Print

Please login or register.
1 Hour 1 Day 1 Week 1 Month Forever
Login with username, password and session length

[klaus]

I have, on another occasion (http://repforums.prosoundweb.com/index.php/topic,36438.msg532924.html#msg532924), lamented the decline of the prevalent listening environment and attitude. This is Part II of the same subject (can't get it out of my head).

I wrote here about hooking up a Neumann M50 to record my outgoing message on my answering machine. Insanity, pure and simple. Whatever I heard differently with that $20k mic from the $5 electret mic I had been using before and after that experiment, was probably tainted by the expectation that it WOULD make a difference.

Now comes the ironic flip side of the same coin: All proud father, I uploaded to YouTube a recording I (g.) made with my son (dr.) in the basement with a nifty little camera that had surprisingly good audio fidelity. I had given out the link to a few friends, and, after giving it some time, I inquired what they thought of it. To a person, they watched the three-minute song (or, probably more realistic, the first 15 seconds of it) on their iPhones or Androids.

So what the hell are we doing on this forum? Discussing how minutely different brands of coupling capacitors affect $10,000.- mics? How aftermarket transformers don’t quite sound the same as the real thing? How current PVC diaphragms cannot touch the sex appeal of older ones?

Discussing minutiae of audiophile-quality microphones seems almost pathetic in light of today’s dominant playback format: sub-telephone-quality audio from a 1/4 inch loudspeaker buried behind a metal grate.

It’s one thing to give a quick initial look and listen on a hand-held device of music I have carefully recorded and uploaded. It’s an entirely different universe in which I must now realize that a second listening on a device with halfway decent fidelity will never happen.

[aremos]

But, like everything else in life, we end up doing things for, and because of, our own obligation to ourselves.
And we never know how, in the long run, it will exponentially affect things down the road.

Why lower our standards towards what we might (erroneously) think is the norm ... or that it isn't appreciated?
And, once in a while, there will be those who will hear (whether in the "right" environment or not) what we did & appreciate it. And the effect is reciprocal.

[klaus]

Those are kind and wise words.

[Piedpiper]

I am sure that virtually all of us reading this can relate to this question, as well as ones like it in other arenas of our lives, and have already answered it for ourselves, over and over, as we are faced with the doubt of whether pursuing anything our hearts resonate with is worth it. It is by definition worth it, but not in and of itself so much as as an expression of our love for the depth and breadth of the beauty of creation. The maniacal obsession over minutiae seems to solicit the balancing factor of a larger perspective represented in the choice to walk out the door of the studio to enjoy a simple meal and a walk under the stars with a loved one, or even by ourselves, or the dance of wild abandon that we are sometimes lucky enough to capture with all our painstaking technique and equipment.

Also, it seems that we are already witnessing the backlash of the hyper fast disposable culture in retro trends, however trendy, exhibited in the hipster movement, towards vinyl and the like... strange but true... as always...

[DarinK]

A bit of hope comes from the increasing popularity of actual headphones instead of earbuds.  Apple has just announced they're buying Beats (the headphone & audio company) and are also expected to soon start offering higher resolution downloads.  So, for the first time in years, some big market forces seem to be moving towards better fidelity.

[Uwe]

However, I do have great difficulty with the mention of 'Beats' headphones in the same paragraph with better fidelity...

[DarinK]

However, I do have great difficulty with the mention of 'Beats' headphones in the same paragraph with better fidelity...

They're definitely bass-heavy, but they're also much better fidelity than most earbuds or smart phone speakers.

[Piedpiper]

Yes, it is gratifying that fashion is favoring larger size with pretensions of an awareness of quality as opposed to purely the convenience and discretion of small size.

[Piedpiper]

But, like everything else in life, we end up doing things for, and because of, our own obligation to ourselves.
And we never know how, in the long run, it will exponentially affect things down the road.

Why lower our standards towards what we might (erroneously) think is the norm ... or that it isn't appreciated?
And, once in a while, there will be those who will hear (whether in the "right" environment or not) what we did & appreciate it. And the effect is reciprocal.

