Pleasant and unpleasant evenings

Posted by: graphoman on 30 October 2001

All that below is nothing but a cry in the wilderness.
As we all know, good equipment sounds allways better than less good equipment plus any tricks (stands, cable etc.). The aristocracy, possessing 500s, CDSIIs and so on may enjoy good sound forever. We, mortals, have to stick to equipments that sometime sound good and sometime less good. At least that’s what I’ve been aware of in the last 20 years or so, and my ackquaintance seems sharing my findings. Sound quality keep changing with day time, the best hours being at and after 9 p.m. Several reasons may be brought up but up to now no one has been proved scientifically. (No wonder. Contrary to common knowledge, no real parameter of Hi-Fi has ever been proved that seriously.)
Those evening hours, however, are rather different. Some evenings are pleasent, some are not. Reasons, again, are only brought up but never proved. So I can talk about mere impressions. There are the known bio-meteorologycal fronts: the warm one and the cold one. It’s my impression that at warm front the sound quality can be embarrassingly good. The phenomena may not be psychological, rather physiological since it appears not only for the master of the house but, according to my observations, for the friends as well.
I’d be glad if reading someone else’s observations on that very thema. I’d hardly change things but at least I’d know that I’m not that mad.
graphoman
Posted on: 30 October 2001 by Phil Barry
The NAP 500/NAC 52/ CDS2/Rockport Sirius III folks still have to contend with two phenomena that keep their feet firmly planted on the ground with mortals.

1) There are a lot of crap CDs and LPs out there that have SOME musical merit - you just have to listen through lousy materials or lousy production.

2) No matter what, it ain't live music.

I never felt sorry for myself because all I had was a NAC62/140 (purchased for less than any Nait I saw on the market).

Phil

Posted on: 30 October 2001 by dave simpson
(4)
x. A recording can exhibit "The finger of God" by virtue of it's captured limitations.

Ever hear a field recording of migrant workers singing work songs or an old guitarist playing bottleneck blues on his front porch? Captured with the minimal amount of gear and the maximum amount of care , every wrong or out-of-tune note, scraping noise or out-of-sync hand-clap just adds to the event.Without the "flaws" , the experience would be less.Makes it difficult to accept modern studio techniques once you've heard one of these. Even limitations with the remote recording equipment are ignored so powerful and direct is the musician's message.

dave

Posted on: 30 October 2001 by Phil Barry
Agreed.

The best live blues I've heard was at B.L.U.E.S on Halstead St. in Chicago. When I first went there, the sound system was execrable, but it didn't get in the way of the music.

When I think of lousy production, it's not the equipment I think of, but how the equipment is used.

Phil

Posted on: 30 October 2001 by dave simpson
Your right Phil. Alot of the time it is technique and not gear.... and then , sometimes it's just weird....


I remember twenty + years ago the band I was in collected some nice recording gear, an Otari half-track (M-40?...same machine Linn used in their early recordings) and Nak C-1000 mics (not bad...warm and extended)into a custom , straight through mixer (Lotta money for a play-for-beer-n-girls band). We still had our old found-in-a-wrecked-car JVC boom box/recorder choking on dust in the corner. Got out the JVC unit after using the big-knob pro stuff for several months and made some jam recordings with the JVC. From a hi-fi standpoint the otari/nak combo was miles ahead. From a music standpoint the JVC smoked the big rig. This cheezy $100 beer-soaked boom box out performed $7K?+/- worth of pro gear.... I think that might have been the deciding factor for me to cancel all of my hi-fi magazine subscriptions.


dave