Live music - how can you tell?

If I'm walking past a bar that has live music playing it's always possible to tell that it's live and not recorded, but I don't really know why/how

Even if (as usual) it's all amplified, using amplifiers and speakers that we here would probably not have great things to say about, it still sounds "live" (and therefore, better). That applies even if the instrument has no 'live' sound of its own (eg electronic keyboard).

I guess this touches on the "music" vs. "hifi" debate again - also on the "Source first" question. With amplified live music, your source is surely as good as it's going to get?

I guess one of the things I'm striving for in my system is that if it's playing some live music I get the same "je ne sais quoi" sensation that it really is live, and not recorded. One thing, that would seem to suggest the flatties have got something right, is that I'm sure this "sensation of live music" has nothing to do with timbral or tonal accuracy as even a terrible PA will let it through. It would suggest that it may well have something to do with timing :yikes:

Michael.

 

I can usually tell if its live, more often than not because the singing is crap

 

I suspect it is mainly to do with timing and dynamics. Also the music has not had to go through the recording and production process, which probably mangles the signal somewhat.

 

Either that, or the mixing engineer hasn't 'Screwed' the sound in the 'Production process' from his 'Experianced understanding of the the artists emotions and feelings', that he wishes to convey via his 'Mastering diligence'

 

I think PBirkett as the answer as people always make mistakes in live recordings. Also the live recordings on the CDs etc tend to be best live recording from a gig unless its just randomly picked.

 

As usual, I have a long and boring explanation for it. Only today I'm rather short on time. So I'll post later on this. But the question is THE question when considering musical reproduction.

 

I'm in agreement and very much suspect you're right Robbo.

How many commercially available recordings have dynamics which match those of real life (DVD-A/SACD has the potential in theory) or where the macro and micro dynamics are in exact proportion to a live performance? Even most live recordings are edited afterwards in the studio so that proportions are wrong or get altertered. (what WM said above).

I too can tell the difference between hi-fi and live music 99% of the time. I often hear some very nice piano playing coming from a house on my walk to the train station to go to work in the mornings, and even hearing it through a closed window can tell it's live and not coming from a hi-fi or being amplified or reproduced by some kind of audio system.

The most convincing experience I've had, not from a hi-fi, but from a PA system was when I was at school and use to do dabble as a "sound equipment relocation engineer". We once had this £99 Matsui CD player plugged into one of the inputs on the PA's head unit and I played a CD where one of the tracks was a 5 minute bass guitair solo (Brian Bromberg). Now that to me sounded like the musician had just plugged his instrument into the PA and was actually there playing live!

One question though. In the context of dance music, if a DJ recorded a set that (s)he played in front a crowd one night and played back that same recording through the PA system the following night, would anybody be able to tell the difference? Assuming you couldn't see whether the DJ was on or off stage? Some how I doubt it.

 

The answer is in this last comment..

The reason you can always tell it's live is because ..

a) PA's have a distinctive sound quality that you are able to distinguish..(even if you don't realise your doing it subconsciously).. this is particularly true of the vocals.. I've yet to hear anything short of a full sized gig..where the vocal mike/PA are anything better than atrocious.. you can always hear a boxy/muffled/honky sound to the vocals. I can't see how you could claim that even crap PA systems maintain the timbre of the instruments.. IMHO .. there is nothing worse at reproducing the correct timbre of an instrument than a cheap PA system.. in fact only the very high end ones get even reasonably close !

b) The timing is often crap too in most of these bands.

Personally ... I think it's entirely down to tonal balance that you can always distinguish the two... most pub/club replay systems are pretty dire.. and so you can always hear it's a recording from the shoddy bass/treble reproduction.. live doesn't always sound good quality.. but there is something about the bass/treble quality that is always "different" from recorded music.

GTM

 

There's usually someone standing on your foot, it's too loud, and your beers been spilt all over your front at least 3 times.