I have recently been hosting a late night open mic at a not particularly nice bar, filling in for an indisposed friend. I have been doing it as favor, and for the money, as well as to support the local artistic community such as shows up to this place. I am not overly fond of such venues and have harbored some judgements about some of the clientele. I am an accomplished musician but mostly in an unusual genre that I would assume limited interest from this sector, but I always kick off the night with a few tunes from myself. I also go to unusual measures to adjust the sound for each individual performer and haul in my own modest but capable PA and mics. I have been quite surprised by the many comments of generous appreciation for both my playing and attention to the sound from those I would have assumed to be beyond such sensitivities. It has shifted my attitude decidedly about the place, the people, and my willingness to continue the gig. Yet another in a long line of humbly gratifying experiences.

[Jim Williams]

To be a coach craftsman in the age of the model T is similar. Buggies were switched out for cars, home hi-fi speakers are switched out for earbuds.

I'm glad I listened to a few wise men back in the early 1970's:

"Too many mixers, not enough fixers".

Now days I feel like that old man at the end of that 1970's sci-fi film Logan's Run when the lead charactor asks;

"Why do you keep the old guy around"?

"Because he knows how to fix the MACHINES!"

[J.J. Blair]

I watched on my laptop!  Those speakers are way better than the iPhone.

[J.J. Blair]

BTW, I will say that even on my laptop, I can tell when there's a good vocal mic and a not as good one, because one conveys emotion and nuance better.  It's nothing to do with fidelity. 

Also, the better the mic, the less work I have to do as a mixer, to make something sound right.  Mind you, better does not necessarily mean more expensive, or what not.  It might be best choice for that instrument / voice in that track.  And then I check my mix on my laptop.  And I can certainly tell on the laptop if it's a SM57 on vocals, or a spitty cheap condenser. 

If I'm recording an orchestra, and I need to do a Decca tree, I bet that even on my laptop, M50s will sound better than Earthworks. 

[Jim Williams]

I've used everything from AKG 535's to Shure 545's to Beta 58's live.

Once mixed, no one can tell what mic was used if the vocals sound good and are well balanced.

A great performance seems to equalize all that stuff out to where it isn't as important as you may think.

Performance sells 'downloads', not the gear you select.

[klaus]

So, if "performance sells downloads", not the gear I select, then the ongoing de-evolution into using shitty audio recording equipment seems fully justified. No wonder I don't get these calls anymore where people are begging me to take them on as apprentices.

Maybe this is indeed a cleansing period, as one poster suggested: only those with passion for good audio stay in the game, and for all the right reasons.

I'll think of a name and motto for the New Audiophile Guild. Something like "Dedicated to the Preservation of Beauty, Art and  Bla Bla Bla in Audio…"

[GYMusic]

Passion.

[Piedpiper]

I've used everything from AKG 535's to Shure 545's to Beta 58's live.

Once mixed, no one can tell what mic was used if the vocals sound good and are well balanced.

A great performance seems to equalize all that stuff out to where it isn't as important as you may think.

Performance sells 'downloads', not the gear you select.

I can always tell what mic I've used. live or recorded, no matter how I mix it, but mic choice doesn't keep me or the performer from doing our jobs as best we can, and if I'm not doing mine, the performer's is useless. Performance trumps all but it still requires and deserves everything both of us can give it.

[J.J. Blair]

I have correctly identified the vocal mic on many records.  Certain mics, I just know their sound.

That being said, a track that many people asked "what was that vocal mic?  I love that," was a SM57 into a Mackie.  I got the track, and gave it some 1073 and 1176 love, and I think the compression is what people were responding to.  The singer was more of a talker, though, and I don't know if that mic would have worked as well if he should really sing.

Also, Elvis Costello's "No Action" was recorded using some old EV dynamic, if I recall.  Very compelling vocal, but due mainly to EQ and compression.

The mic is the transducer that takes the performance and converts it into electrical current.  If performance is the most important thing, then the mic has to be the second most important thing.  That's what captures the performance, and if some things are lost in that process, they can't be made up for later in the chain.

[Jim Williams]

So, if "performance sells downloads", not the gear I select, then the ongoing de-evolution into using shitty audio recording equipment seems fully justified. No wonder I don't get these calls anymore where people are begging me to take them on as apprentices.

Maybe this is indeed a cleansing period, as one poster suggested: only those with passion for good audio stay in the game, and for all the right reasons.

I'll think of a name and motto for the New Audiophile Guild. Something like "Dedicated to the Preservation of Beauty, Art and  Bla Bla Bla in Audio…"

We join the others in passed-over industries. There are still a few horse coach makers in this country. Some still forge swords. We work on audio gear. Most people don't understand why when you can model anything off a laptop.

