This isn't a panning problem. It's a movement and stereo imaging problem. So many of the comments below talk about panning but I feel that it might be getting confusing. There has been so much interest in this video that I will follow it up, soon hopefully. UPDATE - Followup available here - ruclips.net/video/EdDnAnSPQpg/видео.html
There is NO problem. It's not a problem at all except to you. Your ignorance is making what is common use into a problem. That's weird - & is not representative of reality in song production. If you're really an audiophile you're stepping outside your field & commenting on a completely different field but spouting ignorance. You're in no position to comment on the recording business & it's techniques - having already demonstrated you don't know your stuff. Other producers have commented here also - producers who know their craft.
@@SeanWysemanalso sounds perfectly fine in mono so I don’t know what exactly is the point other than to pontificate on needless bs caused by other needless bs
@AudioMasterclass - Most entertaining, but I must take a ittle bit of an issue. I manufacture high-end analog components. I'm also a musician, and have played numerous instruments in bands & orchestras of all denomination. I know what real music sounds like in all manner of venues. I simply don't quite understand your fixation on imagery. I'm listening to my workshop set-up which is basic & limited, but hilariously good! Everyone is gobsmacked by the realism - I played the CD of a sadly late friend, Nigel Richard; bagpipe builder and player extraordinare. He (without provocation) said it sounded just exactly as it did in the recording studio. Amazing what O/B's and concrete walls can acheive. My workshop isn't very large - maybe 5 x 7 metres with the O/B's maybe 2.5 metres from me, situated roughly 1/3rd along the 7mtr, with me near the end wall. The OB's & I occupy that 1/3rd the space, the remainder of which is occupied by the apparitions of melodic performance. A nicely recorded small set up even taken from youtube can sound unnervingly real: ruclips.net/video/8mCCMhuKEYw/видео.html&ab_channel=JasonMraz ruclips.net/video/oIyVu0Ucz8U/видео.html&ab_channel=SouthernRaised Well, they genuinely could fit in my room, and they do. Take that second track - the banjo starts right in the far right corner of the room from me. Sounds real - it's there. Rest is kinda mushed towards the centre left with the vocals about a metre forward. Nothing great going on with the imagery here, so why does it sound this good? Without paying autistic levels of scrutiny to imagery (I can feel roughly where it is, and thats no where near the speakers) and I get a strong impression of presence. Go to the first track. Practically mono. In these sort of live gigs, the speakers could be anywhere but I'm pretty certain I'm hearing the best version taken straight from the mixer desk and post eq-d. Pretty sure it's not the imagery that's doing it for me now? Neither of the above tracks require ear-splitting volume - you should always listen at realistic levels for acoustic music. Unfortunately for those desiring of orchestral levels of performance, some 106dB will be required. I don't believe that imagery is as important as you appear to insist. Yes, I have tracks that move backward & forward, left and right. Sure it's a factor, but it's certainly not the most important - otherwise mono would be entirely redundant.Is there no such a thing as a mono oriented audiophile?
@@jamesportrais3946 The guy doesn't know his stuff. He doesn't know that there are 3 distinct disciplines & 5 more sub-disciplines that are normally divided up among as many people. Sometimes you get someone who does it all. But those jobs are divided up - even in the mind of the person that wears every hat. I'm one of them that often does every stage himself because I'm good a them. But when he enters the dialog with a bold & blatant statement that "you're not an audiophile if you can't hear this" - which is really clickbait because it's false. You can find all kinds of misinformation on YT & this is a perfect example. A guy grandstanding with an opening headline that knows not what & audiophile is. Then says you're not one if you can't hear this. Ridiculous. No audiophile is accurately described as such. It may be an audiophile who's using his mixing appreciation skills - but that's not an audiophile's domain - figuring out if the mix engineer should have made the right artistic choice. That's not an audiophile that's making those observations even if he considers himself an audiophile - he's not talking about the fidelity of the sound - which is what defines an audiophile. Why is important to make the correct distinctions - it's not that important unless you want to communicate it to others. Then it's important that you know the roles & definitions or you'll not gain an credibility by not knowing your topic more deeply than the public you are communicating with. This guy doesn't know his topic.
@@SeanWyseman I'm in your camp Sean, but I'm not certain he needs to be eviscerated 😛 - I can see why you were annoyed, but the guy is trying to promote his channel/business. We only learn through mistakes, and the modern culture of cancellation hardly allows any degree of growth. I think the guy has 10 years on me which would mean that his formative years would have come from the late 70's-80's when "specifications" sold typically solid-state amplification. Let's not forget that only a couple of decades previously, your audio aspirations would be curtailed by a furniture-centric wife. I've seen "high end" radiograms from the late 60's/early 70's that had speakers, radio, TT, O/R tape recorder, fridge & cocktail bar (seriously!) all built in. I'm sure you can see where I'm going with this. Early SS equipment sounded on the whole _shyte_ but measured brilliantly. This was the era when the likes of Krell was king; megawatts & miniscule distortion combined with practically unlimited bandwidth & vanishing noise. All very nice, but sounded crap. Sandpaper treble, paper mids, bass that you couldn't distinguish from external traffic (you got pumped when you thought a truck on the road outside was part of the plot) and absolutely no depth - your program was nailed to a perspex sheet between your probably three-way speakers with seriously _shyte_ crossovers. Everything we hated about early CD players was encapsulated in this meandering mess. What that equipment _could_ do was image. Inherently more consistently reproducible semi conductors meant consistence throughout the bandwidth. This means that a fixed pan-point is less likely to wander with varying degrees of frequency. If that's your only selling point, might as well push it - so they did. Sean, I don't think our man has ever heard a proper stereo soundscape. My experience for more than a few decades has been one that you feel you could walk into. More than a few visitors go looking to the rear wall in order to find additional speakers that aren't there. Funny thing is, being O/B's, they turn around and hear the same phenominon! I'd like our man to pay a few visits to very different set ups and gain a little experience. His writing, or rather talking doesn't smack of someone who's heard a Class A single ended micro-Watt set-up for example. Your thoughts Sean?
That sounds about right, I use audio equipment to listen to music, but I also use music to listen to the equipment itself. For me it goes both ways, but I am also not one of those delusional people who spend $10,000 on a set of stereo speakers. I think the music itself should always be the primary concern, not the equipment used to listen to it. I have also found out over the years that you get used to whatever equipment you use regularly, so while it's nice to have audiophile equipment, it is not the end all and be all, and it certainly does not determine how much enjoyment you will get from the music.
That was my take on it. I noticed the panning movement but figured it was intentional. Sometimes they make the sound fields uneven on purpose to add a sort of "dimensional" effect.
@@MrR2185 when I saw the nice pastoral video image I imagined that the clarinet was a little rabbit jumping from here to there, is this music programmatic?
Hi! i was the assistant engineer on this recording. Not all of the mics were used, the orchestra for example is purely our A/B and ORTF main mics combined with the room mics and some spots for the woodwinds and Double basses. For Roeland we used only the stereo mics but not hard-panned, more something like 20%. Personally i like the slight movement. Oh and to comment about the Bricasti, it didn't do all that much, just enhances the natural acoustics of the hall. Lastly, the speakers are Dynaudio BM6a's, OK speakers for on the move and to give a general impression. Our main monitoring is usually a Grace M900 paired with some headphones we know well. The speakers are just there in case a lot of people want to come and listen and to make the recording session less of a headphone-only session. The room we were in (one of the changing rooms) was certainly not ideal for speaker-based monitoring. Thank you for the interesting video and feel free to ask me any questions regarding the recording, i'll do my best to answer!
It is a beautiful recording. I heard the stereo field 'wandering' on the soloist but I don't think it's a negative because it does seem to more faithfully represent how one would perceive the sound if one were in the room with the group and the soloist was expressively moving his body as he played (which it turns out he was). I have been a musician all my life and have both performed with various sizes of groups and listened to many performances in-person, and the details of the musical experience (in-person) differ considerably with even small changes in one's position in the room, let alone the habits and idiosyncracies of the players. I don't consider myself an 'audiophile' exactly (and can't afford really nice equipment anyhow) but I appreciate the clarity - in a recording such as this one - of a faithful representation of how the music would be perceived if I could have been in one of the better spots in that room where it was originally performed. Thanks!
That's fascinating, Robin Breuglemans. I don't know if you saw my earlier comment, and those of others, but there is definitely a group of people who found the slight movement of the clarinet to be entirely natural, and added character to the recording. Thanks again for your comment.
I am fond of my old BM10s. I know they weren't the most popular near/mids, but I like them. I have just moved onto Neumann NDH 30 for hp monitoring. It is the first time in a long time I have fallen in love with a tech purchase. I adore them!
As a solo clarinetist, I heard the panning and thought it was quite a good representation of how one bobs and bounces from left to right and animates themselves as they play. That's definitely not a "problem in the recording" at all, and I'm not sure why it would ever be perceived as such. What bothered me on my studio headphones is that the microphone had a touch too much gain, and very often the recording of the clarinet was clipping pretty bad.
@KingOthius Yes, I had exactly the same thoughts as you did; the clipping was obvious. Although I didn't notice the slight panning, when it was pointed out I just assumed this was the musician moving in front of stereo mics.
Listening to the original recording, I don't hear any clipping. I would be very shocked to hear clipping for a modern classical album that isn't live. I do hear air escaping from the embouchure being picked up from the close mics. The hard part of any recordist and engineer is trying to capture the excitement, clarity, and dynamics a close mic provides without making it sound strange. Wind instruments will get key clacks, strings will get more bow noise and directionality, piano and percussion will get more mallet and felt noise, and classical voice can sound distorted. Another source of the panning, especially coming from the main pair (not the solo mics) is going to be the resonances of the room and the directionality of the instrument. You can hear the latter when a high or low note suddenly sounds like its in another direction, but then after the leap it comes back to where it was before. Cello and bassoon are the worst at this! With more directional instruments like brass and voice, movement is a bigger issue. And I do mean Issue. Especially in vocalists that like to emote through body movement, the stereo image of the soloist can get very distracting. If you narrow the close mics for classical voice too much, the sound can appear small. No vocalist wants to be heard as a small sound, believe me haha.
@@peted3637 Full disclosure: I'm not an audiophile, but I did hear the panning and I thought: hey, that's a nice stereo effect, did they do that on purpose to add some "depth" to the recording or did they record it that way? I also thought that I heard some clipping and that that would be the supposed defect.
@peted3637 It isn't clipping. It's the sound of the musicians fingering their instruments. The microphones pick up audio that you probably wouldn't ordinarily hear if you were in an auditorium listening to the piece live because the mics are close enough to the instruments to pick them up.
Same here. Soloists often express physical movements while playing. Most notably Martin Frost, one of our greatest clarinetists. He moves a lot while playing. So honestly even if its audible, I didnt really "hear" it
Classically-trained musician here. I heard it, but didn't realize that's what you were talking about. IMO, not only is there nothing wrong with it, but that's the best way to capture this performance: get all of the individual idiosyncrasies that the musician brings to it. That's what makes it a performance, not just the sterile perfection of running sheet music through MIDI. What that recordist captured is unique in the universe. Even with the same orchestra and solost, there will never, ever be another performance just like it.
You so-called musicians! Stop 'playing' music and get serious! How insensitive, dull, blunt, and deaf do you have to be if those constantly swaying, rocking, shaking fluctuations escape your sense of hearing??? Trained ears? Trained to tolerate the most vile torture of your auditory apparatus! How can it be, you're impervious to the oscillating atrocity of the Doppler Effect when the clarinet is swaying from side to side - and more so at varying speeds! Pleeeeeaase, get me some of those MIDI files, you mentioned! Are there any with NO MUSIC in them, at all? I'll add them to my huge collection of recordings of 4′33″.
I like @shanedk's explanation. Imagine being seated in a small recital hall listening to the soloist with no amplification or accompaniment. The movement of the instrument might sound a great deal like this solo on the recording and it's an important part of any live performance. I suppose the problem is exacerbated because the instrument seems to move but the orchestra does not. I always learn a great deal from Audio Masterclass (and I did this time as well), but I'm willing to accept what was "wrong" with this recording as something that might be very difficult to "fix" while accurately capturing both the nuanced solo and the orchestra.
@@CricksWhiteNoise @shanedk certainly is right in his rather 'emotional' approach to recording technique. As humans we want 'moving' performances. One problem that might arise from moving while recording with several mics is phase cancellation, destructive wave interference. Although wave interference can in some musical situations really be used as a kind of 'natural audio fx control' that can be achieved by merely adjusting the signal's run-time differences when making the mic set-up. With classical music recordings it's something you'd rather want to avoid, usually...
I didn't realize it was the "mistake". I perform and hear lots of classical music, so I'm used to Instruments (especially in solo parts) being moved as a physical expression. In my opinion this movement and the resulting shifts in the stereo field are important and a part of the performance. (if its not hard panned)
@@Sizzer1337 Only because he told you that. I am a mastering engineer & work with this stuff every day. We teach people to create movement not stifle it. You're dead wrong about what you said here as this kind of movement is used all the time. Just google 'automated panning plugins' & take a look at the "wealth" of tools that are designed to help you do just that. You let the guy in the video cause you to decide that this was wrong & a mistake & you designed your comment in agreement with him. It didn't sound wrong or bad to me & people pay a ton of money as a producer to make informed & intelligent observations. I do admire his trick of creating a challenge to acquire the clickbait to attract people to see what the hell he's talking about because even the headline sounds wrong but it's that aspect that makes you want to see what he's trying to say. Problem is he doesn't know where that movement came from or why. He just decided that it was wrong without knowing that people are doing that all the time in music production. Also it appears that he's using a sort of cheap trick by presenting the "you're not an audiophile" kind of challenge - presumably because, for the first time, he actually noticed something he'd not heard before & figured that because he calls himself an audiophile & because he heard it - he can use the headline strategy to make himself appear to be an audiophile you should listen to. Then he blusters about how wrong it is & all that bunk. It sounds just like a musician dancing while playing. At the end of the day there is no right or wrong in artistic choices unless a predetermined standard is applied to it & then you can judge it against that standard. However in this case no artistic standard exists except in the authors head so it's an invalid comparison.
@@Sizzer1337 That would only be after he told you it was wrong. It's not. It's what everyone in the professional world is doing these days. He just never heard it till now - meaning that by his own definition - that he's judging everyone else with - he's not an audiophile - or didn't become one until he heard it. But this sort of thing is not only being a lot it's encouraged & taught. Welcome to the real world. Nice of you to catch up.
Sean, I agree 100%. The movement the artist creates is part of his art, not a mistake. Obviously the 'audiophile' making this video prefers the sound of sanitized studio music over a recording of live music. BTW, I couldn't hear any of the stereo shifting while watching this on my phone! 😂
I consider myself an audiophile, but I do not have expensive interconnects, or even expensive speakers for that matter. I listened to this on a pair of Tannoy Reveals using a Music Hall DAC25.2 into an NAD 7020. The movement of the clarinet within the sound stage enhances the realism of the recording IMHO. I didn't hear a problem, only a wonderful live performance, which is the goal of most recordings.
@Dr Curious -- audiophiles are the audio version of Corvette/BMW/Porsche clubs .. (wow! nice chrome, great hemi, super exhaust pipes ...) -- it's all about the impressive array of equipment and the proclaimed results --
@@aBachwardsfellow Yes. Totally. The funny issus for us tend to be the claim of what can be heard in certain situations and the misuse of equipment and setups. Like a 30k speakers in a wooden floored, french doored, square, reverberant listening space, with platinum power cables and 1m long platinum speaker connections. etc.
when I 'auditioned' my $2,000 PSB speakers back in '92, I thought they were the best sounding in the room sans the $10,000 B&W speakers. I couldn't afford the silver speaker cables for it, but when he connected them to the PSB's, it was like night and day, they just opened up more shimmer, sound stage, imaging, and timber of instruments. You believe what ya want, but I HEARD it myself. Go hear some GOOD speakers and cables, not the mass market crap.
