[news]

The question of is there a correct gain for playback has come up before, but
I don't think it has been answered conclusively. I bring it up again because
of an interesting experience today.

I was playing back one of my own recordings of our local concert band. It
was just a quick recording with the little Zoom H6 digital with its own
built-in XY capsule, and then equalized in editing to boost the bass a
little. A lot of starts and stops during rehearsal, with a lot of talking
from the director. It sounded OK but uninspiring. I'm saying to myself,
well, just wait until I get my real microphones out. This just sounds a
little "punky."

But I knew that I wasn't playing it at live levels, because I didn't expect
that much from the recorder's mikes, so I grabbed the remote and boosted it
up a little - then a little more... easy now, just a teense more, and
suddenly something "clicked" in, and the sound became very real and very
fabulous, to the point where I had to go back through all that I just heard
and hear it again, hear it right.

It was just enthralling - everything about the presentation just seemed more
right. The imaging improved, the balance among instruments, the frequency
response - this was now believable, I could "see" my band again.

So what gives here? I have heard that just the right volume "fills" the room
just right. Obviously there must be some level that compares to the live
levels of the instruments. You can have too low, and it sounds punky,
elevator music, not real yet. It can be too high, where no instruments on
the recording can be heard that loud in real life. Is it possible that
having been there, it "clicked" in because of my memory of the live sound?

Acoustically, what have we got here? Your speakers put out some direct sound
and some reflected and reverberant. But those ratios are the same at any
volume, right? So which of those fields is most responsible for the
impression of loudness? The direct field is probably most indicative of
nearness or closeness of the instruments. The reverberant field would
perhaps be most responsible for "how loud is this group here in my room
compared to its size vs how loud would the live sound fill a room?" That is
an awkward way of saying does the size of this sound match how big it would
be in real life? Like, in a movie theater, it always seems like the voices
are much louder than a person would be if he were talking live on stage.
Same for music - larger than life.

So that's my story so far. I'm thinking it has more to do with apparent size
of the group within the construct that suffices for the combination of
recorded vs actual reverberant field in your room. We well know how loud a
simple human voice or a piano would be if it were in our room. But the
question is more about a full symphony orchestra stuffed into your listening
room. If you were there live, the sound would attain a certain level
throughout the hall, except for the direct sound, which would diminish at a
greater ratio than the reverberant. So there must be some sweet spot in the
loudness of the reverberant field in your room that "clicks" in with your
subjective impression of hall size. Too low a volume, they seem too far
away, like you are on the outside of the hall listening through an open
doorway. Too loud and it seems bigger than life - no room I have listened in
is this loud for unamplified music. Just right, and most characteristics
"settle in" and seem to agree with the apparent size, the frequency balance,
the precision of imaging, and being able to hear the lowest sounds above the
noise floor.

Any other thoughts or theories on how loud it should be?

Gary Eickmeier