25 years ago I would visit Coast Recording in LA and marvel at the collection of old audio decks and consoles, most for sale at ridiculous prices. Every year I would see that same stuff, still on sale. Once I asked the owner if he was operating a audio gear store or a museum. They laughed but they aren't laughing now.

[brightmillion]

Maybe this is indeed a cleansing period, as one poster suggested: only those with passion for good audio stay in the game, and for all the right reasons.

Well, I hate to see civilization declining just as much as everyone here, but at least for me (us), if folks start giving up on good audio and start dumping all that old "expensive" gear in favor of newer disposable gear that doesn't need maintenance, that means more yummy gear at lower prices for me!   

I don't know nearly anything compared to you guys as to the "Why" great gear sounds great, but it makes me feel something. And my goal is to make records that make ME feel something first regardless if it sells or not. I just strive to make something one day that is truly great. Great sounding equipment captures that in my opinion, not so good stuff tries to make me THINK it has captured that. To me, it's the difference between talent and celebrity. Celebrity spends its whole time convincing me that I should care, but what did you really DO that I should care about. Whereas talent (great gear) doesn't need to convince anyone. It just does, for the sake of doing.

I recently was at a shop auditioning mics - mostly U47 style clones, and decent ones at that, and they sounded good, like, 'I could use this and my recording would sound very good'. Then, after comparing all the clones and picking my favorite I thought I could be satisfied with, I sang a few words through their vintage U47, put down the headphones and walked out the door. The vintage U47 gutted me, compared to the others- after comparing the others for some time I got 'used' to them and started picking which one sounded best, and it did sound best COMPARED to that field of choices.

But once you open up the field to include higher quality, it hits you like a brick. I think a lot of young people today have never heard their favorite records through any decent system, hence, I think that is why headphones are starting to replace earbuds. They DO make a difference. Maybe next, decent home stereos will come back (I guess the car stereo is the closest they have to this). If no one 'stays the course' to lead by example things are lost to trends and commerce, but not because everybody is stupid (ok, maybe most people are...) but some people just don't know what they are missing.

As a grade school kid I loved listening to the mainstream pop station on the radio because I discovered that I loved music and didn't know any better, but then my friend gave me a warped dubbed cassette of 'Zeppelin II' and my life changed forever. Every great book, film, music that I now love I discovered because of someone else who 'knew better' than me about that subject. And I am thankful for all those people because my life is more enriched. Otherwise I'd just be another guy who thinks pickup trucks and ice fishing are the pinnacles of life (no offense to trucks or ice fishing...)

I am thankful you guys exist, so that people like me can learn and appreciate the art of this gear at a higher level. And then someday I can pass that along to others. I sleep better at night knowing that there are people out there who I can trust to care for my babies when they get sick (no, not human babies, my vintage gear)   

That being said, if anyone is trashing their U47 in favor of some earbuds, give me a call....

[Jim Williams]

The only difference I see in the affection of older recording gear and techniques is once upon a time you could make some decent money with it.

That is no longer the case. There will always be collectors though.

[klaus]

I mangled a reply and in the process I deleted a whole, thoughtfully argued post. I have no ability to recover the post. I am awfully sorry.

Bottom line, when I hear nuances of difference described in terms of night and day on forums it irks me.   Night and day is the difference between hearing the ny philharmonic live or through a pair off earbuds.   Maybe there is a night and day difference between a 10 dollar radio shack condenser and a C12.    But some of the hyperbole is just ridiculous, it's like without a vf14 and marinairs you are some how left with an inferior recording.   It's even more absurd given the playback medium and systems typically used. Unless of course we are recording solely for out own enjoyment.

In the realm of audio we sometimes tend to exaggerate even small differences between sound impressions we heard. But who is to determine whether those differences heard were material or significant enough to the listener to justify an expensive purchase?  I have found that once a listener has heard these quality differences, small as they may be, s/he will never forget them and will forever try to acquire a mic which offers them. The rest ("with some EQ I can almost get there") is mental acrobatics.

Let's honor what we like and love and the sometimes extreme efforts we are willing to undertake to be closer to that experience.
 