I loved the stereo wandering of the clarinet. It adds a new dynamic that really pulls the melody out of the rest of the harmony without being "in your face" about it. Subtle and beautiful. By not recognising what was going on, it doesn't mean you didn't experience and appreciate it - the beauty of this piece lies in the subtlety of the effect. Great stuff.
Agreed. What's the point of multiple channels if they are not used for things that can't be done with mono? I like the feeling that the musician/music is moving around. I wouldn't have noticed it if I had listened blind, and wasn't bothered by it even when primed to listen for a mistake.
@@sumerianliger - which comes around to the question -- does the fact that the "wandering" of the clarinet (which is completely natural in a live performance) is identified as the targeted "something wrong" speak to the perfectionist presuppositional mindset (how it "ought" to sound) that plagues the mind of an audiophile? Do audiophiles create their own Sisyphus hell of endless technical diddling to achieve what never existedin the first place? Microphones on the bell of a clarinet?
Exactly. I think that what he didn't understand is that the recording engineer probably *purposely* recorded it with stereo mics to get that life that you mentioned. It makes the recording more interesting.
I wrote a piece of music that features a bridge that builds up to a crescendo following a lead guitar playing a meandering melody... at first I left the guitar in the center of the mix and it felt kind of empty and lacking something... so I automated the panning to make it meander left and right and suddenly that section felt like it came to life. So I can definitely see someone doing this on purpose in this piece of music as well.
Yeah, I thought that the „clicking“ was supposed to be the problem. Sounds to me that someone’s is slightly tapping their fingers over the mic or something. But maybe it’s a hardware problem on our end? Cause no one seems to notice it. 😅
And might I also add, being an audiophile isn’t about what you can or can’t hear. It’s about valuing and providing access to the best possible sound/hearing experience. (I’m not an audiophile)
To me it almost sounded like audio artifacting/glitching. Maybe it's the sound of the mechanical pieces of the clarinet clicking a bit? Not sure. I slightly noticed some panning/movement in the stereo field, but what was super apparent to me was that aggressive click/artifacting/glitch (whatever it was) directly up the center.
Yeah, it adds a certain flavour and experimentation and mocking joyfulness. I am proud that I could notice it having worked as a freelance audio technician. Unfortunately, the pursuit of perfecting: "I SING A SOOOONG, AND I AM DONE" got tiring. I love it when a band or composition has different expressions of the same work like Iron Maiden. The changes and imperfections develop the piece as a whole. The recording was classical true, but I think one should not take themselves or their work too seriously. A bit of whimsy open new avenues of development.
I heard the movement of the clarinet in the stereo field, but I did not perceive it as a "problem". I thought the effect of the solo voice swaying in and around the other instruments as quite natural. My mind went to other potential problems (lack of depth in low strings) which is more related to the pair of headphones I'm using. I think this re-enforces your point that much of music engineering and production is a matter of taste. Thanks for the fun and informative video.
Same here... I really don't understand why anything in that track was a "PROBLEM". Probably a wrong categorisation. You're referring more to an issue of setup and interpretation of the audio when recorded through that setup. I was expecting something like, can your audio chain reproduce that issue inherent in the setup? - and I heard the moving clarinet, but I didn't stop to interpret it. I just enjoyed it. If there WAS A difference in the first 2 seemingly identical tracks that an audiophile's system SHOULD have made clear, I guess I didn't hear anything different or different enough to call it out.
Same here. The mics accurately recorded the performance. I like a little movement in the stereo image. I thought we were going to be hearing a phasing issue, or something real. Unsubscribe.
I would agree that things done in the mix are not "problems" per-se. Personally my first thought was I just found the recording to be sub-par due to the strange imaging. I have heard a recording like this one which had a similar issue and that one it actually was a genuine problem. A distant mic was picking up a soloist in a classical music recording, so to "solve" the issue the recording engineer simply mixed them in similar ratios to how the mics were picking up the sound. The result was the stereo image rapidly shifting back and forth depending on which mic was dominant in its sound pickup, which was annoying. I would say in general _actual_ problems are technical issues like a mic partially dropping out in a live performance, clipping due to inadequate headroom or excessive levels, noise or cross-talk due to poor interconnects or interference being received, etc. Things that actually impact what was recorded.
I noticed the clarinet dancing around the rest of the band both in melody and space but didn’t consider it a flaw. But my formative musical years were spent listening to psychedelic rock where instruments flying through musical space is not a flaw but a feature.
Yep. Thought the movement was intentional as well. Because of the visual background image. Thought it was meant to be some invisible forest fairy flying around while playing clarinet (or being portrayed by the clarinet). And of course I also grew up with vinyl records with titles like *This is **---===STEREO===---*
Same; I noticed but didn't consider the location a flaw; instead I was listening for clipping (and cringing because my volume was too high on a couple spikes) 😊 _[edit, typo]_
To me, being an audiophile doesn't mean I can hear details others can't. It just means the sound quality is as important to me as the music itself. Case in point, every time I've upgraded my headphones I've grown more and more "addicted" to listening to music that would (personally) sound better and better. For a year now I've been using Focal headphones, and rarely is there a day I'm not using them, quite possibly an average of 4 to 6 hours per day. I'm even enjoying songs that I clearly wouldn't have enjoyed nearly as much if it weren't for the sound quality that still amazes me a year later. I have friends who tried them on and couldn't have cared less despite agreeing with the fact that the music sounded "great"; they are not audiophiles. And then I have one colleague that is truly interested in trying my headphones, and truly appreciates the improvements they bring to the experience; what is that if not an audiophile?
It is not possible to get a full range stereo audio signal through cans. Oh, sure. It can be measured as a full range signal, but bass from real instruments is felt in the body as much as heard. And cans will only ever provide a dual mono signal (some binaural techniques that are still quite rare aside). This is why deaf people can enjoy clubs. Cans are a great compromise to keep noise levels down for those who may not want to hear your music, but they will never be accurate. Some people can make impressive mixes through cans via experience but as audiophiles like to go on about the intent of the musician or engineer or producer, know that the vast majority of them do not create music to be heard in two discreet, non-interacting channels. Again, some more modern mixers are experimenting with making music that is aimed primarily at earbuds, typically using those aforementioned binaural techniques, HRTF etc etc, but that is still rare. And some orchestral work may translate well in headphone stereo if the right miking technique is used, but that doesn't fix the problem of lower bass being 'heard' by the body as much as the ears. Cans are not and should not be considered audiophile, if we take the word audiophile seriously. But sadly, thanks to the years of woo (green marker pen on the rim of a CD has to be a low point) most audio professionals do not any more.
I definitely noticed it moving around slightly the first time, but I don't consider that a bad thing at all, so I kept looking for some other problem. I personally love the dynamic movement of instruments, especially if the movement is actually a result of the performer moving around. It adds so much life to it~ But yeah, stereo movement isn't a problem at all, and doesn't depend at all on the quality of your equipment either.
I don’t understand why this movement would be considered undesirable. When I think about what’s ideal in a mix, I want it to represent the recorded music in a way that conveys as much character as possible without distracting from the core themes. I wouldn’t want it to ping pong from hard left pan to hard right, but this subtle movement makes it feel more expressive, like you’re going on a journey with the clarinet
To me the whole point this video is clickbait, he even says that he enjoys this recording. Please use the affiliate links in the description. Thank you. :)
The movement can cause a mic to pick up some sounds more and some sounds less, so if he moves away from the mic, those notes will be quieter. But also, the mic will pick up the note a fraction of a second later than when he’s closer, mics positioned further away will also pick up the sound slightly delayed. So it’s not just about the stereo effect but about the dynamics, and tempo of the recording. As a musician who moves a lot, and who works hard on dynamics, tone, and tempo, I’d hate a recording to not represent my hard work.
When i first replied to this comment.... i had just woken up... and i had assumed you meant "the audiophile movement"... But then i realized my mistake xD
I am a career recording engineer (40 years and 2 months) with hundreds of studio and live music recordings in my past. Your opening really intrigued me, so I took your bait. You stated that there "Was something WRONG with the recording." So, I listened attentively. I absolutely heard the "space" that the beautifully performed clarinet moved around in as it was played - I totally didn't feel that is was a problem at all. I fact I enjoyed the movement. To my ears and brain, the movement added a wonderful artistic quality to the recording. I listened in a well treated control room on Genelec 8" nearfields setting on pedestals. Could I hear it? Yes. Wrong? Whatever. I suppose some might call that movement a problem, but not me. But... I really must state that my speaker cables are 12 gauge solid copper Romex - yeah THAT's the "Problem!"
I really loved the movement too. It actually improved my experience of the piece. Very lively! I heard it at home on my cheap home theatre loud speakers 😂 I guess I've just got good perception.... in fact... listen more closely, and you can hear something that can only be the fiddling of the solist hands or movement of his clothes. I'm not quite sure. There's too much music in the way haha. Oh, and I first noticed the "background" noise with my Sony WH-1000MX4 bluetooth headphones.... yeah you heard that right... bluetooth. No expensive audiophile equipment in sight.
can you hear it? NO! due to the way the youtube algorithm and stereo imaging works.. you absolutely did NOT hear it.. LOL! i was struggling to figure out what this guy was going on about because i didn't hear crap until i actually looked up and found a lossless version of the same song on one of my streaming apps.. i do NOT claim to be an audiophile and most of my equipment is set up specifically for atmos MOVIES and not audiophile music.. i think this is a trick question because it was in straight garbled youtube heavily compressed stereo until i found it in lossless audio.
Solid Romex? Interesting. I'm surprised you don't use stranded 12awg. Is that a cost decision? I wonder if one might hear the difference in frequency response due to skin effect if you A/B with stranded wire. Although I'm willing to bet it isn't drastic and can be compensated for when the studio playback system is tuned to the room anyhow.
Half-way through watching this right now and I still think theres nothing wrong with the music. I was hearing faint clicking, and ticking sounds throughout the piece, but seeing the video of the recording session its obvious i was hearing the keys clapping closed. Its bloody impressive recording for me to hear that.
I had to look for this comment to validate to myself that I was also hearing the keys clicking and totally thought that was the issue. I heard the panning but really just thought that it gave it more of a spatial feel, so I didn't think of it as a negative.
I really enjoy your videos. You are very knowledgeable about music production and at the same time very engaging. I am not an audiophile, but did hear the wandering clarinet after you pointed it out. I loved the piece and the excellent recording. Thanks.
I'm an enthusiast who learned from others and I continue to learn. I hope that my videos can convey my enthusiasm to my viewers. You can find my further thoughts on this topic here ruclips.net/video/EdDnAnSPQpg/видео.html and here ruclips.net/video/m1VzhiBSv28/видео.html
I don't consider myself an audiophile, but I do have a fairly well trained musical ear and I often hear issues with everyday playback of music and speech that most people don't notice or care about. Especially with streaming music services (the compression artifacts due to insufficient bitrate are painfully noticeable). The stereo image "problem" is not a problem. It's 100% accurate to how the instrument was played, including the movements of the artist. Without subtle movements or differences in audio like this, I believe the sound would be less organic and would sound more sterile.
Exactly! I was looking for compression or low bitrate, maybe some interference or noise... But didn't really notice much. Was a bit disappointed when the real "problem" was revealed.
Thank you for saying this, I'm very unknowledgeable on music and I thought to myself is this really "wrong" though and that perhaps it sounds like the physical movement of the instrument irl
If the objective is to faithfully reproduce the experience of hearing the instrument as played, the movement, or more specifically it's effect on the recorded sound is significant. However, on this recording the panning sounds as though the musician has sprinted the full width of the stage. Not a problem to my aging ears but an interesting and obviously unrealistic effect.
As a clarinettist, to move the clarinet direction during playing happens and that changes the direction of the sound. Including this in the recording adds the element of human performance to the recording
@@tavarno I don't think the point should be adding imperfections for the sake of them. As the late Bob Ross said, they're 'happy little accidents'. Not necessarily something to strive for. In the end, there's a reason why orchestras and musicians in general do many rehearsals and takes before the final recording and/or playing live.
@@omnirhythm i know, but for me this playing sounded very natural, so if adding some imperfections makes the result more natural, i have to try it. Bit probably it will sound just bussy
I'm so used to hearing classical music recorded this way I didn't notice it at first. Or, rather, it didn't bother me. Recording techniques for classical music are often more about the space rather than the clarity. Been in the music industry for years and every single genre has a different way of recording. I think it comes down to what you pointed out: taste. Great video.
My interpretation of an audiophile has changed a lot over the years. I'm more of a music enthusiast with a really good ear. I don't have crazy expensive equipment, but I do have a few items that I really like and put a lot of research into before purchasing. I was in fact able to hear what you're talking about.
I am a developing recording engineer, and I learned a lot from you. The biggest lesson is that it is okay that I had no problem with what I heard. When you defined it as the clarinet moving around I recognized that it was indeed moving around, but I had no problem with it doing so - it fit well into the mix, and the character of the music is actually (for me) augmented by the clarinet sort of "tripping along through the forest" exactly as we hear it. I do get the idea of having sound sources in non-moving positions, but only when it makes sense. When I do recordings of Church services in the Eastern Orthodox tradition, there is a lot of physical movement taking place, and to try to force every singer and chanter to be "static" in a recording is not realistic in context. In my forthcoming CD I tried to bring a little realism by having the deacon in the center of the sound field, with the choir "behind" (as in a choir loft) and the celebrant priest "in front" as "in the sanctuary / altar" behind the iconostasis. There isn't movement, per se, but there is a realistic sense of placement that I have not usually experienced in other recordings of this type. Let's see what happens when it gets released. Thank you for your video! I subscribed so I can learn more. God bless! Oh, and I don't have a real Bricasti M7 - I need money and success for that. But I do have "Seventh Heaven Professional" which is a very good emulation of the M7 and it is my go-to for reverbs almost all the time. Excellent!
@@Jamey_ETHZurich_TUe_Rulez I didn't hear anything amiss, but it is possible that given the distance to the mics, that the mechanical thingies on the clarinet are what you might be hearing. Do they jibe with his solo?
@@Jamey_ETHZurich_TUe_Rulez I'm hearing a subtle doubled 'brush' tapping sound at 1:12-1:13 and again at 1:14, again at 1:15 and some other place too? (Listening on a Sennheiser G4ME ONE through a bog standard TRRS connector into a laptop)
Amazing content . . . I'm not an audiophile, and I didn't hear it. Your approach is confident and opinionated, not at all condescending or combative. It's a fine line, always cool to see someone pull that off.
To me, the fact that the performer was moving, and the recording captured it means that there was no "problem" with stereo imaging at all; the recording is more accurate than you would have known without seeing a video of the performance. And anyway, regardless of the cause, I like how the clarinet dances with its own melody!
I humbly disagree, the subtle or at any rate rhythmic swaying of the soloist would not have created a wavering almost doppler effect naturally, the mic placement created that effect.
@eugenebrandon3914 Perhaps if the performer were playing a sine-wave-generating instrument, that doppler effect would be clearer, but the mics aren't too far apart, so in a way it's similar to sitting right up close to the performer - not much more phasing than would occur naturally between your ears. Regardless, I like the way the notes dance!
I find the changing of channels intriguing and feel it enhances the music. There are many people who will find this type of music soothing. Ironically it gives our brains something to do which helps us relax.
The funny thing is that, although I was only watching this video in an idle moment on my laptop, I heard the clarinet moving about, but since this is what happens when musicians play, I found the effect to be quite natural, and added to the charm of the recording. Indeed, as the music was playing, I had an image in my mind of a clarinetist turning and swaying exactly as seen in the subsequent video clip taken at the recording session. Thus, in this respect, it is an excellent recording!