Cheers

 

GTM - I think you misunderstood me, I meant to say that even crap PAs which have terrible timbral accuracy still let through the information that lets you indentify the music as live.

But take PAs out of it. As with Henry, at the place I stay when I'm in London I often hear someone playing the piano in one of the houses I walk past to/from the station. The playing is very good so that isn't the giveaway but it's quite clearly a live piano, even with the sound being muffled by the windows of the basement floor it comes from.

Michael.

 

I think it has to do mostly with dynamics, CDs played in discos with a powerful system sound like live music, at least to me, our home systems will always compress the music if played at "live" levels, smaller rooms and less power...

 

I also remember a certain red Sharp double deck with a white headphone lead running into a certain WEM valve amp - playing "Telegraph Road" on tape(!!) (must have been 1987??) - and it rocked! Great days dude.

Just wish I'd been there when David Workman blew up the right channel of the PA - wasn't he jamming "Mother" by Lennon??

I think you can tell because of the drum kit usually - there's no way domestic gear can reproduce the scale of a real kit because even sources like SACD seem to impinge on it somewhere. Try reproducing the VOLUME of a kit in your own room too - my mate PD's housemate is a drummer, and when he goes for it it's fekking loud... I have a photo of him and his kit, with my (usually huge, but in this case weedy!) Epos ES14s either side of the kit - there's no way a puny 8 inch driver can reproduce a 18 inch bass drum accurately...

PAs (similar to some of the Naim gear I've heard) seem to be overexuberant in the mid-upper treble (can tend to a flamethrower/ear ringing treble after a few minutes) - probably 'cos most places use a too-weedy PA at high levels so it clips, while real places like, for example, the Stratford Rex, use a huge rig at maybe 30% of its full capacity. Result - you can talk over it, not get ringing ears, but it's still loud.

 

In theory, there's nothing wrong with the dynamic of SACD, it's just that there are NO commercial recordings available to demonstrate the type of "uncompressed" dynamic range that you'd experience in real life, it's mixed out during the mastering for practical reasons. Things are done that way, let's face it because in reality, the average Jo Bloggs isn't going to have a set of amp and speakers (mainly the amp I'd say), that could handle those sort of transient demands without crumbling under the demands.

 

Well, if that's the case, why bother with a super dynamic range format at all for the home? Doesn't make sense to me - they seem to market the whole thing on decay and dynamic range, so if that's really the case, guess they're stiffing us audiophools again then

 

Well. As usual in a hurry, but let's give it a try.

First: the frequency range balance has already been mentioned. When you listen to live music, the sound is usually very lean, but the basses are there and go really down. That means, IMO, that hifi tends to reproduce bass through energizing the upper bass, at the detriment at really low bass (because both of power amp limitations and speaker size)

Second: The upper harmonics that make up timbre are always cleaner when you listen to music live. The reason for that is, I think that both the recording and the reproduction gear have massive lower resolution than the real thing. When reproduced with solid state amps I often think music is presented as if in lower resolution: think of printers: a professional one will give you 2400 dpi; a normal one will give 600 dpi. It is that kind of difference, but I think most amplifiers only get to about 300 dpi. With valves, the top end is simply lacking. SACD will undoubtedly better that aspect (I know DAT does), but I think there will still be recording and amplifying limitations.

Third, but related to second: Live music sounds very clean (the resolution factor) even if it is very loud. As a matter of fact, acoustic instruments and voices usually are loud. If you try to get that kind of loudness with a normal amplifier all kinds of distortions will creep in. So, in order to keep that kind of distortion down, people tend to play amplifiers a little softer than the real thing. As a matter of fact that is why the better gear you have the harder it gets to get loud music (Krells, Brystons and other such things apart). That is because distortion adds a sense of loudness – but it is just dirtiness. Live music can get really loud without any distortion.

