Acoustics

That's interesting, Israel. Loud bass pizzicato would contain a lot of initial high harmonics, followed by the body of the note. My guess is that a tube will emphasise the low note and perhaps mask the very high harmonics that give the initial attack.

I also think we need the harmonics very much so in order to hear the tuning on a tuba. Possibly, the harmonic content gives away any poor tuning. I know that when I play near a tuba, I detect the fifth (The first harmonic) sometimes almost as strongly as the fundamental note. I have to be quite close to a tuba to hear it though. Chances are that on the Mahler recording, they are fairly closely mic'ed so there would be a lot of harmonic content there and if the amp reproduces that content clearly, you would indeed be more aware of tuning.

That's really interesting and could well be why so many musicians like tubes, Israel. The added harmonics kind of smooth the 'actual' harmonics and so you become less susceptible to tuning errors.

Actually, you have reminded me of a recording that I did on the oboe which has a nasty opening. Poulenc's Sonata. The engineer close mic'ed me. (Uncomfortably so for me) It was picking up key rattles and my own gasping for air etc.

I also noticed any tuning errors on playback more than when I was playing. We're talking tiny amounts, but I was aware of it.

On the nasty opening which starts on a top 'D' (D Bb Eb, Gb), the tuning really bothered me, so the engineer set up a mic further back and kind of blended (or took out the close feed) on that particular section - the result was that it sounded more in tune to me. The engineer did mention harmonic content.

Also, when I've sat next to a flautist with dodgy tuning and I have to play alongside or even in unison (which is a pig if they keep wobbling with a huge vibrato), I tend to lock into the flute's harmonic content. I tend to hear the fifth above moreso than anything else and it really helps to get your own instrument in line with them.

I did the 'Rite of Spring' with Boulez and one section that we all struggled with and went over and over again was the section where all the oboe section play this descending harmony before the alto flute plays that wonderful folk song F# E F# C# B E C#. I was doing first oboe, and those parallel chords on the oboes are a nightmare. Boulez was/is a fanatic and we went on and on for tuning (to the point where my lips bled actually). The one thing that helped us all was to listen to the 'buzzing' (harmonics) when all of the oboes played. If the buzzing was in tune, we knew that we all were as well.

So there may well be something in what you are saying about the tuning being more apparent on the ss amp and not so much on tubes.

Hence one difference between a musician listening and a hi fi person. A hi fi person would accept slightly 'off' tuning whereas musicians really can't so they may well prefer the 'dirty' out of tune version on a tube.

You know the reality of getting everyone in an orchestra the size of the Mahler symphony in absolute tune so then you'd be glad to have it smoothed out.

Let alone the actual technicalities of some of the parts in that piece. It's also a bugger to play!!

I think the 'harmonic' content is quite an important thing for a musician because instruments do produce so many at close quarters that imo go missing from a lot of recordings and non musicians wouldn't know. I also think that this could be why so many hi fi people often like very bright headphones - it can help to accentuate harmonics. (although for me - normally not the right ones!!!!)

Hopefully, that rant makes sense, but it ties in with what you are describing.

To me, Israel, the O2 produces quite an 'accurate' or 'flat' sound, but that's not to say that the harmonic content is reproduced in the same quantities as the original.

I think that's why I have problems with a lot of hi fi gear as well and why I change it so often!

I tell you what Israel; reading your posts is brilliant for me since I do actually understand exactly what you're saying in terms of the musicality and to me, it makes perfect sense.

However, I suspect that others might think us a pair of loonies ........ ;D

Engineers often think that they've captured a good recording if the fundamental notes are good and strong etc, but they don't always capture what's above, depending on mic placement/room etc and what is referred to as 'air' in headphones could well be the harmonic content actually being reproduced. (However, perhaps not in the right quantities for each harmonic, which is why speakers and headphones can be hard to live with)

It is partially very true, Ian. I am thinking specifically of the last note of the first movement of Mahler 5th, which is a loud C# pizzicato in the basses, right after the flute C# at the end of the C# minor arpeggio. I have yet to hear that one in tune! Both in live performances, and every recording I have heard, even the ones with some of the finest bass sections, it just simply is out of tune - way too sharp! IMHO it is not really an acoustical problem, because if it were, it would be rather subtle. It is way too sharp because it is fortissimo. It seems ridiculous, but true! The bass player's right hand finger, in an effort to make it loud enough, plucks the string so forcefully, that it reaches the point where it raises the string's pitch, sometimes even by a quarter tone or more, despite the fact that their left hand is fretting the string in the proper position, should it have been arco instead. Also, the fact that the sound duration is so short, does not give the players a chance to get it tuned.