I actually love when the center image dances around, makes the recording feel more alive. As if the instrument player/singer is right in front of me, occasionally shifting weight from one leg to other
As a former recording engineer myself (non-audiophile!), I'm somewhat peeved that I didn't spot it. Having watched so many of your truly excellent videos talking about distortion in it's many guises, pseudonyms and euphemisms, my brain was telling me it must be distortion he's on about and was so busy hearing none of it that the elephant trundled by unnoticed! Truth is, the performance was so captivating that someone could have let off a firework in the room and I'd have missed it. Another great video, thank you.
you didn't spot it because its a personal preference, there is no problem with the recording, which you strangely seem to have agreed with regarding your statement, i suggest reading Robin Breugelmans very polite comment who was involved in recording this captivating performance as you put it ;)
I am not a audiophile and I did hear it the first time. But I didnt feel like it was "wrong", matter of fact. I thought it was de complete opposite of that. For me it feels like the Klarinet dances through my head, from up in my head to the left to the right, lowerright etc. Playing with me. That effect alone gives it so much more.
I actually loved that movement between left right and center...it didn’t bother me at all from enjoying the music...it felt very natural and as if I was there with them during the performance!
100% agree... I didn't hear it (the "problem") the first time, not because it didn't go unnoticed, but rather because I found it natural and appealing. This is a problem only to someone that believes it to be a problem.
As a musician and a front-of-house sound engineer (live show mixer for the less educated), I love the fact that I can hear the wandering instrument. It gives life to the experience, remembering that this is a live recording. As you listen, you can picture the player waving or even walking around. If this was a studio recording then it would be different and maybe not so acceptable.
It *was* a studio recording. In classical music, it is the convention for players to sit or stand still as they play - wandering around causes any amount of difficulty with the balance the conductor has worked so hard to achieve.
I thought it was going to be the sharp resonant frequencies you hear sometimes on certain notes, but i've found that unless you have some kind of dynamic eq or automation it's hard to tame that without making the source sound thin or empty... I don't consider myself an audiophile by any means, but I have been mixing for several years now! This is a great video!
yeah first i thought it came from the actual clicking of the clarinet but a few of them actually sound like pure digital audio glitches. anyway i was also certain that was the problem
This is so interesting. I never considered the movement of the player to have an effect (although very minor) on the audio. That being said, one thing I noticed after learning to use Ableton and recording guitar and keyboard is that the very minor imperfections of a human player can enhance the feel of certain tracks and provide a more organic feel compared to drawing the notes perfectly on a time table. The only part that has to be perfect, no matter the case, are the drums for obvious reasons. Thank you for providing this interesting insight.
It is a thing that a recording can be too perfect. One of the functions of a producer is to decide whether an instrumental or vocal take is good enough or try again for something more perfect. Sometimes an early take is the one that's used and later takes are just not as inspiring though technically more perfect.
Gosh! How I like your videos, the sence of humor! "Any recording engineer would prefer that the solo instrument doesn't move this is why the piano was invented, but the piano has its own problems" loved that one!
I've never considered myself to be an audiophile, I just like music. 😀 I didn't hear anything odd in the music but I did notice that it sounded like a human instrumentalist rather than a VST. Having heard the explanation, I'm sure that it was the movement of the artist that set off that response in me. I enjoy this sort of detailed breakdown, thank you.
what do you mean by that? You have ceased to enjoy music listening with the best possible quality, or you have stopped believing that incremental changes in the playback chain matter?
@@duel5071 Probably means that being pedantic about things that no one but you can hear isn't constructive. If you point out a quirk, everyone will hear it. If only you know of that quirk, either no one else will notice, or they'll enjoy it as a feature. Being overly perfectionistic and looking for improvements in redundant places is *not* the same thing as as valuing quality. Confusing the two creates a HUGE waste of time, money, and sanity.
@@frank8627-v8k yeah but audiophile listening, if we are going to use a made up term, shouldn't be defined as investment in redundant places, and shouldn't let people who do that call themselves audiophiles, or we shouldn't even use the word. Best quality playback is a real thing though
@@duel5071 Like most things in the world, a word loses its definition when the wrong groups identify with it. People who actually care about quality and create it reasonably have been kicked out of the audiophile squad. When I hear 'audiophile' nowadays, I think "person who thinks the color of a guitar neck effects tone" (which is quickly disproven with a spectrograph, but these people would rather play games of superstition than use real science).
I did have a chuckle being encouraged to listen to high quality audio streaming from YT through "okay quality" computer speakers. However, what I must say, is how clear your voice is in the audio . . . top 1% for RUclipsrs. You obviously practice what you preach. Well done and thanks. (edited to correct typos.)
Personally I like that subtle movement between L and R, it gives it amplitude and spatiality, although I must confess that until the "problem" was revealed I was focused on several things except panning. Thanks for this content!
what did you focus on? I didn't hear the "problem! til it was revealed either, but the squeaks from the clarinet, and the tone being blown too harshly a few times.
Is there any use of me asking hearing strangers on the internet what I asked in hearing people middle school "What's it like to be able to hear with two ears, listen to stereo things 'Properly'?"
I was looking to a little clipping of audio or problem with compression on some frequencies or problem with general audio rather than a music itself. As rock/metal fan panning is natural and it add new layer of complexity. I'm no audiophile I have cheap headset.
I played violin for years, I immediately heard the slight swaying but it made total sense to me and it didn’t register as a “problem”. If anything it’s more immersive, like you’re attending a recital. I’d hate to hear what some “audiophiles” would think of a solo violinist or saxophonist swaying back and forth. 😂
That's how I hear things in person... so... why would I not hear it here? *shrug* "audiophiles" pay for baggies of crystals to wrap around their $1000 cables and I'm just a hard pass on that no matter what it does to the sound. It's weird. It's like telling me crystals heal cancer. I'm sure some folks wish they did (me fucking too) but... uhm... so far no evidence has presented itself.
Problem? I love that they caught his "rock and roll" with the mics. We otherwise could not see and enjoy his physical expression of the music. But now, via movement in the field, we can. Brilliant.
Wonderful video! 40+ year pro mobile audio tech here. This is a great tool to show the budding audiophile/ enthusiast how to listen to things properly. It will be invaluable in teaching them the finer aspects of DSP and equalization. Thank you!
Being a live audio mixer for the last 40+years , Congrats ! You led me down the garden path so to speak . I was so intent on listening for distortion or noise on the track , That I never considered the panning even though I did hear it . If the guy moved like that while playing , I'm certain it sounded that way in the room also while it was being recorded , so , while you may not like it , it was STILL faithful to what the artist had played !! Just my 2 cents .
You're right of course, it is faithful to what the artist played. It isn't so faithful to what a concert-goer would hear though, even in the front row, and I speak as a concert goer who likes to get as close to the front as possible. DM
@@AudioMasterclass Absolutely right. Your average concert goer will not be standing 1 foot away from the flutist. So no matter how much he moves around, it will still sound like a point source to the audience. This is a problem with the sound engineers basic recording philosophy, rather than a problem with their, or your, or my equipment. However, some recordings are not meant to recreate the sound of a live show from the perspective of the audience. Here we have at least three different philosophies - the "purist", who only wants a perfect recreation of the studio sound as the engineer intended, the "live", who wants to recreate the concert sound, and the "control", who wants absolute control over the sound; to mold it as he sees fit. Lets consider surround sound to be part of the "live" philosophy. To the purist, there is absolutely nothing wrong with the recording, as long as his equipment places the sound exactly where the engineer intended. The live might be "blown away" by the movement within the sound stage, or disappointed that there is movement at all (like yourself). The control may or may not care at all. He just wants it to sound as he wants it to sound. The movement may be aggravating only if he wants to fix it to a particular spot.
@@AudioMasterclass That's really the point, isn't it? Musically, we want to hear the clarinet from a distance, as a unity. Even from the front row, we don't hear it panning left and right, with high notes going to the extremes, and the bass notes falling in the middle. And we don't hear the (wandering) clarinet as being wider than the orchestra. Our brains process the sound so that the clarinet appears to be coming from where we see it being played. And the gyrations are very small.
@@AudioMasterclass While I agree that it might be what the artist wanted, the movement was so exaggerated that I actually believed that it was meant to be an intentionally *cheap trick.* The background picture/video lured me into considering that the clarinet was the acoustic depiction of an invisible forest fairy, flying left and right through the forest. And yes, my tracked the presumed location as it moved. I know I should have closed my eyes while listening.
This kind of shifting soloist movement is heard all the time in my 2 channel “audiophile” listening room. Yeah, it sometimes bugs me, but most of the time I simply enjoy it by picturing the musician or singer moving about during the performance. And surprisingly, your video has actually cleared up certain things that have been puzzling me for years. Thanks much for posting this!
I think it’s nice that it moves around the stereo image. It makes the music literally dance. It sounds like this isn’t preferable for an audio engineer though. I think this is a case of technicality vs artistic expression. Making the decision to deviate from what is technically correct and what feels better is how art is created.
Except it's NOT technically incorrect. This sort of thing is being taught to emerging mix engineers. Yes you are right that it's purely a creative decision & there are no technical rules against it either.
You're wrong, because on a technical level, this is perfectly fine. I'm an audio engineer, and not only is this stereo imaging an ok thing, it actually enhances the performance. The job of the audio engineer is always to enhance and fully replicate the nuance of the performance. Audio engineers are creative professionals too, and this decision was used to put more emotion in the performance. Not only is it not technically incorrect, in this specific scenario with how the rest of the mix is structured, I would say the imaging of the clarinet is preferred. There are some super technical things here or there that he doesn't talk about, but mostly, it's really good.
If the sound engineer didn’t want the stereo image, then they wouldn’t have spent the time setting up the microphones in such a way as to capture the stereo image. I’m not a professional, but I do spend some time behind a deck at my church. I do a bit of stereo imaging, but mostly just panning a single channel so that each vocalist or instrument has a position within the stereo field. If the engineer didn’t want the lead instrument moving around, them they would have set up a single mic and set its position within the mix.
@@StolenJoker84 Precisely! & well stated. I'm a pro & I've been saying all along that the movement is intentional - regardless of what he used to create the movement - it was achieved by choice. It's not an accident. It may provoke the personal taste of the author of the video - but not everyone is going to have the same taste or experience. Those of us who are professionals have a deeper perspective but at the end of the day - subtle but noticeable movement is a major component, a hallmark if you will, of an ideal recording.
@@SeanWyseman Yeah. When he said there was a “problem” with the recording, I expected it to be something like some kind of faint static or some kind of distortion in the overall sound … not “This instrument is moving ever so subtly around the sound stage” (I personally didn’t hear it, but that could be that I was using Bluetooth headphones to listen). Then, when he went and explained the why, my thought was “And you still think it’s a problem with the recording?!?”
I am a retired sound recordist. I listen to a lot of music and a lot of different kinds of music. At first listen I immediately noticed the problem with the clarinet and I found it very unpleasant. I used a Sennheiser DAC and headphones to listen to your test.
You and I are oddly in a minority on this. You can find my further thoughts on this topic here ruclips.net/video/EdDnAnSPQpg/видео.html and here ruclips.net/video/m1VzhiBSv28/видео.html
I heard the clarinet moving left, right, and center throughout the piece, but I wasn't aware that it wasn't supposed to be doing that. I considered it to be either the clarinetist changing direction/dispersion in their performance, the acoustics of the performance hall, and/or the sound engineer's efforts to create a wider soundstage by encompassing the entirety of the accompanying orchestra. I was more focused on any lack of clarity at various frequency ranges mixing/overlapping and/or the mids and high frequencies clipping. Thank you for expanding my understanding of what an audiophile is; it's not just about the quality of the sound, but also the fundamentals of how these sounds are created. BTW - I found it to be enjoyable nonetheless.
Wasn't bothered at all with the clarinet moving, but found the clipping irritating. Interestingly, I looked up the original and couldn't hear any clipping. Maybe youtube / reencoding messed up the audio there?
I was also straining to hear something extraordinary and dismissed my immediate observation that the clarinet moving within the sound field was an artistic or simply engineering choice in the final mastering of the recording. I came here expecting to be able to detect some sort of minuscule problem with the recording, so have come away rather deflated by the set-up given by Audio Masterclass, as it felt more like deliberate obfuscation than a test of hearing and music appreciation.
I actually like when the sound source moves around! It makes the music a lot more dynamic, otherwise, why have stereophonic devices if we'd prefer everything pinned to the same position the whole time! Once, I spent days hearing decades of Carl Orff's Carmina Burana's recordings of orchestras from all over the world to find the pieces I enjoyed the most. Thanks for the video, as it brought the subject to the front of my mind!
I'm an absolute audiophile. On the first time listening, I noticed the performance of soloist is superb! enjoyed the phrasing and dynamics. I misunderstood the low D and B-flat sound comes from another instrument, but realized those sound comes from the same instrument. What a wide pitch range clarinet has :) Wandering instrument is normal, it is performer's personality, like Joshua Bell moves a lot and Hilary Hahn does not move, but both players are top tier!
I am not an audiophile but after your explanation and adding my attitude to music and dance I adore the piece even more the clarinet now seems to dance around the room. It's gorgeous. Thank you I will listen more carefully from now on. This is a great introduction to another level of music appreciation that now even with my basic system can show. It won't turn me into an audiophile but it will make me listen differently. Problem?? not as far as I can see it.
I heard it, but I have recently installed low-viscosity electrons in my interconnects so the sound moves around better. With normal high viscosity electrons the sound tends to be sticky and move around less, so localising the sound around the centre.
@@c128stuff Audiophile air is a much better upgrade, it has a specially selected blend of nitrogen and oxygen isotopes that resonate in phase with the music thus making the sound more transparent, it's like a veil has been lifted when listening to music.
Hi! Audio Engineer in training here, still a couple semesters into my college career and I did manage to hear the "issue" even if I wasn't exactly sure what it was at first. As you said yourself, whether or not to call it an issue is certainly based on taste. And overall, what I interpreted as your main point was this: "If you're going to invest the money for audiophile grade equipment, invest the time in training your ears as well." Which I do agree with
Not an audiophile but a musician. It was an elephant in the room thing for me. I was listening for unusual things, but the oboeist moving was ordinary to me, and I ignored it for trying to hear something out of place. I enjoy the movement of music from one side or the other or travel between both. I almost identified it after I listened to it 6 times. But I knew the answer had to be movement since everything else sounded ordinary. And you confirmed it. As I usually listen to music over and over, I would have identified it in passing at one session or another. I love listening to Crosby Stills Nash and Young as well as Paul McCartney and Wings for the very dense harmonies. In stereo, they are awesome to study!
As a musician and producer myself, I was focused on the notes performed more than the soundstage on first listen. On the second listen I paid attention to the soundstage and didn't hear anything wrong. Having that opportunity was a great idea from the person doing the video. I approach music production by letting the artist express themselves. If I hear or perceive something is off after the take, I'll ask what were they trying to achieve. Once I understand their thought process, I might make a suggestion to try it differently or show them myself if it's an instrument I can play. This doesn't happen often. It was a good exercise, but to these ears the slight panning was a nice effect. Not a fan of reverb on symphonic music. When mixing I allow the room acoustics and musician's dynamic playing to rule. Thanks.
I didn't really hear it at first. I thought there was a volume inbalance, but after you said it I could hear it when I closed my eyes. It sure gives that human feel/touch to music as opposed to a lot of electronic stuff you hear on the radio these days.
I thought it was the high end rasp, then I realized it was the player's breath flowing through the instrument, also heard the fingers. At first I thought I was hearing the chains rattling on a snare drum.
Same, definitely must have been the keys, actually kinda ruins the presentation when listening with good headphones, but if not critically listening probably wouldn't have noticed as much if at all.@@frankm3867
As an audio engineer, I've noticed that there are phase issues in the recording. While the panning doesn't particularly concern me, it seems that the microphones might not be properly aligned or phase-corrected. This misalignment could be causing the sensation that something is off in the audio. - Listened on Yamaha NS speakers, Audient converters, Alesis amp, ass budget cables to my NS speakers
I have rarely felt more triumphant than when you confirmed that I was hearing what I was thinking that I was hearing. Especially since I set up my monitors with a tape measure yesterday. Know that I only did this in response to you convincing me to give a crap about stereo imaging. Also, that's a badass clarinetist. Thank you.