Fourth, the direction of sound. Usually speakers are directional. True sound isn't. Must hifi maniacs don't care for omnidirectional speakers, but I always though that was the way to go. Live sound rings in the air, be it in a dry or an ample acoustic. Perhaps with the new multichannel technology that aspect can be overcome when you listen to music at the center of a cube defined by four speakers. But it will take time to get there.

Fifth: Recording engineers know the limitations of usual gear and change the sound to fit into it; hence the bulging upper bass.

Bottom line: If I was asked what the most important factors are, I'd say, first, resolution, distortion and loudness; after that sound direction and recording techniques.

I have no time to edit this. I hope I was clear enough.

 

I think it's largely down to the less "clinical" sounding performance and dynamics. I've not been to many "proper" PA'd gigs for a while. Only local bands (my brother) in small venues. I guess alot of it comes down to what is considered a live sound? Using my brother as an example, he plays acoustic guitar and sings. I'll hear him play MOst days around the house and am as such, very familiar with the sound. However, put him through a PA and though in some areas it may gain (volume obviously), I feel a fair bit is lost. Now, this is MOre than likely down to a budget set up in the venue, with everything from the room, the way it's mixed, and speakers changing the sound. So, I guess there's live and there's "live"

The last thing I heard through a decent PA was when I went to see the Lion King earlier this year. The show was the first thing of it's sort i'd experienced. I was blown away by it! The music and the acting impressive in equaly large parts! The thing MOst noticeable about the music side of it was the Dynamics. From a soft vocal and perhaps one instrument into a full on attack of sound! Venes like those where such shows take place are much larger than the average persons listning room, with volume levels to match. The "thwack" factor of drums is often mentioned (Tony and his MA's), and I know my system has nowhere near the chest pounding thwack level of a live drum kit!

I think really good dynamics are best when big rooms and large (potential) levels are available.

MO

p.s The lion king was really good

 

MO, I've heard systems with relatively small stand mounts produce serious dynamics, in a small room, although they did have a 250w rms amp on them, it's the proportions in which the speaker/room ratio's are equal?, that it seems to sing.
I recently was invitied to an disused airfield to test some 'newly developed' amplifiers (for Outdoor use) the require ment was 120DB@ 400m :drum: through huge horn loaded drivers shaped like snail shells, with 10KW of power, sadly not enough though only 112/3DB reached, was it dynamic :JPS: I'd buy that for a dollar, but not want you want in our front room.
Having a system that just majors on Dynamic's in my book is a little short sighted, not all music requires squeezing out the speaker at warp 11, and without harshiness or hardiness, plus it can be irksome and relentless.
MO, the Shearwaters are somewhat 'more Dynamic' than the MA's, by a serious margin, with the big plus of a decent mid band too, the pair of XA-200 I heard were fairly dynamic, a lot different to the sleep inducing later kit. WM

 

Hehe...the first satisfied customer of the new smilie.

 

Try listening to a song being played on a hi-fi system over a telephone, and for some reason it sounds live -- not played over a PA live, but live. Jazz sounds particularly good in this regard.

Imagine the dynamics, resolution, and imaging on the phone (ie, non-existant) -- so why do you get that live vibe?

~ ~ Dave

 

Having gigged for a few years and done the sound for a band for a few years and now a studio owner I would agree with much of what GTM says. It also depends if you are talking about acoustic instruments or amplified; there is a massive difference and the reason why you would know it is live is different in both. I would sum up as scale and effortless power, assuming that we are talking about a decent size PA system; hifi's cannot match this. If we are talking pub band then it is because the mix is unbalanced, if it is a pop band then it will not sound polished even if backing tracks are used, if it is a competent acoustic set then maybe the timbre - but this is a difficult one but one that I always know.

I do think that this is a different question to the music vs hifi question though. Live music will never sound hifi but it also might not sound music either especially if it is miked or mixed incorrectly. I also think that some hifi systems exaggerate the music bit as GrahamN discussed with us when he was auditioning his Wilsons.

dominicT