Live music rubbish!

I agree with the excessive volume at rock concerts. The past 20 years or so I've made it a habit to take foam earplugs with me to concerts. The last concert I went to was at Benroya Hall in Seattle, a recently constructed symphony hall with 2,500 seats. The opening act, Carlene Carter was very well mixed, taking advantage of the hall's acoustics and played at an appropriate volume. I was able to listen and enjoy without earplugs. The headliner, John Mellencamp, followed with a great performance, marred in my opinion by volume that far exceeded the hall's capabilities. Moreover, excessive bass made a live performance sound like an overly loudness mastered album.

I just don't get. Why would Mellencamp book a small, acoustically-tuned venue only to play at a volume that made it sound like teenager's 1500-watt car stereo with a dominating subwoofer? My ear plugs were in for Mellencamp. I offered a pair of plugs to my daughter. She eschewed and thought his concert sounded fine without them. My conclusion: I'm getting old. Outdoor concerts might be a better bet for me from now on, still with earplugs in place.

I stopped going to concerts to protect my ears. The sound quality hasn't been that great anyway. Not sure why bands think so much bass makes for an enjoyable evening. 

My Naim system sounds just fine anyway as a substitute and then some... 

Indeed classical and jazz are always fine. However pop/rock and especially metal can be a challenge. It’s in addition quite often that in addition to the loudness also the sound as such is mediocre. Jazz is however quite often in the contrary a real delight. For classical while it’s played in special venues is normally quite good.

I absolutely agree. I often think that the technicians responsible for mixing the sound must be deaf. I too have used various types of ear plugs over the years, but they cut the treble to such an extent to make it a pointless experience. I think the best solution would be to have made to measure ear plugs of the type used by musicians. These can be quite costly, but worth the investment if you want to continue attending live rock concerts and still be able to hear well in old age. 

Live music is about atmosphere and emotion if I found myself listening to the system instead of the artist playing I wouldn’t go again. 

To me it's seeing the artists live.If the sound is not the best that night it's not the end of the world.Its more the occasion and the expectation.Having a few beers out with your mates.Hi -Fi at home will never sound as good to me as a gig will - never.

I was agreeing with JoeRand and Analogmusic in that the sound in many rock concerts is usually so loud that will damage your hearing, not that listening at home comes close to seeing the artist performing live. I fail to understand why those technicians mixing the sound so often mix thunderous levels of bass in particular. Surely the mix should be sensitive to the music such that the bass complements it rather than dominating it. 

The last concert that I went to - Belle and Sebastian on Monday - was actually a bit quiet.

It is rare that anything is super-loud - mainly because it is forbidden. Some venues actually display real time dB levels. And every venue has complimentary plugs if you want them.

I wonder if room acoustics are just as important at live venues as we acknowledge them to be at home.

I've always assumed that the whole point of carrying out a sound check during setup was to compensate for the acoustics at the venue, so was most disappointed a couple of years ago when going to see Joe Bonamassa at Leeds First Direct Arena, a purpose built venue.

The sound quality on the day was dire, and to add insult to injury, the mixing desk was only a few rows behind our seats. It might have helped if the sound engineer had removed his headphones to experience the sound as we were hearing it, but it's put me off that venue for good.

On the other hand, I've been to Scarborough Open Air Theatre a few times, and the permanent PA setup there is spot on, with exceptional clarity.

So, I don't know if it's so much excessive volume or bass, so much much as simply getting things right on the day, for the particular venue.

I find the comments about excessive bass rather interesting. I have long been under the impression that a proportion of people on the forum simply don’t like bass, not uncommonly preferring or at least liking small speakers incapable of much bass energy or decrying the ‘overblown’ (to them) nature of larger speakers. The comments above tend to reinforce this impression. For me the bass is an essential part of much of the music to which I listen - and I have always wanted my system at home to reproduce it like at live performances, where to me it often has sounded just right. Of course, the part the bass plays, and how much or how deep it goes depends on the type of music, even being absent in some, but the aim live is presumably to get it so it sounds “right” to the production team, who should be meeting the intent of the artist, albeit within the limits of the venue.