I heard it, but to my ears (as a musician, recording engineer, and monetarily-challenged audiophile) it worked quite nicely. The performance was expertly done, and I felt the recording captured both the nuance of the musician and elements of the recording space. The fact that my system reproduced it faithfully makes me happy in my equipment selection. The music, though, makes my soul happy -- even if my cables aren't pricey and lifted off the floor.
I'm a musician who records his own material and I did notice the stereo movement the first time but didn't think anything was wrong. I mostly do electronic stuff (but also use guitar and some other instruments) so I'm quite used to wild stereo movement of instruments. A well balanced mix does not mean you can't have an interesting stereo field but just that one channel isn't wildly louder than the other.
I am a recording engineer and I prefer the movement of the instruments, but only if you have stereo miking for that instrument. It also works for vocals it makes the whole recording more realistic.
Owning an old z5500 from logitech, this sounds amazing! But the video did not prepare for something this elegant in sound. i have no headphones to test out, and only 3 speakers connected (left-center-right) Still i was able to hear some wierd "moving" but not the expected from audio. Love this video. Found it by accident. Thank you sir. Cheers from Denmark
I couldn't identify anything wrong with the recording. I've been a recording and live sound engineer for all of my adult life. Starting in high school. I did however notice all the characteristics of movement in the clarinet solo, which I found to be real and part of the histrionics of the performer. I was very glad that it had been recorded in stereo so as to capture that. The entire recording has an extremely 3 dimensional quality to it! It literally sounds like the recording as you and the assistant engineer Robin, below, describe it's capture! The engineers did their best to capture the spherical sound of the recording environment and succeeded marvelously! Not so much a problem as a job well done! Brilliant! Thank you sir! May I have another?😊
I'm no sound engineer but a mere musician and I obviously noticed the movement of the clarinet, but I was looking for an actual issue and couldn't find any. The reveal was more like: You think that this is a problem?? ^^ Maybe you can hear a bit of noise-floor but that could be on my side. The clarinet solo has no issues imho whatsoever, it is lively and captures all of your attention, one could argue about the width of the stereo image of the solo instrument, there was one single lower note that was way out to the left and almost sounded like it was coming from another source, but I absolutely love it exactly the way it is. It keeps you quite literally glued to the instrument, like you follow it with your ears. Could you do it differently? Sure. Could it be as great? Maybe. It's a decision that has been made and then been executed brilliantly.
I did hear the movement right from the start but I just didn’t think there was anything wrong with it. It added to the dynamic quality of the performance.
I concider myself an audiophile in the sense of listening to music on more refined equipment, but I listened to this on my phone, so I must relisten to this on my system for a much clearer seperation than my ear buds. That said, im not bothered by that movement mentioned as long as the recording is well done. its the quality of sound of each instrument which is most important to my listening pleasure.
i love that this exists, i was just trying to explain that when you spend enough time mixing music or frankensteining together surround sounds, you ruin your ears and regular listening, i actually hear three issues, phasing, some sort of clicking possibly of the instrument or chair of the musician, and some mic clipping
As a non-audiophile, I wouldn't even notice as even when focusing on those things you pointed out. I would accept these kind of things as intentional or intended simple since I am so use to listening to music that is meant to capture scenes they are played with.
I'm an enthusiast! I didn't recognize there was a panning or that is was a problem untill you pointed it out. I did hear it on my 99 dollar Sony Pulse 3D headphones but it would not even have occured to me there would be flaws in what I was listening to. Also I feel a little tricked because we were given a visual image of a beautiful field and instantly the Clarinet became a fluttering butterfly in this field. It’s volume represents our proximity to it vs the rest of the field. It did what butterflies do. I do like movement in scenarios like this. Great video.
I heard nothing but the fact that this clarinetist played it much better than my high school state honor band efforts 50 years ago. I haven’t had so much fun listening to audiophile jargon in my life. New follower here , looking forward to catching up.
I'm not an audiophile - and I didn't hear it until you pointed it out. If I had noticed it before I would have assumed the musician was moving and it would never have bothered me. I love the detail and explanation you give about mic positions and I will consider this next time I'm on a sound desk or setting up mics. Thank you very much for this video. I just subscribed.
I'm glad you didn't use the normal test that I see on RUclips where they play some insanely high frequency and tell you "if you didn't hear this you're not an audiophile, ignorant of the fact that that youtube and most compressed audio will remove frequencies that most people can't hear or most people don't have the audio equipment to replicate.
@@lordxeno8270 Well, it was just my opinion... since it pulled me out of the usual things I hear. It is just an opinion friend, based upon my father being a Choral Director for 10 years of my life, and being classically trained for 8 years, and even getting in a few full orchestra performances where individual "chairs" and instrumentation sections were in varying directions, not just two. I forget that not everyone has had the opportunity to live that experience. It was nice, and easily overlooked.
I quite enjoyed the movement, honestly. It felt alive, and it felt natural. I could almost sense the musician moving as he played, as one naturally would if one were passionate about one's instrument. what I didn't hear (and I think it's due to listening to it on this particular set of headphones, with the eq still set up for more bass-laden music genres), is something I truly enjoy hearing on my fairly modest collection of vinyl records containing classical instrumentals... audible breaths... fretting noises from the stringed instruments...etc. unfortunately, even with these headphones (NOT "audiophile" quality by any stretch) I think i'm hearing more of the audio compression laid on by RUclips's processing algorithms. It's kind of a faint "fuzz" directly following notes/words and heard in the sudden silence afterwards. not an audiophile, but I do enjoy "hearing" things. thank you for introducing me to this musician, I'll be checking out his album!
I profoundly agree and felt with how you went through the listening session (or "test for that matter"). My vintage system is audiophile by all definition; although not expensive, they are collectibles and rare [modified & tweaked to the bone]. To name a few: Audio Research D-51 / SP-3a, Quad ESL-63, Linn Sondek LP 12 / Koetsu MC cart, Otari M-10 reel-to- reel [ these last two brings out the most musicality of involvement to my 79-year ears !!! The meaningful video is excellent. Now, I ask myself; did I hear t? I'll have to ask my grandson and be the Judge. Thanks Xomby
I wouldn't have guessed this was a problem. In recorded music we often make left and right channels slightly different to make the sound more open and alive. It could be done intentionally by adjusting the EQ, adding short reverb or an artifact of the tape. At first I thought that the bandwidth was low, as if the recording was old, and the key clicks were too noticeable.
The first time i listen to it i wasn't really paying attention to it since I'm not really that much of a audiophile, but when he mentioned it it really caught me off guard, though i believe the reason i didn't caught it at first is because the shifts were happening so fast. It's a beautiful piece though, and it's meant to be enjoyed by all.
I don't identify as an audiophile, but I do recognize and appreciate precision and accuracy in audio quality. Of course the wobble, the almost undecisiveness and youthfulness of the clarinet is obvious, even exciting. Hardly seems a flaw, especially since the other instruments are well rendered. Not all music has to be static; this dynamic clarinet brings life to recording.
Brilliant! I learned that my current speakers are a bit muddy and had to change to headphones and loved the movement! Thanks for the training course on mic placement. I enjoyed the video!
I LAUGHED when you revealed the answer! I was listening with headphones and had been pulling away alternate ears trying to locate the clarinet. I thought that you were pulling some kind of phasing stunt on a monophonic recording. In audiophile equipment, I respect the law of diminishing returns.
Yes I heard it. I'm a professional musician sitting in a very precisely tuned acoustic home studio with proper amounts of diffusion and absorption nice ADAM speakers. I've also engineered and produced over my career. Everything you point out is very astute. I am glad to see Robin's response. Phase differences account for a portion of the movement left to right, but the room itself could also inflict some weirdness.
And could we say that clarinet might be the most "difficult" to deal with in terms of phase? And with a close in music stand like that I would think comb-filtering would be even more likely and add somewhat random issues in that field.
@@TiqueO6 The movement of the clarinet blurs the comb filter effects. Anyway, in live settings, I prefer good old clip-on microphones. Now, the clarinet emirs sound not only from the horn but also from the finger section. so just can't just mike it with a trumpet clip-on microphone. But there's the AMT WS, a clip-on double microphone. Stays stationary in regard to the clarinet, and I really like the sound. And then there's the Rumberger WP-1x which places a microphone inside the mouthpiece. The idea is to capture the sound before it exits through horn and finger section. That's probably what I would bring when I had to do live sound of a clarinet player in a hardcore metal band. It's also half the price of the AMT WS, so if the hardcore metal guitarist start smashing his burning guitar and the hardcore metal clarinet player joins in with his burning clarinet...
Having recorded heaps of Orchestras, we used to use a Stereo Neumann mic as the main then a number of others for the different sections. Later we moved the Decca Tree which gave a much fuller sound in the 2nd violins, violas and front cellos. It also removed the phase cancelation caused by the middle space of the L & R capsules on the Neumann or stereo pair.
Great! I'd to laugh in the first moment as i thought "he's about to tell all the stuff nerds...", then i hold my breath. I couldn't hear any prob at all! Wait... Then, after Davids explanation i recessed unstressed. I took that wandering of the clarinette from the very first moment for being natural. Natural at all. So have thanks for this divine video, David!
You're welcome. You can find my further thoughts on this topic here ruclips.net/video/EdDnAnSPQpg/видео.html and here ruclips.net/video/m1VzhiBSv28/видео.html
I’ve just purchased my first pair of “audiophile” speakers. I’m loving some aspects of the sound, in particular the way the instruments and vocals seem to have more richness in their reproduction. On the other hand, more by luck than planning, over the years my changes have yielded an ever more precise stereo image, until now. Now the image is more vague and I’m trying to evaluate if my attitude to the system having slightly less focus in the image is going to outweigh the otherwise improved tonal qualities. Will I gradually forget, as I float on the music as if wafting on a punt across the waters of the Lethe? The music is still spaced across a wide and deep soundstage, wider in fact than the speakers, so I believe I will. In case you hadn’t guessed, I am an audiophile. I make no claims as to the quality of my 62 year old ears, only that I derive pleasure from the beauty of the sound as well as the quality of the playing. Tonight’s entertainment included that well known audiophile band, Camel, as well as a joyful reunion with a childhood favourite, Tubular Bells. Fiftieth Anniversary Edition, half speed mastered by Abbey Road, naturally 😂. Loved the video.
I listened to this on my 13 inch laptop while eating breakfast. I didn't hear the recording flaw, but I'm still sticking to my belief that I am, and will always be an audiophile. (Note to self: should have used headphones!)
1. I love the “movement“ of the clarinet sound in the audio field. 2. When I mix recordings of my own music, I almost always change the pan of each instrument between movements, and *usually* within a movement as well - to my mind (and ear!), the “purist” approach to mixing [where every instrument is “frozen” in space] is rigid. To be honest, I’m baffled when engineers choose not to use as expressive and powerful a tool as placement within the sound field…
I enjoyed this. I was simply listening on my phone so the pans left and right were not very noticeable and I heard a fuzz in some notes. But as you mention the lively nature of the recording is beautiful. I will be revisiting this when I'm with my stereo. I consider myself though, an audio enthusiasts. Where I feel philes are searching for a most true to form music I just want to hear it all and hear it loud. I'm more worried about missing tones than I am colliding tones and phase shift. I'm willing to experiment with phase, ports and reflection so that I'm surrounded by sound. Movies make this really difficult though, with atmos and dtsx creating height channels for images on a screen that is in front of me never seems to quite line up. I think this is more a problem with traditional movie making trying to use 3d sound rather than sound imaging itself. Video game on the otherhand have made amazing use of sound in the 2 dimensional plane. Being part of a world that is all around me and being able to hear something behind me because I have speakers behind me is much more emmersive than a plane that goes over head of me but on screen the whole time in front of me.
This isn't a panning problem. It's a movement and stereo imaging problem. So many of the comments below talk about panning but I feel that it might be getting confusing. There has been so much interest in this video that I will follow it up, soon hopefully. UPDATE - Followup available here - ruclips.net/video/EdDnAnSPQpg/видео.html
There is NO problem. It's not a problem at all except to you. Your ignorance is making what is common use into a problem. That's weird - & is not representative of reality in song production. If you're really an audiophile you're stepping outside your field & commenting on a completely different field but spouting ignorance. You're in no position to comment on the recording business & it's techniques - having already demonstrated you don't know your stuff. Other producers have commented here also - producers who know their craft.
@@SeanWysemanalso sounds perfectly fine in mono so I don’t know what exactly is the point other than to pontificate on needless bs caused by other needless bs
@AudioMasterclass - Most entertaining, but I must take a ittle bit of an issue.
I manufacture high-end analog components. I'm also a musician, and have played numerous instruments in bands & orchestras of all denomination. I know what real music sounds like in all manner of venues.
I simply don't quite understand your fixation on imagery. I'm listening to my workshop set-up which is basic & limited, but hilariously good! Everyone is gobsmacked by the realism - I played the CD of a sadly late friend, Nigel Richard; bagpipe builder and player extraordinare. He (without provocation) said it sounded just exactly as it did in the recording studio. Amazing what O/B's and concrete walls can acheive.
My workshop isn't very large - maybe 5 x 7 metres with the O/B's maybe 2.5 metres from me, situated roughly 1/3rd along the 7mtr, with me near the end wall. The OB's & I occupy that 1/3rd the space, the remainder of which is occupied by the apparitions of melodic performance. A nicely recorded small set up even taken from youtube can sound unnervingly real:
ruclips.net/video/8mCCMhuKEYw/видео.html&ab_channel=JasonMraz
ruclips.net/video/oIyVu0Ucz8U/видео.html&ab_channel=SouthernRaised
Well, they genuinely could fit in my room, and they do. Take that second track - the banjo starts right in the far right corner of the room from me. Sounds real - it's there. Rest is kinda mushed towards the centre left with the vocals about a metre forward. Nothing great going on with the imagery here, so why does it sound this good? Without paying autistic levels of scrutiny to imagery (I can feel roughly where it is, and thats no where near the speakers) and I get a strong impression of presence.
Go to the first track. Practically mono. In these sort of live gigs, the speakers could be anywhere but I'm pretty certain I'm hearing the best version taken straight from the mixer desk and post eq-d. Pretty sure it's not the imagery that's doing it for me now?
Neither of the above tracks require ear-splitting volume - you should always listen at realistic levels for acoustic music. Unfortunately for those desiring of orchestral levels of performance, some 106dB will be required.
I don't believe that imagery is as important as you appear to insist. Yes, I have tracks that move backward & forward, left and right. Sure it's a factor, but it's certainly not the most important - otherwise mono would be entirely redundant.Is there no such a thing as a mono oriented audiophile?
@@jamesportrais3946 The guy doesn't know his stuff. He doesn't know that there are 3 distinct disciplines & 5 more sub-disciplines that are normally divided up among as many people.
Sometimes you get someone who does it all. But those jobs are divided up - even in the mind of the person that wears every hat. I'm one of them that often does every stage himself because I'm good a them.
But when he enters the dialog with a bold & blatant statement that "you're not an audiophile if you can't hear this" - which is really clickbait because it's false. You can find all kinds of misinformation on YT & this is a perfect example. A guy grandstanding with an opening headline that knows not what & audiophile is. Then says you're not one if you can't hear this. Ridiculous. No audiophile is accurately described as such.
It may be an audiophile who's using his mixing appreciation skills - but that's not an audiophile's domain - figuring out if the mix engineer should have made the right artistic choice. That's not an audiophile that's making those observations even if he considers himself an audiophile - he's not talking about the fidelity of the sound - which is what defines an audiophile.
Why is important to make the correct distinctions - it's not that important unless you want to communicate it to others. Then it's important that you know the roles & definitions or you'll not gain an credibility by not knowing your topic more deeply than the public you are communicating with. This guy doesn't know his topic.
@@SeanWyseman I'm in your camp Sean, but I'm not certain he needs to be eviscerated 😛 - I can see why you were annoyed, but the guy is trying to promote his channel/business. We only learn through mistakes, and the modern culture of cancellation hardly allows any degree of growth.
