to others than those "others" comment on the subject out of
ignorance.
=A0
=A0
=A0 Perhaps you should steer clear of Dark Side of the Moon as a
=A0 reference.
=A0 Perhaps you should remember that you don't rule the universe. Proof=
by
=A0 assertion is no proof at all. If you've got evidence, then offer it=
..
If y=3D
=A0 ou
=A0 have something to say but OSAF , I'm sure we'd be all glad to hear
it fro=3D
=A0 m
=A0 you.
=A0
=A0
=A0
=A0 I see no point in trying to "prove" things that are well documented
=A0 and easily accessed by anyone willing to do their homework. What nex=
t?
Next thing should be supporting your asseriotns by evidence. See below.
=A0 Will you ask me to "prove" Pink Floyd was an actual band? One does n=
ot
=A0 have to rule the universe to catch you making gross errors in fact o=
n
=A0 this subjeect Arny. One just needs to know a litle bit about what
=A0 actually went into the making of DSOTM.
As I worte in other post, I don't see gross errors in what Arny wrote.
So what? What you personally see does not determine what is and what
is not.
=A0
=A0
=A0
=A0 If you've miced different instruments in different rooms
=A0 different ways, =3D3D a recording paints a fairly detailed
=A0 sonic picture of how the recording was miced. If you've
=A0 worked the room, then mic locations can be estimated
=A0 fai=3D3D rly well.
=A0 What is known for sure is that DSOTM was created in a
=A0 studio or studios, which are generally (with a few
=A0 exceptions) acousticaly dead. =3D3DA0It is co=3D3D mmon to mic
=A0 close and add the sonic perspective electronically
=A0 during the mix. Done right, this can fool most
=A0 listeners.
=A0 And so based on the false assumption that the clocks were
=A0 recorded in an acoustically dead studio room with your
=A0 experienced ears as a recording engineer you concluded
=A0 that the clocks were recorded in a dead studio room and
=A0 were close miced.
=A0 No such thing!
=A0
=A0 Wow, wow, Arny, really? You really wanted to post this? Abby Road
=A0 Studios dude! Were talking specifically about Abby Road studios.
=A0 =A0http://www.abbeyroad.com/studios/studio1/
=A0 "Studio One is the world?s largest purpose-built recording studio. T=
he
=A0 space can easily accommodate a 110-piece orchestra and 100-piece cho=
ir
=A0 simultaneously. Studio One?s acoustic is as famous as the location,
=A0 offering a supremely warm and clear sound, perfect for numerous type=
s
=A0 of recording, from solo piano to large orchestras and film scores. T=
he
=A0 live area also has two spacious isolation booths. A Steinway D conce=
rt
=A0 grand and a celeste are also available
=A0 The size of Studio One also makes it a very attractive venue for liv=
e
=A0 music events."
So? How that describes that as acustuically vivid hall?
Do I really need to explain to you why a space that is described as
"perfect for numerous types of recording, from solo piano to large
orchestras" and is "an attractive venue for live music events" isn't
an acoustically dead space? Maybe these websites will offer some help
in understanding these basic concepts in room acoustics.
http://www.aip.org/tip/INPHFA/vol-3/iss-3/p20.pdf
Reflections
According to John Bradley of the Institute for
Research in Construction at the National Research
Council (NRC) in Ottawa, Ontario, Canada, studies in
the 1950s and 1970s demonstrated that early-arriving
reflections from the sound source were highly significant
for sound quality, especially =93lateral=94 reflections
arriving from the sides of the listener. These early lateral
reflections, along with the right balance of late-arriving
reflections (reverberance), create a sense of being
enveloped within the sound. In the 1990s, beginning
with studies by researchers at Kobe University in Japan,
it was discovered that lateral reflections arriving a little
bit later could be more important than early reflections
from overhead for determining spatial impression in
concert halls. Furthermore, recent tests by Bradley and
his colleagues demonstrated that the perception of listener
envelopment increased as more energy was contained
in late-arriving reflections.
http://www.answers.com/topic/anechoic-chamber-2
"An acoustic anechoic chamber is a room in which essentially an
acoustic free field exists. It is sometimes referred to as a free-
field or dead room."
And what it
tells it was 40 years ago?
Nothing. One simply has to do their homework on that subject to know
what the room was like 40 years ago.
Concert halls and studios do get changed.
We are not talking about generalities. We are talking about Abby Road
studios. If you have any record of any of the three studios being
acoustically dead when Pink Floyd recorded DSOTM then please offer it
up.
Later in your post you imply thayt one part of the Abbe Studios did not
exits 40 years ago, you you use the very same descriptions (picket from
Abbey web page) to infer conclusions about how that stuio was arranged
40 years ago). Sorry but, decide on something.
There is nothing to "decide." The facts are well documented regarding
Abby Road Studios.
I know cocncert hall which has been modernized, and during that
modernization it's acustics were changed. Hall became more vivid and
better balanced.
That's nice. What does it have to do with Abby Road Studios and the
recording of DSOTM?
=A0 =A0So what does thing mean Arny? according to you "only a person who=
has
=A0 never been in a real world recording studio and has no clue about ho=
w
=A0 recording is done in studios could make these claims.(The recording
=A0 spaces are hardly dead there (abbt Road Studios))
That's your (mostly unisubstatntiated) assertion. Please, dont present
your asserions as facts.
I am presenting facts as facts.
=A0 does this mean that
=A0 the people at Abby Road studios making claims about the acoustics of
=A0 their own studio have in fact never been inside their own studio?
=A0 Could it mean that at Abby Road studio when you record an orchestra
=A0 you do so in a dead acoustic envirement? So what next? demands that =
I
=A0 prove that Studio One at Abby Road Studio is actually an acousticall=
y
=A0 reverberant studio?
Yes, you should. As thats what you essentially claim.
Actually it is what the Abby Road studios website claims. of course it
does take a basic understanding of room acoustics to understand that.
Note: acustically dead does not automatically mean anechoic.
An acoustically dead space is in fact acoustically anechoic. See the
reference above and read up on anechoic chambers.
=A0 You should have quit when you were just way
=A0 behind Arny.
=A0
=A0
=A0
=A0 Yikes. Arny, the album was recorded at
=A0 Abby Road studios. The recording spaces are hardly dead there.
=A0 Scott, only a person who has never been in a real world recording
studio =3D
=A0 and
=A0 has no clue about how recording is done in studios could make these
claim=3D
=A0 s.
=A0
=A0 Including some very lively spaces Arny. Something you think only a
=A0 person who has never been in an actual recording studio would claim.=
As
=A0 you point out Abby Road Studios has many differnt rooms but your cla=
im
=A0 was that "What is known for sure is that DSOTM was created in a stud=
io
=A0 or studios, which are generally (with a few exceptions) acousticaly
=A0 dead." So 1. what was actually well known but apparently not to you
=A0 was that DSOTM was mostly recored in *Abby Road Studios* and you cla=
im
=A0 the rooms are generally, with *few* exceptions acoustically dead.
Thats right?
Yes. that is right.
=A0 Clearly studio 1 is anything but dead.
Clearly?
Clearly to anyone with a basic understanding of room acoustics.
I know some large studios
Does not matter. We are talking about a specific studio space that has
been described as an excellent venue for orchestral recording and live
music concerts. That would preclude any acoustically dead spaces.
We can continue this exchange after you read up on room acoustics and
the recording of DSOTM. all I am doing now is correcting your errors
on both subjects. It gets old pretty fast.