As for sound level, it is so hard to generalise because it obviously depends on the artist and production team, and the OP doesn’t mention even the style of music. I have certainly been to gigs where it would have benefitted from being a touch quieter - I well recall Thijs Van Leer’s flute being painful at a couple of Focus gigs back in the 1970s, and occasionally the same would be true with some vocals, though at those relatively high frequencies it was possible to reduce below the pain threshold simply by moving rotating or inclining my head slightly. And in those days some gigs did leave me with my ears still ringing a bit next morning, so probably were indeed too loud and at risk of causing permanant hearing damage. At the other end of the scale, I can’t understand how anyone could have enjoyed the Beatles gigs in the mid 60s, when all you would hear would be the screams of girls in the audience!

Rock music, by its vary nature, I don’t think sounds right played quietly, and to me a gig should indeed be loud (but within limits), however a solo folk singer with guitar should not be as loud - ideally  a well designed PA system should distribute it so that for the vast majority of te audience the sound level is as if the player is sitting on the stage only a short distance in front, ragardless of size of venue - and systems these days can be sophisticated enough to achieve that.

Meanwhile some venues have poor acoustics and it can be nigh on impossible to get clear sound (one local to me I have found from experience only sounds good in a limited range of listening positions),  but regardless of all the above, there is never any excuse for a badly distorted sound, and I would be demanding my money back if that was the case.

I am sure the venue and the venue's acoustics play a huge part in this. Almost all of the concerts I have been to in recent years ( mostly venues in Edinburgh/Glasgow) have been pretty good from a sound quality perspective, and by and large sound levels have not been uncomfortably high. I would specifically commend Glasgow's Royal Concert Hall for its acoustics, with more than a few of the bigger acts appearing there commenting on the quality of the acoustics. Dave, I have seen Joe Bonamassa at the Clyde Auditorium in Glasgow, and the acoustics were pretty reasonable, although I did think that his performance and his interaction with the audience were a bit lack-lustre and disappointing. 

The one exception in respect of acoustics & sound quality I can recall in recent years (and it was a biggie), was a Bruce Springsteen concert at Hampden Park (Glasgow) which was absolutely unbearable. I am a motorcycle rider, and so I almost always have earplugs to hand. I don't normally bother to take them to concerts, but did take a pair to the Springsteen concert, just in case. The sound system at Hampden Park was so loud and so badly distorted (where I was positioned) that I left the concert after 4 or 5 numbers because I feared that my ears (even wearing earplugs) would be permanently damaged. The sound was so loud and distorted that I only recognised one of the numbers, and I probably own most of his albums.

I only began to make out words and a melody when I stopped to listen briefly from outside the stadium.

I don't know if this was typical of a stadium concert or not. I have been to a number of outdoor festivals when I was younger, but I think this was probably the first stadium concert to which I have been. I won't be going to another.             

Innocent Bystander posted:

 For me the bass is an essential part of much of the music to which I listen - and I have always wanted my system at home to reproduce it like at live performances, where to me it often has sounded just right.

I totally agree - there is nothing like a live gig and when the bass actually causes your chest or even nostrils to resonate it's an unbeatable feeling.

Above and beyond the physical sensation is the shared experience of the live moment of creation. Recorded music is the same every time it is played - frozen in time. Live performance can draw on the synchronicity of the artists' inspiration and interaction with the audience to create a unique experience. The Grateful Dead were masters of this and often said how they appreciated the Deadheads' tolerance of their occasional stinkers to enable them to take the risks necessary to access transcendental levels of performance impossible in a recording studio.

Live music every time for me but if it's at home - play it LOUD!

Hmack posted:

I don't know if this was typical of a stadium concert or not. I have been to a number of outdoor festivals when I was younger, but I think this was probably the first stadium concert to which I have been. I won't be going to another.            

Generally I have found open air venues and performances to sound much better, which I guess is because the sound waves are able to dissipate rather than being confined and reflected off walls. I recall superb sound at Knebworth and Wembley Stadium.

Clive B posted:

I absolutely agree. I often think that the technicians responsible for mixing the sound must be deaf. I too have used various types of ear plugs over the years, but they cut the treble to such an extent to make it a pointless experience. I think the best solution would be to have made to measure ear plugs of the type used by musicians. These can be quite costly, but worth the investment if you want to continue attending live rock concerts and still be able to hear well in old age. 

There are some ear-plugs called Doc’s ProPlugs that are available in a vented version that are available in 8 different sizes (you measure your ear to choose), not expensive, which are claimed to be used by musicians. I don’t know what they’re like, but quite coincidentally I have just been looking at them online, contemplating getting for scuba diving for which the vented design is said to make them suitable. If I do Get them I shall have to assess for sound quality as well!