[Dinogi]

Even with myself being entirely out of the same league as everyone else here, I find there are times that I too get frustrated with the state of reproduced music. Then I have the opportunity to hear a wonderful string quartet, or a talented pianist at a well behaved piano, or even my own guitar, a well set up Martin. It renews my passion for the quest for beautiful sounds. As long as there is well made music, it's worth the effort my brothers. It is very much worth it.
humbly submitted, dino

[underblu]

I mangled a reply and in the process I deleted a whole, thoughtfully argued post. I have no ability to recover the post. I am awfully sorry.

In the realm of audio we sometimes tend to exaggerate even small differences between sound impressions we heard. But who is to determine whether those differences heard were material or significant enough to the listener to justify an expensive purchase?  I have found that once a listener has heard these quality differences, small as they may be, s/he will never forget them and will forever try to acquire a mic which offers them. The rest ("with some EQ I can almost get there") is mental acrobatics.

Let's honor what we like and love and the sometimes extreme efforts we are willing to undertake to be closer to that experience.
 

Hi Klaus, no worries.  And what a great resource this forum is.    I was essentially agreeing with your position regarding the state of playback.  Even your top end Bestbuy midfi playback system can't do a lot of recordings justice. 

And I get those small differences you mention.  As a kid, I visited a high end stereo store and there was a room with Martin Logan CLSes powered by Krell Amps with a VPI turntable as the source that absolutely soundly like music to me, not electronics not even real high end electronics but music.  I will always remember that experience and tried to recreate it later with varying degrees of success.  I guess the memory of that moment was even greater than the moment itself.

Getting back to recording gear,  Don't get me wrong, I love vintage mics, vintage pres and comps too.  I've own and owned several and suspect I will own some more again.   Almost had a deal on a U67.  (One mic that at least for me, no acceptable clone exists, at least none that I've heard).  And the appeal of vintage mics is undeniable, they are after all the originals.  But this appeal for me is more due to my passion for the thing in itself and its historical context.  Not to say these vintage mics lack utility.   Quite the contrary, the utility or performance of these vintage mics (that have been well cared for) is second to none.   

However, I will say I have been happy with my Flea, Telefunken USA, BAE, UA, Retro Instruments gear.  The results I am able to derive with these tools compare favorably to some of my favorite recordings and to some of my favorite vintage gear.  And thats even after scrutinizing these tracks through a high end reference playback system.  Listening through buds or the bestbuy stereo, you could probably get away with far less and the differences I presume would be of negligible importance to most listeners.

That's not to say we shouldn't strive for something great or heatedly discuss the nuances we perceive.  It just seems silly to exaggerate these nuances into something larger then they are

[klaus]

..and just as silly as denying oneself the pleasure of really good audio, once that bug has been planted in one's ear (greatest metaphor fail ever!)

[Jim Williams]

When you walk into a modern home, what is missing?

Back in the 1970's and 80's, it was a neighborly competition to see who had the biggest, baddest stereo system.

A modern home doesn't even have one anymore. Critical music listening has taken a back seat to other activities.

Back when DSOTM was released, we would take it home, fire up the black light and lava lamps, sink into a bean bag chair, pop on the Koss 4-A headphones, light up a joint and sink into the music. It was, "don't bother me, I'm LISTENING!"

Try now to sit a 17 year old down to listen to a 3 minute song. They can't last more than 30 seconds before they get antsy and reach for a social communications device. Music has lost much of it's importance.

It once created social change, now it's a victim of it.

[klaus]

I saved this quote, read somewhere:

Post-Telecommunications Act 96,' this generation's music for the first time has been selected by corporations and a handful of program directors. BIG DIFFERENCE

Yet another factor in the decline of music's relevance as art and life changer.

And to think that Bill Clinton (driving force behind the '96 Act) was our (the Baby Boomers') most powerful representative ever burns me. Shitty saxophonist to boot.

[Bodyslam]

Try now to sit a 17 year old down to listen to a 3 minute song. They can't last more than 30 seconds before they get antsy and reach for a social communications device.

That's the reaction I have when listening to an mp3. Since the 17 year old has likely listened to nothing else his whole life, this is the reaction he's conditioned to.

[jaykadis]

I think the reduced sound quality is an effect rather than a cause. Frankly, some mp3s sound better than much of my record collection does now. It's more likely due to this generation's lifelong exposure to visual stimulation in games and videos. Music's become a background consideration, which is unfortunate: I can't imagine losing the experience of listening to music and conjuring my own internal visual experience.