I think the guy has 10 years on me which would mean that his formative years would have come from the late 70's-80's when "specifications" sold typically solid-state amplification. Let's not forget that only a couple of decades previously, your audio aspirations would be curtailed by a furniture-centric wife. I've seen "high end" radiograms from the late 60's/early 70's that had speakers, radio, TT, O/R tape recorder, fridge & cocktail bar (seriously!) all built in.
I'm sure you can see where I'm going with this. Early SS equipment sounded on the whole _shyte_ but measured brilliantly. This was the era when the likes of Krell was king; megawatts & miniscule distortion combined with practically unlimited bandwidth & vanishing noise. All very nice, but sounded crap. Sandpaper treble, paper mids, bass that you couldn't distinguish from external traffic (you got pumped when you thought a truck on the road outside was part of the plot) and absolutely no depth - your program was nailed to a perspex sheet between your probably three-way speakers with seriously _shyte_ crossovers. Everything we hated about early CD players was encapsulated in this meandering mess.
What that equipment _could_ do was image. Inherently more consistently reproducible semi conductors meant consistence throughout the bandwidth. This means that a fixed pan-point is less likely to wander with varying degrees of frequency. If that's your only selling point, might as well push it - so they did.
Sean, I don't think our man has ever heard a proper stereo soundscape. My experience for more than a few decades has been one that you feel you could walk into. More than a few visitors go looking to the rear wall in order to find additional speakers that aren't there. Funny thing is, being O/B's, they turn around and hear the same phenominon!
I'd like our man to pay a few visits to very different set ups and gain a little experience. His writing, or rather talking doesn't smack of someone who's heard a Class A single ended micro-Watt set-up for example.
Your thoughts Sean?
I once heard it described this way:
Normal ppl use audio equipment to listen to music. The audiophile uses music to listen to audio equipment.
You can find my further thoughts on this topic here ruclips.net/video/EdDnAnSPQpg/видео.html and here ruclips.net/video/m1VzhiBSv28/видео.html
Take the music box away, then who knows how the audiophile uses said equipment. Sounds like the typical music snob
@@squiggyloveslemons
I’m not following lol.
But as far as snobs go… I think each every hobby / passion has its own.
@@squiggyloveslemons Yeah, your sentences aren't quite coherently put together
That sounds about right, I use audio equipment to listen to music, but I also use music to listen to the equipment itself.
For me it goes both ways, but I am also not one of those delusional people who spend $10,000 on a set of stereo speakers.
I think the music itself should always be the primary concern, not the equipment used to listen to it.
I have also found out over the years that you get used to whatever equipment you use regularly, so while it's nice to have audiophile equipment, it is not the end all and be all, and it certainly does not determine how much enjoyment you will get from the music.
I am not an audiophile, just a music enthusiast. I didn't hear anything wrong and just enjoyed the music.
Exactly.
I noticed it but still enjoyed the music!
@@seymourclearlyme 2
That was my take on it. I noticed the panning movement but figured it was intentional. Sometimes they make the sound fields uneven on purpose to add a sort of "dimensional" effect.
@@MrR2185 when I saw the nice pastoral video image I imagined that the clarinet was a little rabbit jumping from here to there, is this music programmatic?
Hi! i was the assistant engineer on this recording. Not all of the mics were used, the orchestra for example is purely our A/B and ORTF main mics combined with the room mics and some spots for the woodwinds and Double basses. For Roeland we used only the stereo mics but not hard-panned, more something like 20%. Personally i like the slight movement. Oh and to comment about the Bricasti, it didn't do all that much, just enhances the natural acoustics of the hall. Lastly, the speakers are Dynaudio BM6a's, OK speakers for on the move and to give a general impression. Our main monitoring is usually a Grace M900 paired with some headphones we know well. The speakers are just there in case a lot of people want to come and listen and to make the recording session less of a headphone-only session. The room we were in (one of the changing rooms) was certainly not ideal for speaker-based monitoring. Thank you for the interesting video and feel free to ask me any questions regarding the recording, i'll do my best to answer!
Keep doing what you're doing. I thought it sounded great.
It is a beautiful recording. I heard the stereo field 'wandering' on the soloist but I don't think it's a negative because it does seem to more faithfully represent how one would perceive the sound if one were in the room with the group and the soloist was expressively moving his body as he played (which it turns out he was). I have been a musician all my life and have both performed with various sizes of groups and listened to many performances in-person, and the details of the musical experience (in-person) differ considerably with even small changes in one's position in the room, let alone the habits and idiosyncracies of the players.
I don't consider myself an 'audiophile' exactly (and can't afford really nice equipment anyhow) but I appreciate the clarity - in a recording such as this one - of a faithful representation of how the music would be perceived if I could have been in one of the better spots in that room where it was originally performed. Thanks!
That's fascinating, Robin Breuglemans. I don't know if you saw my earlier comment, and those of others, but there is definitely a group of people who found the slight movement of the clarinet to be entirely natural, and added character to the recording. Thanks again for your comment.
Since we Americans don't use "a recording" and "a mix" interchangeably, I assumed the "problem with the recording" was the noise at 1:17.
I am fond of my old BM10s. I know they weren't the most popular near/mids, but I like them. I have just moved onto Neumann NDH 30 for hp monitoring. It is the first time in a long time I have fallen in love with a tech purchase. I adore them!
As a solo clarinetist, I heard the panning and thought it was quite a good representation of how one bobs and bounces from left to right and animates themselves as they play. That's definitely not a "problem in the recording" at all, and I'm not sure why it would ever be perceived as such. What bothered me on my studio headphones is that the microphone had a touch too much gain, and very often the recording of the clarinet was clipping pretty bad.
You can find my further thoughts on this topic here ruclips.net/video/EdDnAnSPQpg/видео.html and here ruclips.net/video/m1VzhiBSv28/видео.html
@KingOthius
Yes, I had exactly the same thoughts as you did; the clipping was obvious. Although I didn't notice the slight panning, when it was pointed out I just assumed this was the musician moving in front of stereo mics.
Listening to the original recording, I don't hear any clipping. I would be very shocked to hear clipping for a modern classical album that isn't live. I do hear air escaping from the embouchure being picked up from the close mics. The hard part of any recordist and engineer is trying to capture the excitement, clarity, and dynamics a close mic provides without making it sound strange. Wind instruments will get key clacks, strings will get more bow noise and directionality, piano and percussion will get more mallet and felt noise, and classical voice can sound distorted.
Another source of the panning, especially coming from the main pair (not the solo mics) is going to be the resonances of the room and the directionality of the instrument. You can hear the latter when a high or low note suddenly sounds like its in another direction, but then after the leap it comes back to where it was before. Cello and bassoon are the worst at this! With more directional instruments like brass and voice, movement is a bigger issue. And I do mean Issue. Especially in vocalists that like to emote through body movement, the stereo image of the soloist can get very distracting. If you narrow the close mics for classical voice too much, the sound can appear small. No vocalist wants to be heard as a small sound, believe me haha.
@@peted3637 Full disclosure: I'm not an audiophile, but I did hear the panning and I thought: hey, that's a nice stereo effect, did they do that on purpose to add some "depth" to the recording or did they record it that way?
I also thought that I heard some clipping and that that would be the supposed defect.
@peted3637 It isn't clipping. It's the sound of the musicians fingering their instruments.
The microphones pick up audio that you probably wouldn't ordinarily hear if you were in an auditorium listening to the piece live because the mics are close enough to the instruments to pick them up.
I'm not an audiophile, and I did hear the variation you pointed out but, I would never have thought it to be "something wrong."
Same here. Soloists often express physical movements while playing. Most notably Martin Frost, one of our greatest clarinetists. He moves a lot while playing. So honestly even if its audible, I didnt really "hear" it
Same
same, i've also ery appreciated it very much, for me it was more expressive than a mono variant would be
Great performance. I enjoyed the bass clarinet backdrop.
yeah this man is full of bs
Classically-trained musician here. I heard it, but didn't realize that's what you were talking about. IMO, not only is there nothing wrong with it, but that's the best way to capture this performance: get all of the individual idiosyncrasies that the musician brings to it. That's what makes it a performance, not just the sterile perfection of running sheet music through MIDI. What that recordist captured is unique in the universe. Even with the same orchestra and solost, there will never, ever be another performance just like it.
me too
Spooky Cosmic Interference
You so-called musicians! Stop 'playing' music and get serious! How insensitive, dull, blunt, and deaf do you have to be if those constantly swaying, rocking, shaking fluctuations escape your sense of hearing??? Trained ears? Trained to tolerate the most vile torture of your auditory apparatus! How can it be, you're impervious to the oscillating atrocity of the Doppler Effect when the clarinet is swaying from side to side - and more so at varying speeds! Pleeeeeaase, get me some of those MIDI files, you mentioned! Are there any with NO MUSIC in them, at all? I'll add them to my huge collection of recordings of 4′33″.
I like @shanedk's explanation. Imagine being seated in a small recital hall listening to the soloist with no amplification or accompaniment. The movement of the instrument might sound a great deal like this solo on the recording and it's an important part of any live performance. I suppose the problem is exacerbated because the instrument seems to move but the orchestra does not. I always learn a great deal from Audio Masterclass (and I did this time as well), but I'm willing to accept what was "wrong" with this recording as something that might be very difficult to "fix" while accurately capturing both the nuanced solo and the orchestra.
@@CricksWhiteNoise @shanedk certainly is right in his rather 'emotional' approach to recording technique. As humans we want 'moving' performances. One problem that might arise from moving while recording with several mics is phase cancellation, destructive wave interference. Although wave interference can in some musical situations really be used as a kind of 'natural audio fx control' that can be achieved by merely adjusting the signal's run-time differences when making the mic set-up. With classical music recordings it's something you'd rather want to avoid, usually...
I didn't realize it was the "mistake".
I perform and hear lots of classical music, so I'm used to Instruments (especially in solo parts) being moved as a physical expression.
In my opinion this movement and the resulting shifts in the stereo field are important and a part of the performance. (if its not hard panned)
That's right but sudden movement like this is uncomfortable to hear and you immediately know somethings wrong with the spacing
@@Sizzer1337 Only because he told you that. I am a mastering engineer & work with this stuff every day. We teach people to create movement not stifle it. You're dead wrong about what you said here as this kind of movement is used all the time. Just google 'automated panning plugins' & take a look at the "wealth" of tools that are designed to help you do just that. You let the guy in the video cause you to decide that this was wrong & a mistake & you designed your comment in agreement with him. It didn't sound wrong or bad to me & people pay a ton of money as a producer to make informed & intelligent observations.
I do admire his trick of creating a challenge to acquire the clickbait to attract people to see what the hell he's talking about because even the headline sounds wrong but it's that aspect that makes you want to see what he's trying to say.
Problem is he doesn't know where that movement came from or why. He just decided that it was wrong without knowing that people are doing that all the time in music production.
Also it appears that he's using a sort of cheap trick by presenting the "you're not an audiophile" kind of challenge - presumably because, for the first time, he actually noticed something he'd not heard before & figured that because he calls himself an audiophile & because he heard it - he can use the headline strategy to make himself appear to be an audiophile you should listen to.
Then he blusters about how wrong it is & all that bunk. It sounds just like a musician dancing while playing. At the end of the day there is no right or wrong in artistic choices unless a predetermined standard is applied to it & then you can judge it against that standard. However in this case no artistic standard exists except in the authors head so it's an invalid comparison.
I was wondering if that's what he was on about. I thought it was intentional, or at least not an "issue".
@@Sizzer1337 That would only be after he told you it was wrong. It's not. It's what everyone in the professional world is doing these days. He just never heard it till now - meaning that by his own definition - that he's judging everyone else with - he's not an audiophile - or didn't become one until he heard it. But this sort of thing is not only being a lot it's encouraged & taught. Welcome to the real world. Nice of you to catch up.
Sean, I agree 100%. The movement the artist creates is part of his art, not a mistake. Obviously the 'audiophile' making this video prefers the sound of sanitized studio music over a recording of live music.
BTW, I couldn't hear any of the stereo shifting while watching this on my phone! 😂
I consider myself an audiophile, but I do not have expensive interconnects, or even expensive speakers for that matter. I listened to this on a pair of Tannoy Reveals using a Music Hall DAC25.2 into an NAD 7020. The movement of the clarinet within the sound stage enhances the realism of the recording IMHO. I didn't hear a problem, only a wonderful live performance, which is the goal of most recordings.
As a producer who has worked for majors, "Audiophile" beliefs and their gear are one of the top comedy topics we engage in.
@Dr Curious -- audiophiles are the audio version of Corvette/BMW/Porsche clubs .. (wow! nice chrome, great hemi, super exhaust pipes ...) -- it's all about the impressive array of equipment and the proclaimed results --
@@aBachwardsfellow Yes. Totally. The funny issus for us tend to be the claim of what can be heard in certain situations and the misuse of equipment and setups. Like a 30k speakers in a wooden floored, french doored, square, reverberant listening space, with platinum power cables and 1m long platinum speaker connections. etc.
@@Dr-Curious - Totally! 🙂
when I 'auditioned' my $2,000 PSB speakers back in '92, I thought they were the best sounding in the room sans the $10,000 B&W speakers. I couldn't afford the silver speaker cables for it, but when he connected them to the PSB's, it was like night and day, they just opened up more shimmer, sound stage, imaging, and timber of instruments. You believe what ya want, but I HEARD it myself. Go hear some GOOD speakers and cables, not the mass market crap.
@@trallfraz night and day? sure
I loved the stereo wandering of the clarinet. It adds a new dynamic that really pulls the melody out of the rest of the harmony without being "in your face" about it. Subtle and beautiful. By not recognising what was going on, it doesn't mean you didn't experience and appreciate it - the beauty of this piece lies in the subtlety of the effect. Great stuff.
@Zane Edmunds -- Music -- however it is heard -- is nothing without the contribution of the synthesis of the mind and soul which is perceiving it.
Hearing it live, the sound would also 'wander'
Exactly.... i didnt see this as an issue at all... just made it more lifelike.
Agreed. What's the point of multiple channels if they are not used for things that can't be done with mono? I like the feeling that the musician/music is moving around. I wouldn't have noticed it if I had listened blind, and wasn't bothered by it even when primed to listen for a mistake.
@@sumerianliger - which comes around to the question -- does the fact that the "wandering" of the clarinet (which is completely natural in a live performance) is identified as the targeted "something wrong" speak to the perfectionist presuppositional mindset (how it "ought" to sound) that plagues the mind of an audiophile? Do audiophiles create their own Sisyphus hell of endless technical diddling to achieve what never existedin the first place? Microphones on the bell of a clarinet?
This «problem» you described, is what makes the recording unique and give it life i think. Perfection is sometimes rigid and boring.
Exactly. I think that what he didn't understand is that the recording engineer probably *purposely* recorded it with stereo mics to get that life that you mentioned. It makes the recording more interesting.
I wrote a piece of music that features a bridge that builds up to a crescendo following a lead guitar playing a meandering melody... at first I left the guitar in the center of the mix and it felt kind of empty and lacking something... so I automated the panning to make it meander left and right and suddenly that section felt like it came to life. So I can definitely see someone doing this on purpose in this piece of music as well.
this guy gets it :p
Yea, but the dude isn't running left to right, it doesn't really depict the reality of the clarinet being played: not a stereo instrument.
@@LetsGo_Brandon A dude moving the clarinet left to right as he plays *does* make it a "stereo instrument".
What's that weird clicking in the audio clip? It's low in volume and squashed by other frequencies but the attack should be clearly noticeable
Yeah, I thought that the „clicking“ was supposed to be the problem.
Sounds to me that someone’s is slightly tapping their fingers over the mic or something.
But maybe it’s a hardware problem on our end? Cause no one seems to notice it. 😅
@@swpostpro 🤣
Nailed it. And might I add, I don’t think he hears it.
And might I also add, being an audiophile isn’t about what you can or can’t hear. It’s about valuing and providing access to the best possible sound/hearing experience. (I’m not an audiophile)
To me it almost sounded like audio artifacting/glitching. Maybe it's the sound of the mechanical pieces of the clarinet clicking a bit? Not sure.