Clive B posted:

Hmack posted:

I don't know if this was typical of a stadium concert or not. I have been to a number of outdoor festivals when I was younger, but I think this was probably the first stadium concert to which I have been. I won't be going to another.            

Generally I have found open air venues and performances to sound much better, which I guess is because the sound waves are able to dissipate rather than being confined and reflected off walls. I recall superb sound at Knebworth and Wembley Stadium.

Open air venues can be good for sound -but certainly not always, as they have their own challenges for the PA system. However I personally dislike huge venues like stadia because the live experience is diluted when you have to use binoculars to see the artist, or are viewing on a TV screen - and the sound is out of sync because of the distance. Adding insult to injury, the larger the venie the more tickets seem to cost! (Though that is often a reflection of te popularity of the band.)  My favourite venue in London was the original Marquee club in Wardour street, where even quite big acts played, despite its 400 or so maximum capacity -and the house PA system wasn’t bad. I do miss it and the gigs I saw there.

Clive B posted:

I absolutely agree. I often think that the technicians responsible for mixing the sound must be deaf. I too have used various types of ear plugs over the years, but they cut the treble to such an extent to make it a pointless experience. I think the best solution would be to have made to measure ear plugs of the type used by musicians. These can be quite costly, but worth the investment if you want to continue attending live rock concerts and still be able to hear well in old age. 

I bought a pair of these - Isolate MiNis by Flare Audio. They work well for me. No point going to live gigs if they damage your hearing. But, for me, live is almost always better.

I'm seeing more 'live' music than ever, attending 57 gigs last year & only 2 were in the 'ear damaging' category. I attend gigs ranging from Chamber to loud Electric bands & try to avoid large venues, with the Royal Albert Hall being the largest producing good quality sound (I will never return to the O2).

The venue & the sound engineer obviously affect the sound quality of the performance & LOUD is not always painful.  Seeing, Godspeed You! Black Emperor at the 'Troxy'  & Thumpermonkey at 'The Black Heart' gigs were ruined by the SE's who are probably limited in their knowledge of sound dynamics. I have seen Thumpermonkey many times & although they are capable of shifting around my internal organs, a good SE can make the experience, life affirming, due to the dynamic range and rhythms of their music. 

Last Saturday's This Is Not This Heat gig at Café OTO (small venue) was a fabulous experience, especially as they added 4 extra speakers to the normal 2 used for the PA. As it was a 7 piece band with 2 drummers, it could have been disastrous, but the SE was excellent and the instrumentation/vocals were controlled with ease. Seeing bands like the Heat, The Necks, Palm (last year) really makes 'live' music so much more a physical & cerebral experience. When you see other people expressing their emotions in unison, especially during a Necks gig, those great to be alive moments are not replicated at home. At least in my experience.

Well either I’ve been cursed by this forum affliction of comparing live rigs to home hifi or the gig I went to onSaturday night had the worst sound I have ever heard at a concert. Bass that hit you in the shins instead of the chest and muffled vocal horrible!

Innocent Bystander posted:

I find the comments about excessive bass rather interesting. I have long been under the impression that a proportion of people on the forum simply don’t like bass, not uncommonly preferring or at least liking small speakers incapable of much bass energy or decrying the ‘overblown’ (to them) nature of larger speakers. The comments above tend to reinforce this impression. For me the bass is an essential part of much of the music to which I listen - and I have always wanted my system at home to reproduce it like at live performances, where to me it often has sounded just right. Of course, the part the bass plays, and how much or how deep it goes depends on the type of music, even being absent in some, but the aim live is presumably to get it so it sounds “right” to the production team, who should be meeting the intent of the artist, albeit within the limits of the venue.

 

IB - for me this is the crux of home hi-fi, in that getting the bass 'right' in a room is, perhaps, the biggest challenge as it affects the whole replay picture (so to speak). I've been to quite a few dems where the bass performance was improved (often using a more powerful/controlling amp) and the overall replay across the sound spectrum improved markedly as a result. Put another way, get the bass wrong, and it muddies the overall sound - which is why many prefer stand-mounts, with relatively limited bass outputs?

As for concerts and live performances, as BtB reports above, it's a bit of a lottery to my ears. Some can be very good - I like to be up close to jazz (i.e. no/very limited amplification), whereas for rock, I like to protect my ears and get way, way back.

