Re: [ARSCLIST] A fundamental Flaw: Was Sampling Theory (was Fred Layn's post on the Studer list re: Quantegy)

[Karl Miller <lyaa071@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>]

On Wed, 19 Jan 2005, Steven Smolian wrote:

> A basic flaw in the way classical records are made is that the conductor or
> his surrogate has approval of the finished product.  He is used to hearing
> from yet another physical position, one that exagerates the spread of the
> instruments.  If he is not kept under control, we get the acoustical diorama
> of the "shaded dogs" and "living presence" records, as unrealistic in their
> way as ping-pong stereo or 14' wide pianos, though a far more pleasent
> listening experience, especially to those of us who fantasy-conduct with the
> record.

I don't understand the use of the word "flaw" in this context, since, for
me, it suggests the notion of an "absolute sound," a notion that I find
problematic.

I would agree that the conductor's perspective in the sound does not
provide the audience's experience. For me, hearing what the conductor hears
is a different perspective...and, with my limited experience as a conductor,
something I value. Again, in my limited experience, during rehearsals...no
audience in the hall...I would give a downbeat and let the ensemble play
while I would walk around the hall and get a sense of what the audience
might be hearing...of course, in an empty hall I could not get an exact
sense of their experience.

Perhaps the best audio perspective might result if the composer could be
present at the recording session...unfortunately that is rarely
possible, and as one of my teachers once stated (not to say that this is
truth), "composers don't always make the best interpreter's of their own
work." However, we can get some ideas by looking at how a composer
wrote for the orchestra. Consider the opposing notions of orchestration as
practiced by Berlioz and Wagner. Berlioz, in both his music and his
writing, made it clear that he was looking for a sound where an oboe
sounded like an oboe. Wagner's ideas, which he articulated in the design
of the orchestra pit for his theater, indicated that he wanted a mass of
sound...less differentiation of the particular timbres of the individual
instruments.

In recording, I try to consider the nature of player...for example...when
doing the roll transfers of Granados, playing that was filled with a more
intimate quality, I looked for an intimate sound, for Fannie Bloomfield
Zeisler, more of a expansive, concert like presence...at the same time
trying to be mindful of the size of the room in which the original rolls
were recorded and trying to make some sense of trying to sustain the line
acoustically, as the pianist would in their playing. Likewise, in my
limited experience in recording orchestras, I try to consider the style of
orchestration.

While I can find some value...perhaps as a lesson in orchestration...in
recordings like that von Karajan Le Sacre, my preference is to have a
recording situation which attempts to equalize the listening experience.
Yes, in part that contradicts my own approach to recording. True, the
microphones behind the head of the conductor will provide a different sound
quality in every hall, but I believe it is about as close to a standard as we
could have. If I want to hear the sound from the balcony or somewhere
else...I can add some reverb or whatever...or, as we have discussed before
on this list, have the same performance recorded with microphones in a
variety of positions and then let the listener choose their
preferred perspective.

I also believe that these notions could be applied to the restoration
process. While it may be subject to the pressings they have available, I
find the differences between a Marston transfer and a Obert Thorn transfer
to be remarkable. While I find relatively less authenticity in Dutton's
work, I still find it to be worth a listen...is it Koussevitzky or is it
Dutton...well there is more Dutton in his work than their is Marston and
Obert Thorn in their work.

Is Dutton's work flawed...well, for me, it depends on what you want to
hear...ultimately, if you want to hear pure Koussevitzky...well you can't,
he is dead. The commercial recordings of his work are a compromise,
(especially all of those years when Victor used such extreme compression)
and while the broadcasts present limitations of their own, for me there is
more truth there than in the commercial issues.

Karl