[Deuce 225]

I seem to remember reading a post by a former Motown employee reminding us that even back in the 60's, the idea of a consumer playing a record on a cheap record player using a $10 cartridge caused their engineers to ask the same type of "Why do we go to some much trouble ?" question that Klaus posed in his original post.

By sheer coincidence, I sat with my oldest son listening to music for an hour last night on our studio Tannoy's with the Manley/Sax Mastering Lab X-overs.  He was blown away by the level of detail he was hearing in some of his favorite songs -vs- what he has grown accustomed to hearing on his computer and/or ear phones.

Lastly for levity -- why do I go to the trouble to purchase locally roasted coffee beans on a weekly basis, grind the beans just prior to brewing and brew in a Technivorm Moccamaster coffee maker?  Because "I" can tell the difference and it makes "me" happy...
Best,
Tim Cochran

[klaus]

By sheer coincidence, I sat with my oldest son listening to music for an hour last night on our studio Tannoy's with the Manley/Sax Mastering Lab X-overs.  He was blown away by the level of detail he was hearing in some of his favorite songs -vs- what he has grown accustomed to hearing on his computer and/or ear phones.

And, just by sheer coincidence, right before I wrote this, I sat down with my son (12) and we listened to three versions of Mingus's "Good Bye Pork Pie Hat" - the original, then Jeff Beck's George Martin-produced version on vinlyl (Thorens-EAR-Allen Organ Amps with 6550s-Tannoys), finally the new Tobias Hoffmann Trio's version on CD*

All I can do is offer the goods - good music, well recorded, and played on good equipment- it either sticks or it doesn't. I am done with proselytizing.


* a stupenduous CD by an up-and-coming guitarist- imagine Bill Frisell on LSD. This CD is so well engineered, I can turn the stereo all the way up, but the music retains its balance, even sounds better, and stays clean. No trace of digital harshness.

[Bodyslam]

I seem to remember reading a post by a former Motown employee reminding us that even back in the 60's, the idea of a consumer playing a record on a cheap record player using a $10 cartridge caused their engineers to ask the same type of "Why do we go to some much trouble ?" question that Klaus posed in his original post.

In the LP era, there was only one format and everyone just tried to make it sound as good as possible, with full knowledge that the consumer would choose his sound quality level by the choice of playback equipment. Now that we have release formats at different quality levels, unfortunately I hear people asking, "why should we engineer our recordings for any quality level better than MP3 since that's how (almost) everyone will hear it?"

I think you can see (hear) where that has led us.

[Deuce 225]

And, just by sheer coincidence, right before I wrote this, I sat down with my son (12) and we listened to three versions of Mingus's "Good Bye Pork Pie Hat" - the original, then Jeff Beck's George Martin-produced version on vinlyl (Thorens-EAR-Allen Organ Amps with 6550s-Tannoys), finally the new Tobias Hoffmann Trio's version on CD*

Very cool Klaus! Like the MasterCard advertisement tag line goes..."a hour spent listening to music with your son...priceless".
Cheers,
Tim

[boz6906]

Do we know any details of the recording chain used on the Tobias Hoffmann Trio recording?

Here's a studio video showing them positioned very close together with close-miced gtrs and drums.

There does seem to be a SM69/USM69 in the center of the trio...

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Zpwy9ggrqMo

[klaus]

All it says on the liner notes is that all songs were played live, in one take, and without overdubs. I will find out the rest and post it here. But the absence of digital icebox is quite noticeable- despite the fact that the release format is CD (and those post-CBS Fenders used here are not exactly tonal softball territory either!)

[boz6906]

Thanks!

Their one room, close arrange makes overdubs very difficult because of gtr amp bleed into the kit mics.

I do favor this type of recording, it seems more 'live' and the musicians don't need headphones which makes them more comfortable.

In the YouTube video you can see a small monitor on a atand, maybe to help the drummer hear the amps.

[polypals]

The frustration of putting in so much energy and money to do a good job is understandable.

Makes me remember the point of view from an executive at a well known recordlabel.
"Why are we discussing ultra low distortion results in analog equipment when we judge this gear using speakers with at least 1-2% distortion"

The answer is our ears are still able to distinguish different kinds of amplifiers although we are using "poor quality" speakers to judge these amplifiers.

Wellcome to the complete nonlogical world of audio engineering.