I slightly noticed some panning/movement in the stereo field, but what was super apparent to me was that aggressive click/artifacting/glitch (whatever it was) directly up the center.
I actually love the panning, cause I could feel him dancing with the melody right in my ears. Definitely a taste difference!
Yeah, it adds a certain flavour and experimentation and mocking joyfulness. I am proud that I could notice it having worked as a freelance audio technician. Unfortunately, the pursuit of perfecting: "I SING A SOOOONG, AND I AM DONE" got tiring.
I love it when a band or composition has different expressions of the same work like Iron Maiden. The changes and imperfections develop the piece as a whole. The recording was classical true, but I think one should not take themselves or their work too seriously. A bit of whimsy open new avenues of development.
a n i m e
n
i
m
e
It feels like the audio is flossing my brain.
Falls under the category “It’s not a bug it’s a feature”
I'm an amateur conductor, so I did notice this immediately, but I didn't think it was the "problem" he was looking for.
I heard the movement of the clarinet in the stereo field, but I did not perceive it as a "problem". I thought the effect of the solo voice swaying in and around the other instruments as quite natural. My mind went to other potential problems (lack of depth in low strings) which is more related to the pair of headphones I'm using. I think this re-enforces your point that much of music engineering and production is a matter of taste. Thanks for the fun and informative video.
Same here... I really don't understand why anything in that track was a "PROBLEM". Probably a wrong categorisation. You're referring more to an issue of setup and interpretation of the audio when recorded through that setup. I was expecting something like, can your audio chain reproduce that issue inherent in the setup? - and I heard the moving clarinet, but I didn't stop to interpret it. I just enjoyed it. If there WAS A difference in the first 2 seemingly identical tracks that an audiophile's system SHOULD have made clear, I guess I didn't hear anything different or different enough to call it out.
Same here. The mics accurately recorded the performance. I like a little movement in the stereo image.
I thought we were going to be hearing a phasing issue, or something real.
Unsubscribe.
You need a dark matter deflector and randomiser to get the most from your system.
@@Coneman3 Flux capacitors help also. 😁
I would agree that things done in the mix are not "problems" per-se. Personally my first thought was I just found the recording to be sub-par due to the strange imaging. I have heard a recording like this one which had a similar issue and that one it actually was a genuine problem. A distant mic was picking up a soloist in a classical music recording, so to "solve" the issue the recording engineer simply mixed them in similar ratios to how the mics were picking up the sound. The result was the stereo image rapidly shifting back and forth depending on which mic was dominant in its sound pickup, which was annoying.
I would say in general _actual_ problems are technical issues like a mic partially dropping out in a live performance, clipping due to inadequate headroom or excessive levels, noise or cross-talk due to poor interconnects or interference being received, etc. Things that actually impact what was recorded.
I noticed the clarinet dancing around the rest of the band both in melody and space but didn’t consider it a flaw. But my formative musical years were spent listening to psychedelic rock where instruments flying through musical space is not a flaw but a feature.
Yep. Thought the movement was intentional as well. Because of the visual background image. Thought it was meant to be some invisible forest fairy flying around while playing clarinet (or being portrayed by the clarinet).
And of course I also grew up with vinyl records with titles like *This is **---===STEREO===---*
Same; I noticed but didn't consider the location a flaw; instead I was listening for clipping (and cringing because my volume was too high on a couple spikes) 😊 _[edit, typo]_
To me, being an audiophile doesn't mean I can hear details others can't. It just means the sound quality is as important to me as the music itself. Case in point, every time I've upgraded my headphones I've grown more and more "addicted" to listening to music that would (personally) sound better and better. For a year now I've been using Focal headphones, and rarely is there a day I'm not using them, quite possibly an average of 4 to 6 hours per day. I'm even enjoying songs that I clearly wouldn't have enjoyed nearly as much if it weren't for the sound quality that still amazes me a year later. I have friends who tried them on and couldn't have cared less despite agreeing with the fact that the music sounded "great"; they are not audiophiles. And then I have one colleague that is truly interested in trying my headphones, and truly appreciates the improvements they bring to the experience; what is that if not an audiophile?
You can find my further thoughts on this topic here ruclips.net/video/EdDnAnSPQpg/видео.html and here ruclips.net/video/m1VzhiBSv28/видео.html
It is not possible to get a full range stereo audio signal through cans. Oh, sure. It can be measured as a full range signal, but bass from real instruments is felt in the body as much as heard. And cans will only ever provide a dual mono signal (some binaural techniques that are still quite rare aside). This is why deaf people can enjoy clubs. Cans are a great compromise to keep noise levels down for those who may not want to hear your music, but they will never be accurate. Some people can make impressive mixes through cans via experience but as audiophiles like to go on about the intent of the musician or engineer or producer, know that the vast majority of them do not create music to be heard in two discreet, non-interacting channels. Again, some more modern mixers are experimenting with making music that is aimed primarily at earbuds, typically using those aforementioned binaural techniques, HRTF etc etc, but that is still rare. And some orchestral work may translate well in headphone stereo if the right miking technique is used, but that doesn't fix the problem of lower bass being 'heard' by the body as much as the ears. Cans are not and should not be considered audiophile, if we take the word audiophile seriously. But sadly, thanks to the years of woo (green marker pen on the rim of a CD has to be a low point) most audio professionals do not any more.
Marshall headphones were a game changer, major iv is the best on ear’s
An enthusiast....
- How can you tell someone is an audiophile?
- He'll tell you himself.
Like Linux users
Imagine a Vegan cross-fitting audiophile, they would literally explode trying to figure out which trait that they should tell you about first.
@@BlackHatInc especially if they were Scottish 😅
Like Pilots.
I love a reddit comment that states “I purchased *insert basic headphone/speaker* and am officially an audiophile”
I definitely noticed it moving around slightly the first time, but I don't consider that a bad thing at all, so I kept looking for some other problem.
I personally love the dynamic movement of instruments, especially if the movement is actually a result of the performer moving around. It adds so much life to it~
But yeah, stereo movement isn't a problem at all, and doesn't depend at all on the quality of your equipment either.
I don’t understand why this movement would be considered undesirable. When I think about what’s ideal in a mix, I want it to represent the recorded music in a way that conveys as much character as possible without distracting from the core themes. I wouldn’t want it to ping pong from hard left pan to hard right, but this subtle movement makes it feel more expressive, like you’re going on a journey with the clarinet
To me the whole point this video is clickbait, he even says that he enjoys this recording. Please use the affiliate links in the description. Thank you. :)
The movement can cause a mic to pick up some sounds more and some sounds less, so if he moves away from the mic, those notes will be quieter. But also, the mic will pick up the note a fraction of a second later than when he’s closer, mics positioned further away will also pick up the sound slightly delayed. So it’s not just about the stereo effect but about the dynamics, and tempo of the recording.
As a musician who moves a lot, and who works hard on dynamics, tone, and tempo, I’d hate a recording to not represent my hard work.
When i first replied to this comment.... i had just woken up... and i had assumed you meant "the audiophile movement"...
But then i realized my mistake xD
It's classical music.
It's supposed to be boring.
yeh. its hilarious. i think what we are hearing is desirablee, and trying to remove it is "the problem"
Not liking audiophiles while acting exactly like the annoying ones and not realizing it is crazy
I am a career recording engineer (40 years and 2 months) with hundreds of studio and live music recordings in my past. Your opening really intrigued me, so I took your bait. You stated that there "Was something WRONG with the recording." So, I listened attentively. I absolutely heard the "space" that the beautifully performed clarinet moved around in as it was played - I totally didn't feel that is was a problem at all. I fact I enjoyed the movement. To my ears and brain, the movement added a wonderful artistic quality to the recording. I listened in a well treated control room on Genelec 8" nearfields setting on pedestals. Could I hear it? Yes. Wrong? Whatever. I suppose some might call that movement a problem, but not me. But... I really must state that my speaker cables are 12 gauge solid copper Romex - yeah THAT's the "Problem!"
I am a moderately educated novice and had a similar thought. Sure, you can hear the space, but right or wrong is entirely a judgment.
I really loved the movement too. It actually improved my experience of the piece. Very lively!
I heard it at home on my cheap home theatre loud speakers 😂 I guess I've just got good perception.... in fact... listen more closely, and you can hear something that can only be the fiddling of the solist hands or movement of his clothes. I'm not quite sure. There's too much music in the way haha. Oh, and I first noticed the "background" noise with my Sony WH-1000MX4 bluetooth headphones.... yeah you heard that right... bluetooth. No expensive audiophile equipment in sight.
can you hear it? NO! due to the way the youtube algorithm and stereo imaging works.. you absolutely did NOT hear it.. LOL! i was struggling to figure out what this guy was going on about because i didn't hear crap until i actually looked up and found a lossless version of the same song on one of my streaming apps.. i do NOT claim to be an audiophile and most of my equipment is set up specifically for atmos MOVIES and not audiophile music.. i think this is a trick question because it was in straight garbled youtube heavily compressed stereo until i found it in lossless audio.
This video does a great job of showing the difference between audiophiles and musicians.
Solid Romex? Interesting. I'm surprised you don't use stranded 12awg. Is that a cost decision? I wonder if one might hear the difference in frequency response due to skin effect if you A/B with stranded wire. Although I'm willing to bet it isn't drastic and can be compensated for when the studio playback system is tuned to the room anyhow.
Half-way through watching this right now and I still think theres nothing wrong with the music. I was hearing faint clicking, and ticking sounds throughout the piece, but seeing the video of the recording session its obvious i was hearing the keys clapping closed. Its bloody impressive recording for me to hear that.
was wondering what the ticking was as well. I was focusing more on that than the panning of the clarinet which didnt bother me at all.
@@claudiobrt652 yeah I liked the panning of the clarinet. It wasn't wildly moving around and felt fairly centred
I had to look for this comment to validate to myself that I was also hearing the keys clicking and totally thought that was the issue. I heard the panning but really just thought that it gave it more of a spatial feel, so I didn't think of it as a negative.
At first I thought it was the little noises too but that's part of the performance.
The clicking is what I head but I assumed it was the instrument, not the recording.
I can even hear how the sound in the speakers changes when a mosquito lands on their fiber optic cable.
underrated comment LOL
🤣
I can hear them rusting
i can hear them radiating microscopic particles
I can hear a fart from 10 miles away.
I really enjoy your videos. You are very knowledgeable about music production and at the same time very engaging. I am not an audiophile, but did hear the wandering clarinet after you pointed it out. I loved the piece and the excellent recording. Thanks.
I'm an enthusiast who learned from others and I continue to learn. I hope that my videos can convey my enthusiasm to my viewers. You can find my further thoughts on this topic here ruclips.net/video/EdDnAnSPQpg/видео.html and here ruclips.net/video/m1VzhiBSv28/видео.html
I don't consider myself an audiophile, but I do have a fairly well trained musical ear and I often hear issues with everyday playback of music and speech that most people don't notice or care about. Especially with streaming music services (the compression artifacts due to insufficient bitrate are painfully noticeable). The stereo image "problem" is not a problem. It's 100% accurate to how the instrument was played, including the movements of the artist. Without subtle movements or differences in audio like this, I believe the sound would be less organic and would sound more sterile.
Not to mention it would be a great experience with good soundstage headphones
Exactly! I was looking for compression or low bitrate, maybe some interference or noise... But didn't really notice much. Was a bit disappointed when the real "problem" was revealed.
Thank you for saying this, I'm very unknowledgeable on music and I thought to myself is this really "wrong" though and that perhaps it sounds like the physical movement of the instrument irl
I agree and I would categorize my level of listening to audio the exact same as yours.
If the objective is to faithfully reproduce the experience of hearing the instrument as played, the movement, or more specifically it's effect on the recorded sound is significant.
However, on this recording the panning sounds as though the musician has sprinted the full width of the stage.
Not a problem to my aging ears but an interesting and obviously unrealistic effect.
As a clarinettist, to move the clarinet direction during playing happens and that changes the direction of the sound. Including this in the recording adds the element of human performance to the recording
thx for this comment, i will try in my recordings to add it a little bit
And if you wanted to fake this from an isolated track you could always do it in post processing pretty easily.
@@turkeyguy0 i think i will try both, and see if the digital version is capeble of what i do when playing without to much effort
@@tavarno I don't think the point should be adding imperfections for the sake of them. As the late Bob Ross said, they're 'happy little accidents'. Not necessarily something to strive for. In the end, there's a reason why orchestras and musicians in general do many rehearsals and takes before the final recording and/or playing live.
@@omnirhythm i know, but for me this playing sounded very natural, so if adding some imperfections makes the result more natural, i have to try it. Bit probably it will sound just bussy
I'm so used to hearing classical music recorded this way I didn't notice it at first. Or, rather, it didn't bother me. Recording techniques for classical music are often more about the space rather than the clarity. Been in the music industry for years and every single genre has a different way of recording. I think it comes down to what you pointed out: taste. Great video.
My interpretation of an audiophile has changed a lot over the years. I'm more of a music enthusiast with a really good ear. I don't have crazy expensive equipment, but I do have a few items that I really like and put a lot of research into before purchasing. I was in fact able to hear what you're talking about.
I am a developing recording engineer, and I learned a lot from you. The biggest lesson is that it is okay that I had no problem with what I heard. When you defined it as the clarinet moving around I recognized that it was indeed moving around, but I had no problem with it doing so - it fit well into the mix, and the character of the music is actually (for me) augmented by the clarinet sort of "tripping along through the forest" exactly as we hear it.
I do get the idea of having sound sources in non-moving positions, but only when it makes sense. When I do recordings of Church services in the Eastern Orthodox tradition, there is a lot of physical movement taking place, and to try to force every singer and chanter to be "static" in a recording is not realistic in context. In my forthcoming CD I tried to bring a little realism by having the deacon in the center of the sound field, with the choir "behind" (as in a choir loft) and the celebrant priest "in front" as "in the sanctuary / altar" behind the iconostasis. There isn't movement, per se, but there is a realistic sense of placement that I have not usually experienced in other recordings of this type. Let's see what happens when it gets released. Thank you for your video! I subscribed so I can learn more. God bless!
Oh, and I don't have a real Bricasti M7 - I need money and success for that. But I do have "Seventh Heaven Professional" which is a very good emulation of the M7 and it is my go-to for reverbs almost all the time. Excellent!
@@Jamey_ETHZurich_TUe_Rulez I didn't hear anything amiss, but it is possible that given the distance to the mics, that the mechanical thingies on the clarinet are what you might be hearing. Do they jibe with his solo?
@@Jamey_ETHZurich_TUe_Rulez Yeah to me that sounds like the keys on the clarinet being pressed somewhat vigorously
@@Jamey_ETHZurich_TUe_Rulez the "weird clicking" is what the keys of a clarinet sound like
I feel the at 1:17 like wobbly sounds.
@@Jamey_ETHZurich_TUe_Rulez I'm hearing a subtle doubled 'brush' tapping sound at 1:12-1:13 and again at 1:14, again at 1:15 and some other place too? (Listening on a Sennheiser G4ME ONE through a bog standard TRRS connector into a laptop)
Amazing content . . . I'm not an audiophile, and I didn't hear it. Your approach is confident and opinionated, not at all condescending or combative. It's a fine line, always cool to see someone pull that off.
Definitely credit where credit is due there!
To me, the fact that the performer was moving, and the recording captured it means that there was no "problem" with stereo imaging at all; the recording is more accurate than you would have known without seeing a video of the performance. And anyway, regardless of the cause, I like how the clarinet dances with its own melody!
I humbly disagree, the subtle or at any rate rhythmic swaying of the soloist would not have created a wavering almost doppler effect naturally, the mic placement created that effect.
@eugenebrandon3914 Perhaps if the performer were playing a sine-wave-generating instrument, that doppler effect would be clearer, but the mics aren't too far apart, so in a way it's similar to sitting right up close to the performer - not much more phasing than would occur naturally between your ears. Regardless, I like the way the notes dance!
@@mikec7604 It is a beautiful piece which I would not have noticed any imperfection in recording had it not been pointed out.
@@eugenebrandon3914 Agreed!
I find the changing of channels intriguing and feel it enhances the music. There are many people who will find this type of music soothing. Ironically it gives our brains something to do which helps us relax.
The funny thing is that, although I was only watching this video in an idle moment on my laptop, I heard the clarinet moving about, but since this is what happens when musicians play, I found the effect to be quite natural, and added to the charm of the recording. Indeed, as the music was playing, I had an image in my mind of a clarinetist turning and swaying exactly as seen in the subsequent video clip taken at the recording session. Thus, in this respect, it is an excellent recording!
I agree, The movement is part of the life of the performance.
Exactly what i thought the actual position of musician seems fixed but sounds like he's moving his instrument as he plays very well recorded.
Unfortunately, the phone I listened to this on only had one speaker so I could not hear the wandering
@@dolphaskelly9665 Have your tried waving the phone about in time to the music while it plays? 🙂
I actually love when the center image dances around, makes the recording feel more alive. As if the instrument player/singer is right in front of me, occasionally shifting weight from one leg to other
right? having the recording be perfectly center makes it kind of boring. I don't find this a problem at all.
It does give it a sort of "an actual human played this" feel. You can tell it's not just computer generated with samples
As a former recording engineer myself (non-audiophile!), I'm somewhat peeved that I didn't spot it. Having watched so many of your truly excellent videos talking about distortion in it's many guises, pseudonyms and euphemisms, my brain was telling me it must be distortion he's on about and was so busy hearing none of it that the elephant trundled by unnoticed! Truth is, the performance was so captivating that someone could have let off a firework in the room and I'd have missed it. Another great video, thank you.
you didn't spot it because its a personal preference, there is no problem with the recording, which you strangely seem to have agreed with regarding your statement, i suggest reading Robin Breugelmans very polite comment who was involved in recording this captivating performance as you put it ;)
I am not a audiophile and I did hear it the first time. But I didnt feel like it was "wrong", matter of fact. I thought it was de complete opposite of that. For me it feels like the Klarinet dances through my head, from up in my head to the left to the right, lowerright etc. Playing with me. That effect alone gives it so much more.
I actually loved that movement between left right and center...it didn’t bother me at all from enjoying the music...it felt very natural and as if I was there with them during the performance!
Right? It was more immersive, giving a spatial audio feel to it. I liked it, sounded more organic and less sterile.
100% agree... I didn't hear it (the "problem") the first time, not because it didn't go unnoticed, but rather because I found it natural and appealing. This is a problem only to someone that believes it to be a problem.
I didnt hear it at the start because i had to turn my phone around to hear the L and R channel. And not mono.
As a musician and a front-of-house sound engineer (live show mixer for the less educated), I love the fact that I can hear the wandering instrument. It gives life to the experience, remembering that this is a live recording. As you listen, you can picture the player waving or even walking around. If this was a studio recording then it would be different and maybe not so acceptable.
We do not want to hear zombie robots performing, do we?
It *was* a studio recording. In classical music, it is the convention for players to sit or stand still as they play - wandering around causes any amount of difficulty with the balance the conductor has worked so hard to achieve.
Then you are not an audiophile.
I thought it was going to be the sharp resonant frequencies you hear sometimes on certain notes, but i've found that unless you have some kind of dynamic eq or automation it's hard to tame that without making the source sound thin or empty... I don't consider myself an audiophile by any means, but I have been mixing for several years now! This is a great video!
I heard that too! I thought for sure that was what the problem was. I had to check the comments if anyone else might've heard it too!
thats the setup of the listener taking a roll in the play
yeah first i thought it came from the actual clicking of the clarinet but a few of them actually sound like pure digital audio glitches. anyway i was also certain that was the problem
This is so interesting. I never considered the movement of the player to have an effect (although very minor) on the audio. That being said, one thing I noticed after learning to use Ableton and recording guitar and keyboard is that the very minor imperfections of a human player can enhance the feel of certain tracks and provide a more organic feel compared to drawing the notes perfectly on a time table. The only part that has to be perfect, no matter the case, are the drums for obvious reasons.
Thank you for providing this interesting insight.
It is a thing that a recording can be too perfect. One of the functions of a producer is to decide whether an instrumental or vocal take is good enough or try again for something more perfect. Sometimes an early take is the one that's used and later takes are just not as inspiring though technically more perfect.
Gosh! How I like your videos, the sence of humor! "Any recording engineer would prefer that the solo instrument doesn't move this is why the piano was invented, but the piano has its own problems" loved that one!
The real Elephant in the room.
I understand this, but that’s most likely due to the 6’1” parlor grand in my small living room. Oops. I should have spelled “parlor” as “parlour”
"Sinatra doesn't move pianos"
I've never considered myself to be an audiophile, I just like music. 😀 I didn't hear anything odd in the music but I did notice that it sounded like a human instrumentalist rather than a VST. Having heard the explanation, I'm sure that it was the movement of the artist that set off that response in me. I enjoy this sort of detailed breakdown, thank you.
I am a recovering audiophile, and I approve of this message.
Hi, I am Joe....Hi Joe....I am an audiophile.....thanks for joining us Joe, you are safe here......tell us about your first...................
what do you mean by that? You have ceased to enjoy music listening with the best possible quality, or you have stopped believing that incremental changes in the playback chain matter?
@@duel5071 Probably means that being pedantic about things that no one but you can hear isn't constructive. If you point out a quirk, everyone will hear it. If only you know of that quirk, either no one else will notice, or they'll enjoy it as a feature. Being overly perfectionistic and looking for improvements in redundant places is *not* the same thing as as valuing quality. Confusing the two creates a HUGE waste of time, money, and sanity.
@@frank8627-v8k yeah but audiophile listening, if we are going to use a made up term, shouldn't be defined as investment in redundant places, and shouldn't let people who do that call themselves audiophiles, or we shouldn't even use the word. Best quality playback is a real thing though
@@duel5071 Like most things in the world, a word loses its definition when the wrong groups identify with it. People who actually care about quality and create it reasonably have been kicked out of the audiophile squad. When I hear 'audiophile' nowadays, I think "person who thinks the color of a guitar neck effects tone" (which is quickly disproven with a spectrograph, but these people would rather play games of superstition than use real science).
I did have a chuckle being encouraged to listen to high quality audio streaming from YT through "okay quality" computer speakers. However, what I must say, is how clear your voice is in the audio . . . top 1% for RUclipsrs. You obviously practice what you preach. Well done and thanks. (edited to correct typos.)
Personally I like that subtle movement between L and R, it gives it amplitude and spatiality, although I must confess that until the "problem" was revealed I was focused on several things except panning. Thanks for this content!
what did you focus on? I didn't hear the "problem! til it was revealed either, but the squeaks from the clarinet, and the tone being blown too harshly a few times.
Is there any use of me asking hearing strangers on the internet what I asked in hearing people middle school "What's it like to be able to hear with two ears, listen to stereo things 'Properly'?"
I was looking to a little clipping of audio or problem with compression on some frequencies or problem with general audio rather than a music itself. As rock/metal fan panning is natural and it add new layer of complexity. I'm no audiophile I have cheap headset.
If you're experienced you'd not have thought it wrong even if you noticed it.
I played violin for years, I immediately heard the slight swaying but it made total sense to me and it didn’t register as a “problem”. If anything it’s more immersive, like you’re attending a recital.
I’d hate to hear what some “audiophiles” would think of a solo violinist or saxophonist swaying back and forth. 😂
That's how I hear things in person... so... why would I not hear it here? *shrug* "audiophiles" pay for baggies of crystals to wrap around their $1000 cables and I'm just a hard pass on that no matter what it does to the sound. It's weird. It's like telling me crystals heal cancer. I'm sure some folks wish they did (me fucking too) but... uhm... so far no evidence has presented itself.
Problem? I love that they caught his "rock and roll" with the mics. We otherwise could not see and enjoy his physical expression of the music. But now, via movement in the field, we can. Brilliant.
Wonderful video! 40+ year pro mobile audio tech here. This is a great tool to show the budding audiophile/ enthusiast how to listen to things properly. It will be invaluable in teaching them the finer aspects of DSP and equalization. Thank you!
You’re welcome. I’m old fashioned enough to believe that details such as this are important.
Being a live audio mixer for the last 40+years , Congrats ! You led me down the garden path so to speak . I was so intent on listening for distortion or noise on the track , That I never considered the panning even though I did hear it . If the guy moved like that while playing , I'm certain it sounded that way in the room also while it was being recorded , so , while you may not like it , it was STILL faithful to what the artist had played !! Just my 2 cents .
You're right of course, it is faithful to what the artist played. It isn't so faithful to what a concert-goer would hear though, even in the front row, and I speak as a concert goer who likes to get as close to the front as possible. DM
This.
@@AudioMasterclass Absolutely right. Your average concert goer will not be standing 1 foot away from the flutist. So no matter how much he moves around, it will still sound like a point source to the audience. This is a problem with the sound engineers basic recording philosophy, rather than a problem with their, or your, or my equipment.
However, some recordings are not meant to recreate the sound of a live show from the perspective of the audience. Here we have at least three different philosophies - the "purist", who only wants a perfect recreation of the studio sound as the engineer intended, the "live", who wants to recreate the concert sound, and the "control", who wants absolute control over the sound; to mold it as he sees fit. Lets consider surround sound to be part of the "live" philosophy.
To the purist, there is absolutely nothing wrong with the recording, as long as his equipment places the sound exactly where the engineer intended. The live might be "blown away" by the movement within the sound stage, or disappointed that there is movement at all (like yourself). The control may or may not care at all. He just wants it to sound as he wants it to sound. The movement may be aggravating only if he wants to fix it to a particular spot.
@@AudioMasterclass That's really the point, isn't it? Musically, we want to hear the clarinet from a distance, as a unity. Even from the front row, we don't hear it panning left and right, with high notes going to the extremes, and the bass notes falling in the middle. And we don't hear the (wandering) clarinet as being wider than the orchestra. Our brains process the sound so that the clarinet appears to be coming from where we see it being played. And the gyrations are very small.
@@AudioMasterclass While I agree that it might be what the artist wanted, the movement was so exaggerated that I actually believed that it was meant to be an intentionally *cheap trick.* The background picture/video lured me into considering that the clarinet was the acoustic depiction of an invisible forest fairy, flying left and right through the forest. And yes, my tracked the presumed location as it moved.
I know I should have closed my eyes while listening.
This kind of shifting soloist movement is heard all the time in my 2 channel “audiophile” listening room. Yeah, it sometimes bugs me, but most of the time I simply enjoy it by picturing the musician or singer moving about during the performance. And surprisingly, your video has actually cleared up certain things that have been puzzling me for years. Thanks much for posting this!
I think it’s nice that it moves around the stereo image. It makes the music literally dance. It sounds like this isn’t preferable for an audio engineer though. I think this is a case of technicality vs artistic expression. Making the decision to deviate from what is technically correct and what feels better is how art is created.
Except it's NOT technically incorrect. This sort of thing is being taught to emerging mix engineers. Yes you are right that it's purely a creative decision & there are no technical rules against it either.
You're wrong, because on a technical level, this is perfectly fine. I'm an audio engineer, and not only is this stereo imaging an ok thing, it actually enhances the performance. The job of the audio engineer is always to enhance and fully replicate the nuance of the performance. Audio engineers are creative professionals too, and this decision was used to put more emotion in the performance. Not only is it not technically incorrect, in this specific scenario with how the rest of the mix is structured, I would say the imaging of the clarinet is preferred. There are some super technical things here or there that he doesn't talk about, but mostly, it's really good.
If the sound engineer didn’t want the stereo image, then they wouldn’t have spent the time setting up the microphones in such a way as to capture the stereo image.
I’m not a professional, but I do spend some time behind a deck at my church. I do a bit of stereo imaging, but mostly just panning a single channel so that each vocalist or instrument has a position within the stereo field. If the engineer didn’t want the lead instrument moving around, them they would have set up a single mic and set its position within the mix.
@@StolenJoker84 Precisely! & well stated. I'm a pro & I've been saying all along that the movement is intentional - regardless of what he used to create the movement - it was achieved by choice. It's not an accident. It may provoke the personal taste of the author of the video - but not everyone is going to have the same taste or experience. Those of us who are professionals have a deeper perspective but at the end of the day - subtle but noticeable movement is a major component, a hallmark if you will, of an ideal recording.
@@SeanWyseman Yeah. When he said there was a “problem” with the recording, I expected it to be something like some kind of faint static or some kind of distortion in the overall sound … not “This instrument is moving ever so subtly around the sound stage” (I personally didn’t hear it, but that could be that I was using Bluetooth headphones to listen). Then, when he went and explained the why, my thought was “And you still think it’s a problem with the recording?!?”
I am a retired sound recordist. I listen to a lot of music and a lot of different kinds of music. At first listen I immediately noticed the problem with the clarinet and I found it very unpleasant. I used a Sennheiser DAC and headphones to listen to your test.
You and I are oddly in a minority on this. You can find my further thoughts on this topic here ruclips.net/video/EdDnAnSPQpg/видео.html and here ruclips.net/video/m1VzhiBSv28/видео.html
I heard the clarinet moving left, right, and center throughout the piece, but I wasn't aware that it wasn't supposed to be doing that. I considered it to be either the clarinetist changing direction/dispersion in their performance, the acoustics of the performance hall, and/or the sound engineer's efforts to create a wider soundstage by encompassing the entirety of the accompanying orchestra. I was more focused on any lack of clarity at various frequency ranges mixing/overlapping and/or the mids and high frequencies clipping. Thank you for expanding my understanding of what an audiophile is; it's not just about the quality of the sound, but also the fundamentals of how these sounds are created. BTW - I found it to be enjoyable nonetheless.
me too, I was searching for any frequencies that are weird
Wasn't bothered at all with the clarinet moving, but found the clipping irritating. Interestingly, I looked up the original and couldn't hear any clipping. Maybe youtube / reencoding messed up the audio there?
The clipping was bothering me too! I guess I was so focused on the texture of the sound rather than how it was produced.
I thought they were combination tones.
I was also straining to hear something extraordinary and dismissed my immediate observation that the clarinet moving within the sound field was an artistic or simply engineering choice in the final mastering of the recording.
I came here expecting to be able to detect some sort of minuscule problem with the recording, so have come away rather deflated by the set-up given by Audio Masterclass, as it felt more like deliberate obfuscation than a test of hearing and music appreciation.
I actually like when the sound source moves around! It makes the music a lot more dynamic, otherwise, why have stereophonic devices if we'd prefer everything pinned to the same position the whole time! Once, I spent days hearing decades of Carl Orff's Carmina Burana's recordings of orchestras from all over the world to find the pieces I enjoyed the most. Thanks for the video, as it brought the subject to the front of my mind!
I'm an absolute audiophile. On the first time listening, I noticed the performance of soloist is superb! enjoyed the phrasing and dynamics. I misunderstood the low D and B-flat sound comes from another instrument, but realized those sound comes from the same instrument. What a wide pitch range clarinet has :)
Wandering instrument is normal, it is performer's personality, like Joshua Bell moves a lot and Hilary Hahn does not move, but both players are top tier!
Correct. It was a good creative decision most likely made by the mix engineer.
I am not an audiophile but after your explanation and adding my attitude to music and dance I adore the piece even more the clarinet now seems to dance around the room. It's gorgeous. Thank you I will listen more carefully from now on. This is a great introduction to another level of music appreciation that now even with my basic system can show. It won't turn me into an audiophile but it will make me listen differently. Problem?? not as far as I can see it.
That third mic certainly did a good job of picking up the clarinet's keys, which was the first thing I noticed that stood out.
Maybe that's what it was there for.
I heard it, but I have recently installed low-viscosity electrons in my interconnects so the sound moves around better. With normal high viscosity electrons the sound tends to be sticky and move around less, so localising the sound around the centre.
Where can i get some of these low-viscosity electrons? Do they leak out of your amps, cables and speakers, so need occasional topping-up?
A sticky solution to a fluid problem!
Lol, you need to add quantum phase correctors to your setup!