This is why I consider mike placement more of an art than a science! A good sound engineer will use close miking judiciously, and be aware of how much of the noises should be apparent, and I don't only mean key clicks, or air gasping, but all the noises that are part of the sound: hissing, buzzing, etc...


One of the first things early in my performing career that I learned was that whenever the intonation is critical, STOP THE VIBRATO!!! I also learned that it is good to befriend the second bassoonist, for he/she establishes the pitch in woodwind chords, and that all the garbage (out of tune harmonics ) floats to the top where the flute usually is on the receiving end of.



It makes a lot of sense to me as well, Ian. Also, harmonics (upper partials) are what define the individual instrument's timbre. If one were to record the same note, played by several different instruments in succession, and after removing the attacks and the harmonics, leaving only the pure fundamental, upon playback, the listener would be hard put to distinguish which instrument was playing!



Do you really care? I don't! One of the luxuries of being old and retired. At my age, I don't really care to have everyone's approval. Been there! Done that!

Cheers!
Israel

I do not know about Israel, he seems quite normal to me, but Ian ?? I am quite sure he IS a loony..

Sometimes you just have to hit the ball thrown at you

...... but nice.

Very true! And, we shouldn't forget that a recording is only an electronically reproduced impression of the actual sound. To expect headphones to give us the actual realistic rendition of what occurs in a live performance is asking for the impossible! One of the missing ingredients in headphone listening is the very important feeling of real depth, i.e. the physical sensation of the way the sound hits not only our ears, but our bodies as well, strangely enough! For example, no recording can reproduce, even with the help of multiple speakers, the feel of a fortissimo by a huge orchestra, choruses, soloists, etc. in a live performance. Mahler knew that well, and used it to great advantage in his 8th Symphony ("Symphony of a Thousand"). It is the kind of sound that not only fills your ears, but slams you in the chest! Being there has no substitute, and this is why I look at recordings as an art form, other than live performances. Some headphones are a little better than others in giving the impression of depth - sound stage, etc., but they can not reproduce the live concert phenomenon.



Agree! It is an acoustical fact that the low frequencies require much more distance than the higher ones, to be properly audible. The actual physical size of the bass wavelength is much longer than the headphones allow. So, the headphones can only give us an 'impression' of bass. Nothing like what one hears in a good auditorium. As an example the opening low C in Strauss's "Also Sprach Zarathustra" has a length of 32 feet! It would be hard to fit that into a headphone!?!?

It is interesting to note that despite it's small size, even the tiny IEM, such as the Sennheiser iE8 can produce impressive bass, but IMHO, as good as that is, it is because it causes our ear drums to respond, or sense the bass, and works to our advantage. The way I understand what Ian implies is that in the case of headphones, regardless how well their transducers can generate low frequencies, the missing ingredient is the spatial one, hence the listener's perception of the recorded performance is not the same as if being in the concert hall. The feel in the stomach or chest, even at lower volumes, while subtle is still there. Let us not forget for example that the transducer of a contrabassoon or a bass clarinet is not that large, and although the bores of these instruments are their resonators, in order for their sound to be perceived properly, they need some space to expand and blossom. In a concert hall the hall acoustics are in effect the extension or resonator of the instruments, and has a great effect in the SQ.



How true. The length of the path does not determine the the bottom frequency. The individual instrument's tone generator, or transducer does that. The reed of the clarinet, the air reed of the flute, the buzzing of the brass player's lips, the rosined bow's causing the strings to vibrate as fingered on the fingerboard, or in the case of the woodwinds fingering the holes on the bore, etc. determine the pitch played, but depend largely on the length and size of the rest of the instrument to produce that specific pitch. There is a reason why the bass fiddle is much larger in size than the piccolo. The bass fiddle needs a lot more space for its sound to blossom out than the piccolo does. If one listens to a bass fiddle played in a tiny damped or anechoic room he/she will hear little of the fundamental note, but mostly upper partials.



My HE-500 with your designed active filter do that as well as my T40/T50 also with your filter, and I am very pleased with that! But, as much as they hit me and pound on my eardrums, they can not, and I don't expect them to, hit me in the chest or the stomach to reproduce the feel of a live performance.



In effect they are damped judiciously, as one would a musical instrument. The walls are usually some of the major problems acousticians deal with, for they can cause standing waves, effectively deadening the sound. As an example how much the acoustical spatial aspect counts in good sound generation, I will bring up the following: I recall playing a series of concerts in New York's Philharmonic Hall, as it was then called, shortly after it was built according to the finest scientific formulas for good acoustics. It was a terrible hall, producing a raucous sound. No matter how beautifully the sound generated by the musicians was on stage, it went nowhere because of the awful acoustics. The stage sits on concrete, and is as dead as a doorknob, offering no resonance to the point where musicians on stage would have a hard time hearing each other. Playing on that stage, I had no idea how my sound was coming across, and felt compelled to play louder and louder in order to make sure that my sound projected out in the audience. I am mentioning this to emphasize that even the best acoustic calculations do not produce the desired results. After all was tried and done, in desperation, the powers that be called conductor George Szell, then Music Director of the Cleveland Orchestra. On the stage of the empty hall, he clapped his hands, walked around the hall, did the same, and then pronounced his final verdict: "You called me too Late!!!". A few years later, with a giant monetary donation by the Fischer family (of Fischer Audio) the hall was rebuilt, and the result: the same giant comedy/tragedy of errors, the same lousy acoustics, producing a rough spotty raucous sound! Only one thing was different. The hall was now renamed to "Alice Fischer Auditorium". It seems that the so called experts ignored the fact that a hall needs to be tuned to offer controlled resonance, and that the reflections of the stage shell (also tuned), as well as the stage floor play a very important role in the hall acoustics. I played for years in The Academy of Music of Philadelphia, known for its excellent acoustics. The floor of that stage resembles a giant bass fiddle: it is made of solid wood and sits on top of a 30 foot deep well! IMHO acoustics, even today, with all our tech know-how, is a black art!

Welcome to the discussion, Chong!

You are now singing my song! . At the risk of getting off topic here, you may recall that I did mention in one or two of my posts that SS and recordings are better appreciated as separate art forms, and can never reproduce the live concert experience! I agree with you wholeheartedly that there is nothing that can substitute being there, at the live performance, and recently talked about the actual physical experience of being hit by the sound not only in the ears, but also on your body - chest, stomach, etc...



This of course is not within the scope of this thread, which is about how well the O2 performs, but I think I may be forgiven if I overstep a bit and talk about it as seen from my perspective as a performing musician. Ian will bear me out when I say that good performing musicians are well aware of the 6th sense, for without it, the art of give and take in ensemble playing, especially chamber music and accompanied solo performance, is absent! As a performer, I value this immensely, and it never ceases to amaze me what miracles it helps create on stage! I have had experiences of simply sitting down with some musicians that I had just met for the first time, going through some rather difficult, ensemble-wise challenging music, and without a single rehearsal, achieve unbelievable music making, with perfect ensemble, thanks to that elusive, but very real 6th sense!

I don't exactly know which sense you refer to as the 7th sense, but for me it exists perhaps in a different way. I dare call it Zen. Zen can not be explained in words. It has to be experienced! As a performer, while I have tried to achieve that state during a performance, many times it eluded me, especially when playing with some less than enlightened players, or through my own human shortcomings, which would bring me back to basics, such as intonation, rhythm, etc. But,.....when Zen is achieved during a performance, at the moment it does, I am unaware of it. It makes all those years of practicing and studying worthwhile! I would only realize in retrospect that it had occurred - after done playing. These have happened to me only a few times years ago, usually at solo recitals, accompanied by a good keyboard player. Rarely, maybe once or twice, in an orchestra conducted by a great conductor. After it would be all over, I would be unable to remember holding a flute in my hands, the presence of the accompanist, or even the audience, or their reaction during my playing! Those experiences were too few and far in between, but I know that they were amazing performances! It was as if someone else was playing my flute - probably true, and I can't claim even an ounce of credit for themI This is what 7th sense is in my book!



Thank you, Chong! I have an indolent type of leukemia - CLL (Chronic Lymphocytic Leukemia) that usually is not fatal, and of all the leukemias this one is the best to have. But, periodically I have to be subjected to the 'joys' of chemotherapy, and there where lies the little devil, for the cure, with its side-effects, has recently proven to be worse than the disease!

All the Best!
Israel