himey
2K Club - QQ Super Nova
- Joined
- Nov 11, 2013
- Messages
- 3,506
Wow. Are you sure you aren't looking for the Steve Hoffman forum?
Reddit?
Wow. Are you sure you aren't looking for the Steve Hoffman forum?
No problem I don't care.I never trust someone who a) uses a put down to make a point and b) over inflates his resume to elevate an OPINION. So now you know where you stand with me.
I have many recordings of performances in which there is real program content in the surround and which are consistent with the composer's intent. Of course, there is the obvious example of Berlioz' Requiem which specifies multiple brass ensembles surrounding the audience but there's no need for a list. Let's just say that there is no disadvantage to having all the speakers equally good and there are many instances in which it is eminently desirable.
No problem I don't care.
Come and show me how to do my job, then we can talk.
I actually have to vet other people's crap recordings, as well as sorting out the equally crap problems with certain "hi end" microphones, which don't work anything like as well as they claim.
If the Vienna philharmonic can totally screw up their new year's day concert broadcast live to millions, then it's open shooting season on the mass media these days.
Btw, I have been "underwhelmed" with most German/Austrian productions recently.
I dunno what's wrong with those people, probably paid too much, sitting on their laurels, and churning out mediocrity, even Abbey Road last night on Radio 3 was no good at all...all sound and fury with no space.
By contrast France musique production the other night with orchestra C-E was gorgeous , as is a lot of BBC stuff.
Like I said, what point surround when BIG BUDGET multi microphone stereo stuff is complete sh..t (just like Michael Gerzon said btw..)
Let's say that I have been present at more than a few.Wait...but have you ever recorded an event in surround? Haha.
I bet your friends have if you haven't personally so you can have an opinion here.
Let's say that I have participated in a few and observed a few more.
Carry on talking bollocks.Attempts to ignore studio recordings and mixing makes your posts even more comical
Can sympathise a lot with that.Record in surround?
Audience recordings?
And then getting to set up a quad mic array in the sweet spot.
Something like a theater making a more permanent install of said mics - perhaps over the audience. This could give an authentic soundscape.
Recently I recorded solo saxophone/flute in a church and mic'd for surround. I more mic'd the room for control after the fact. So, not a quad array in a sweet spot.
Yeah, mention of live field recordings in surround and audience recordings will get me talking about all that!
I just haven't had the opportunity to record something like an orchestra in a perfect hall with the main array being quad in a sweet spot.
So, I guess I like hyper-realism is what I'm saying. Heh, I'm about to be shown the door right?
Doesn't digital make life horribly complicated?
There's no crying in audio!Oh dear, I think this will all end in tears.
There's no crying in audio!
Wuzzat?Friday around 4 PM I shed a few tears when I listened to YYZ.
.. happiness and light all the way.
The 24/96 format with Apogee or better AD is the best recording format I've used.
Topping this with pure analog is a mighty leap and begs for nothing but the best listening room to hear what someone might be going on about.
I think 24/96 is a great consumer format for stereo and surround too.
Being able to re-align a pair/group of spot mics on the computer screen after the fact for one thing!
That leads to an extra mic here and there that you'd never be able to use in the past. All the little "If only I'd be able to"... You pretty much can now.
It's a fine line for some people. I like the scenario where the digital world takes the pressure off and lets an artist soar rather than play it safe and stiff.
I can have an opinion without having recorded and played back surround myself ( I actually do bi-naural field recordings but that's another topic) because I am not interested in doing that and that is not what I want a quad set-up to achieve. I want fun sensory experience listening to all kinds of music, mostly rock. You are coming across as a bit of a zealot. There may, possibly, be right and wrong when it comes to playing back live recordings but not all of us are interested in that.Have you ever tried to record in surround?
Ever tried to play back what you just recorded?
I thought not..
Once you have done some of that, you can have an opinion.
I can think of 2 productions we did this way, one of which was with the choir singing in the theatre foyer.. (rear channels)... was completely ruined by the stupid audience starting to talk amongst themselves at that critical moment...
The other was Tchaikovski nutcracker where a child's chorus sings on the balcony (mixed rear and front channels to give a centre side)...with audience applause all around..
As a direct result of a patently obvious total inability to find a proper system to reproduce at least the test sequences I opted to stop all surround recording for the foreseeable future, despite the astonishing result.
I wish it were not so.
...again, why I opted to make my own system from scratch, which BTW can actually reproduce the surround stuff from Nimbus if and when I feel like it.....never mind the rock concerts I recorded in multi channel, despite the mic poisoning smoke.
Somehow this reminds me of the debates with the brilliant genius who did grateful dead's stuff... but that will truly GO OT then.
I can have an opinion without having recorded and played back surround myself ....
You are coming across as a bit of a zealot. There may, possibly, be right and wrong when it comes to playing back live recordings but not all of us are interested in that.
Enter your email address to join: