naturerecordists
[Top] [All Lists]

Re: ORTF Recommendations

Subject: Re: ORTF Recommendations
From: "clay" dan.cesonrocks
Date: Thu Aug 26, 2010 5:57 am ((PDT))
On Thu, Aug 26, 2010 at 1:19 AM, Rob Danielson <> wrote:

>
>
> At 11:57 PM -0400 8/25/10, clay wrote:
> >
> >
> >Rob,
> >
> >what do you mean by stationary arrays (as mentioned in #6)?
>
> Hi Clay--
>
> Ones that are not moving. The belief is that its easier to obtain
> "cues" and infer space from them than when the array is moving.
>
>
Of course, I'd just never thought to record while moving.  :)


> >Thanks very much for your comments, I especially agree with number 10. :=
)
>
> The skills we've developed seemed to present unbridgeable differences
> in discussions a few years ago,.. Maybe we're more aware of the
> possibility of larger goals now.
>
>
Being an active participant on computer audiophile forums, I've experienced
the unbridgeable differences.


>
> >As for accuracy (of soundstage), I'll admit to not having a clue about a=
n
> >sort of standardized view on soundstage accuracy - seems to me it's a
> prime
> >example of "beauty is in the eye of the beholder".
>
> There doesn't seem to be a substitution for "gestalt,"-- the
> collective impression formed, but "beauty" is certainly the result of
> separate "qualities" we can take apart. Not many people have patience
> for this though-- a recording just sounds, "nice." For stereo,
> "localization" and "depth" are often studied separately. We can also
> try to hear how arrays treat indirect sounds differently-- perhaps an
> important, demanding quality in recording "ambience."
>


As a long-time audiophile, I'm familiar with the words (that can be) used t=
o
describe what I called soundstage accuracy - imaging, soundstaging,
ambience, depth, localization, body, 3D, etc.   What strikes me is that
there is no way to quantify (i.e. measure) the soundstage for accuracy.
Perhaps my "eye of the beholder" comment was a bit flippant, as no doubt
there is a great consistency in what listeners would call proper
soundstaging (e.g. when discussing loudspeaker performance), but given the
illusory nature of the soundstage, it definitely allows for the possibility
of what you called "unbridgeable differences" as to what recording style is
more accurate WRT soundstage.


Thanks Rob, I appreciate your post.

clay









<Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread>
Admin

The University of NSW School of Computer and Engineering takes no responsibility for the contents of this archive. It is purely a compilation of material sent by many people to the naturerecordists mailing list. It has not been checked for accuracy nor its content verified in any way. If you wish to get material removed from the archive or have other queries about the archive e-mail Andrew Taylor at this address: andrewt@cse.unsw.EDU.AU