@@mauricegold9377 I have seen then next to the flux capacitors at the audio store.
@@c128stuff Audiophile air is a much better upgrade, it has a specially selected blend of nitrogen and oxygen isotopes that resonate in phase with the music thus making the sound more transparent, it's like a veil has been lifted when listening to music.
Hi! Audio Engineer in training here, still a couple semesters into my college career and I did manage to hear the "issue" even if I wasn't exactly sure what it was at first. As you said yourself, whether or not to call it an issue is certainly based on taste. And overall, what I interpreted as your main point was this: "If you're going to invest the money for audiophile grade equipment, invest the time in training your ears as well." Which I do agree with
Not an audiophile but a musician. It was an elephant in the room thing for me. I was listening for unusual things, but the oboeist moving was ordinary to me, and I ignored it for trying to hear something out of place.
I enjoy the movement of music from one side or the other or travel between both.
I almost identified it after I listened to it 6 times. But I knew the answer had to be movement since everything else sounded ordinary. And you confirmed it.
As I usually listen to music over and over, I would have identified it in passing at one session or another.
I love listening to Crosby Stills Nash and Young as well as Paul McCartney and Wings for the very dense harmonies. In stereo, they are awesome to study!
I can hear it and I’m only using a cheap lg sound bar over a Bluetooth connection
As a musician and producer myself, I was focused on the notes performed more than the soundstage on first listen. On the second listen I paid attention to the soundstage and didn't hear anything wrong. Having that opportunity was a great idea from the person doing the video. I approach music production by letting the artist express themselves. If I hear or perceive something is off after the take, I'll ask what were they trying to achieve. Once I understand their thought process, I might make a suggestion to try it differently or show them myself if it's an instrument I can play. This doesn't happen often. It was a good exercise, but to these ears the slight panning was a nice effect. Not a fan of reverb on symphonic music. When mixing I allow the room acoustics and musician's dynamic playing to rule. Thanks.
I didn't really hear it at first. I thought there was a volume inbalance, but after you said it I could hear it when I closed my eyes. It sure gives that human feel/touch to music as opposed to a lot of electronic stuff you hear on the radio these days.
I thought it was the high end rasp, then I realized it was the player's breath flowing through the instrument, also heard the fingers.
At first I thought I was hearing the chains rattling on a snare drum.
#metoo
@@Glidedon why have you hashed this reply????
@@sk8razer just agreeing with comment above.
I heard something in between notes almost a soft clicking
Same, definitely must have been the keys, actually kinda ruins the presentation when listening with good headphones, but if not critically listening probably wouldn't have noticed as much if at all.@@frankm3867
As an audio engineer, I've noticed that there are phase issues in the recording. While the panning doesn't particularly concern me, it seems that the microphones might not be properly aligned or phase-corrected. This misalignment could be causing the sensation that something is off in the audio. - Listened on Yamaha NS speakers, Audient converters, Alesis amp, ass budget cables to my NS speakers
That's what I noticed as well, I was surprised he didn't say that was the issue lol
I have rarely felt more triumphant than when you confirmed that I was hearing what I was thinking that I was hearing. Especially since I set up my monitors with a tape measure yesterday. Know that I only did this in response to you convincing me to give a crap about stereo imaging. Also, that's a badass clarinetist. Thank you.
I'm just here to say that your presentaion is awesome. the way you talk, the clean isolated texture when you speak, it feels very professional to me
I heard it, but to my ears (as a musician, recording engineer, and monetarily-challenged audiophile) it worked quite nicely. The performance was expertly done, and I felt the recording captured both the nuance of the musician and elements of the recording space. The fact that my system reproduced it faithfully makes me happy in my equipment selection. The music, though, makes my soul happy -- even if my cables aren't pricey and lifted off the floor.
Everything you deemed "something wrong" was just capturing the life of the performance. Sounds flawless on my system.
You can find my further thoughts on this topic here ruclips.net/video/EdDnAnSPQpg/видео.html and here ruclips.net/video/m1VzhiBSv28/видео.html
I'm a musician who records his own material and I did notice the stereo movement the first time but didn't think anything was wrong. I mostly do electronic stuff (but also use guitar and some other instruments) so I'm quite used to wild stereo movement of instruments. A well balanced mix does not mean you can't have an interesting stereo field but just that one channel isn't wildly louder than the other.
The movement of the clarinet in the stereo image adds to the joyfulness of the interpretation. Excelent choice for the ingineer to keep it that way
I am a recording engineer and I prefer the movement of the instruments, but only if you have stereo miking for that instrument. It also works for vocals it makes the whole recording more realistic.
Owning an old z5500 from logitech, this sounds amazing! But the video did not prepare for something this elegant in sound. i have no headphones to test out, and only 3 speakers connected (left-center-right) Still i was able to hear some wierd "moving" but not the expected from audio. Love this video. Found it by accident. Thank you sir. Cheers from Denmark
I couldn't identify anything wrong with the recording. I've been a recording and live sound engineer for all of my adult life. Starting in high school. I did however notice all the characteristics of movement in the clarinet solo, which I found to be real and part of the histrionics of the performer. I was very glad that it had been recorded in stereo so as to capture that.
The entire recording has an extremely 3 dimensional quality to it! It literally sounds like the recording as you and the assistant engineer Robin, below, describe it's capture! The engineers did their best to capture the spherical sound of the recording environment and succeeded marvelously! Not so much a problem as a job well done! Brilliant! Thank you sir! May I have another?😊
I'm no sound engineer but a mere musician and I obviously noticed the movement of the clarinet, but I was looking for an actual issue and couldn't find any. The reveal was more like: You think that this is a problem?? ^^ Maybe you can hear a bit of noise-floor but that could be on my side. The clarinet solo has no issues imho whatsoever, it is lively and captures all of your attention, one could argue about the width of the stereo image of the solo instrument, there was one single lower note that was way out to the left and almost sounded like it was coming from another source, but I absolutely love it exactly the way it is. It keeps you quite literally glued to the instrument, like you follow it with your ears. Could you do it differently? Sure. Could it be as great? Maybe. It's a decision that has been made and then been executed brilliantly.
I did hear the movement right from the start but I just didn’t think there was anything wrong with it. It added to the dynamic quality of the performance.
I concider myself an audiophile in the sense of listening to music on more refined equipment, but I listened to this on my phone, so I must relisten to this on my system for a much clearer seperation than my ear buds. That said, im not bothered by that movement mentioned as long as the recording is well done. its the quality of sound of each instrument which is most important to my listening pleasure.
i love that this exists, i was just trying to explain that when you spend enough time mixing music or frankensteining together surround sounds, you ruin your ears and regular listening, i actually hear three issues, phasing, some sort of clicking possibly of the instrument or chair of the musician, and some mic clipping
As a non-audiophile, I wouldn't even notice as even when focusing on those things you pointed out. I would accept these kind of things as intentional or intended simple since I am so use to listening to music that is meant to capture scenes they are played with.
I'm an enthusiast! I didn't recognize there was a panning or that is was a problem untill you pointed it out. I did hear it on my 99 dollar Sony Pulse 3D headphones but it would not even have occured to me there would be flaws in what I was listening to. Also I feel a little tricked because we were given a visual image of a beautiful field and instantly the Clarinet became a fluttering butterfly in this field. It’s volume represents our proximity to it vs the rest of the field. It did what butterflies do. I do like movement in scenarios like this. Great video.
I heard nothing but the fact that this clarinetist played it much better than my high school state honor band efforts 50 years ago. I haven’t had so much fun listening to audiophile jargon in my life. New follower here , looking forward to catching up.
I did not even think for a second that this could be something unintentional
I'm not an audiophile - and I didn't hear it until you pointed it out. If I had noticed it before I would have assumed the musician was moving and it would never have bothered me. I love the detail and explanation you give about mic positions and I will consider this next time I'm on a sound desk or setting up mics. Thank you very much for this video. I just subscribed.
Perfection is the perfect portrayal of reality. Therefore the recording is "perfect." No adjustments are necessary.
I'm glad you didn't use the normal test that I see on RUclips where they play some insanely high frequency and tell you "if you didn't hear this you're not an audiophile, ignorant of the fact that that youtube and most compressed audio will remove frequencies that most people can't hear or most people don't have the audio equipment to replicate.
It was exquisite. Not just the tonality, but the movement and life of the Soloist and the Ensemble.
🤣 Shuddup nerd
“Why, it was quite an exquisite☝️🤓”
@@lordxeno8270 Waaaa. I think I will do a study on having a cry.
@@lordxeno8270 Well, it was just my opinion... since it pulled me out of the usual things I hear. It is just an opinion friend, based upon my father being a Choral Director for 10 years of my life, and being classically trained for 8 years, and even getting in a few full orchestra performances where individual "chairs" and instrumentation sections were in varying directions, not just two.
I forget that not everyone has had the opportunity to live that experience. It was nice, and easily overlooked.
I quite enjoyed the movement, honestly. It felt alive, and it felt natural. I could almost sense the musician moving as he played, as one naturally would if one were passionate about one's instrument. what I didn't hear (and I think it's due to listening to it on this particular set of headphones, with the eq still set up for more bass-laden music genres), is something I truly enjoy hearing on my fairly modest collection of vinyl records containing classical instrumentals... audible breaths... fretting noises from the stringed instruments...etc. unfortunately, even with these headphones (NOT "audiophile" quality by any stretch) I think i'm hearing more of the audio compression laid on by RUclips's processing algorithms. It's kind of a faint "fuzz" directly following notes/words and heard in the sudden silence afterwards.
not an audiophile, but I do enjoy "hearing" things. thank you for introducing me to this musician, I'll be checking out his album!
I profoundly agree and felt with how you went through the listening session (or "test for that matter"). My vintage system is audiophile by all definition; although not expensive, they are collectibles and rare [modified & tweaked to the bone]. To name a few: Audio Research D-51 / SP-3a, Quad ESL-63, Linn Sondek LP 12 / Koetsu MC cart, Otari M-10 reel-to- reel [ these last two brings out the most musicality of involvement to my 79-year ears !!! The meaningful video is excellent. Now, I ask myself; did I hear t? I'll have to ask my grandson and be the Judge. Thanks Xomby
Me too
I wouldn't have guessed this was a problem. In recorded music we often make left and right channels slightly different to make the sound more open and alive. It could be done intentionally by adjusting the EQ, adding short reverb or an artifact of the tape. At first I thought that the bandwidth was low, as if the recording was old, and the key clicks were too noticeable.
The first time i listen to it i wasn't really paying attention to it since I'm not really that much of a audiophile, but when he mentioned it it really caught me off guard, though i believe the reason i didn't caught it at first is because the shifts were happening so fast. It's a beautiful piece though, and it's meant to be enjoyed by all.
I don't identify as an audiophile, but I do recognize and appreciate precision and accuracy in audio quality. Of course the wobble, the almost undecisiveness and youthfulness of the clarinet is obvious, even exciting. Hardly seems a flaw, especially since the other instruments are well rendered. Not all music has to be static; this dynamic clarinet brings life to recording.
This movement is what i want to hear from a live recording. And a moving solo Instrument is by no means a rarity.
Brilliant! I learned that my current speakers are a bit muddy and had to change to headphones and loved the movement! Thanks for the training course on mic placement. I enjoyed the video!
I don't even know why I clicked with only one side of my earphones working, but great video.
I LAUGHED when you revealed the answer! I was listening with headphones and had been pulling away alternate ears trying to locate the clarinet. I thought that you were pulling some kind of phasing stunt on a monophonic recording. In audiophile equipment, I respect the law of diminishing returns.
Yes I heard it. I'm a professional musician sitting in a very precisely tuned acoustic home studio with proper amounts of diffusion and absorption nice ADAM speakers. I've also engineered and produced over my career. Everything you point out is very astute. I am glad to see Robin's response. Phase differences account for a portion of the movement left to right, but the room itself could also inflict some weirdness.
And could we say that clarinet might be the most "difficult" to deal with in terms of phase? And with a close in music stand like that I would think comb-filtering would be even more likely and add somewhat random issues in that field.
@@TiqueO6 The movement of the clarinet blurs the comb filter effects.
Anyway, in live settings, I prefer good old clip-on microphones. Now, the clarinet emirs sound not only from the horn but also from the finger section. so just can't just mike it with a trumpet clip-on microphone. But there's the AMT WS, a clip-on double microphone. Stays stationary in regard to the clarinet, and I really like the sound.
And then there's the Rumberger WP-1x which places a microphone inside the mouthpiece. The idea is to capture the sound before it exits through horn and finger section. That's probably what I would bring when I had to do live sound of a clarinet player in a hardcore metal band. It's also half the price of the AMT WS, so if the hardcore metal guitarist start smashing his burning guitar and the hardcore metal clarinet player joins in with his burning clarinet...
Having recorded heaps of Orchestras, we used to use a Stereo Neumann mic as the main then a number of others for the different sections. Later we moved the Decca Tree which gave a much fuller sound in the 2nd violins, violas and front cellos. It also removed the phase cancelation caused by the middle space of the L & R capsules on the Neumann or stereo pair.
Great! I'd to laugh in the first moment as i thought "he's about to tell all the stuff nerds...", then i hold my breath. I couldn't hear any prob at all! Wait...
Then, after Davids explanation i recessed unstressed. I took that wandering of the clarinette from the very first moment for being natural. Natural at all. So have thanks for this divine video, David!
You're welcome. You can find my further thoughts on this topic here ruclips.net/video/EdDnAnSPQpg/видео.html and here ruclips.net/video/m1VzhiBSv28/видео.html
I’ve just purchased my first pair of “audiophile” speakers. I’m loving some aspects of the sound, in particular the way the instruments and vocals seem to have more richness in their reproduction. On the other hand, more by luck than planning, over the years my changes have yielded an ever more precise stereo image, until now.
Now the image is more vague and I’m trying to evaluate if my attitude to the system having slightly less focus in the image is going to outweigh the otherwise improved tonal qualities. Will I gradually forget, as I float on the music as if wafting on a punt across the waters of the Lethe? The music is still spaced across a wide and deep soundstage, wider in fact than the speakers, so I believe I will.
In case you hadn’t guessed, I am an audiophile. I make no claims as to the quality of my 62 year old ears, only that I derive pleasure from the beauty of the sound as well as the quality of the playing. Tonight’s entertainment included that well known audiophile band, Camel, as well as a joyful reunion with a childhood favourite, Tubular Bells. Fiftieth Anniversary Edition, half speed mastered by Abbey Road, naturally 😂.
Loved the video.
I listened to this on my 13 inch laptop while eating breakfast. I didn't hear the recording flaw, but I'm still sticking to my belief that I am, and will always be an audiophile. (Note to self: should have used headphones!)
1. I love the “movement“ of the clarinet sound in the audio field.
2. When I mix recordings of my own music, I almost always change the pan of each instrument between movements, and *usually* within a movement as well - to my mind (and ear!), the “purist” approach to mixing [where every instrument is “frozen” in space] is rigid.
To be honest, I’m baffled when engineers choose not to use as expressive and powerful a tool as placement within the sound field…
It is then assymetrical, I would prefer to instead use two or more mics and somehow symmetricaly place them into the space.
I enjoyed this. I was simply listening on my phone so the pans left and right were not very noticeable and I heard a fuzz in some notes. But as you mention the lively nature of the recording is beautiful. I will be revisiting this when I'm with my stereo.
I consider myself though, an audio enthusiasts. Where I feel philes are searching for a most true to form music I just want to hear it all and hear it loud. I'm more worried about missing tones than I am colliding tones and phase shift. I'm willing to experiment with phase, ports and reflection so that I'm surrounded by sound.
Movies make this really difficult though, with atmos and dtsx creating height channels for images on a screen that is in front of me never seems to quite line up. I think this is more a problem with traditional movie making trying to use 3d sound rather than sound imaging itself.
Video game on the otherhand have made amazing use of sound in the 2 dimensional plane. Being part of a world that is all around me and being able to hear something behind me because I have speakers behind me is much more emmersive than a plane that goes over head of me but on screen the whole time in front of me.