Ive too have been going to quite a lot of gigs recently and find too many are too quiet, polite, you should feel a live rock and roll band as Pev says above, but not to ear-damaging levels. Big venue line arrays are often very shouty though, horrible. The other two commonest problems seem to be too many voices and instruments being put through too inadequate house systems i.e. a small PA system with lots of inputs, cranked up loud and therefore distorted. Female vocals seem to be really difficult to get right over a band too, usually inaudible or just completely swamped sadly. 'Crystal clear' live sound is rare but does happen, there are some great FOH sound guys out there, too many mediocre ones perhaps. For small venues, the sound stage front can be often really good, 'inside' the main PA, the instruments 'live' and the vocals off the wedges. Standing by the sound board should be the other good place......One sound mixer at a venue in London spent the whole of a band's set watching a footy match on his ipad wedged between the knobs and dials, a real pro! I still remember Frank Zappa's gigantic PA speaker piles on the sides of the stage at the Hammersmith Odeon years ago, somewhat loud but totally clear, the best system I ever heard.

Pev posted:

Innocent Bystander posted:

 For me the bass is an essential part of much of the music to which I listen - and I have always wanted my system at home to reproduce it like at live performances, where to me it often has sounded just right.

I totally agree - there is nothing like a live gig and when the bass actually causes your chest or even nostrils to resonate it's an unbeatable feeling.

Above and beyond the physical sensation is the shared experience of the live moment of creation. Recorded music is the same every time it is played - frozen in time. Live performance can draw on the synchronicity of the artists' inspiration and interaction with the audience to create a unique experience. The Grateful Dead were masters of this and often said how they appreciated the Deadheads' tolerance of their occasional stinkers to enable them to take the risks necessary to access transcendental levels of performance impossible in a recording studio.

Live music every time for me but if it's at home - play it LOUD!

The Dead were also very meticulous in tailoring the size and configuration of their wonderful sound system to suit the venue. Decibel levels were always quite reasonable. And they usually got the mix dialed in well after a song or two. I never left a concert with ringing ears.

Contrast that with my last (final?) two live rock concerts, where sound quality was poor, and ear plugs were mandatory. I enjoy the “experience”, but I still go for the music. Unfortunately, I think I am done with large live rock shows. 

I gave up on big venues years ago when working in a call centre, having tinnitus and excess decibels did not mix. Not just concerts, cinema as well.

So my venue of choice is St Georges in Bristol, small, quality acoustic, which does not mean polite chamber music. In particular shows with Lau are amplified, but without distortion. I am constantly amazed at the volume that can be generated by unaccompanied vocals such as The Tallis Scholars.

PA or sound reinforcement systems are never going to be the same as "domestic" equipment, even though there is a crossover with some companies.

To be fair, PA equipment has to be built differently, to be robust and of course they only use "ordinary" cables (wot, no emoji for tongue in cheek?)

I concur with you Popeye. Before I had my Naim system I was under the impression that live music with all the money they spend on equipment, number of watts etc was the embodiment of true satisfaction. I was wrong: the detail and clarity that I experience is head and shoulders beyond any live performance. There are occasions when the sound engineers don't tweak the levels correctly and it just sounds like noise. However, nothing compares to the atmosphere of live music.

Pev posted:

Live music every time for me but if it's at home - play it LOUD!

And yet again, that exploding sausage fails to convey any meaning whatsoever.

Concert sound engineers are evidently completely deaf. That's all I can put it down to. Big acts here in Vancouver play in a hockey arena that has such poor acoustics, it makes little difference who is actually playing, or what they are playing. It is all just a deafening din of white noise and echo. One really has to enjoy the visual show, as the aural aspect is simply a godawful unintelligible mess. I just don't go anymore. And those damn video-recording phones.

notnaim man posted:

I gave up on big venues years ago when working in a call centre, having tinnitus and excess decibels did not mix. Not just concerts, cinema as well.

So my venue of choice is St Georges in Bristol, small, quality acoustic, which does not mean polite chamber music. In particular shows with Lau are amplified, but without distortion. I am constantly amazed at the volume that can be generated by unaccompanied vocals such as The Tallis Scholars.

PA or sound reinforcement systems are never going to be the same as "domestic" equipment, even though there is a crossover with some companies.

To be fair, PA equipment has to be built differently, to be robust and of course they only use "ordinary" cables (wot, no emoji for tongue in cheek?)

 

The St Georges is a truly world-class venue. One of the best I've ever experienced. I miss it it badly.