Dynamic range at a classical concert.

f1eng

Wammer
Wammer
Dec 13, 2009
2,550
181
108
Wantage, U K
AKA
Frank
I was at a concert last night where my wife was singing, with piano accompaniment, conducting an accapella choir, and singing in a choir with Organ.

I did the nerdy thing and took measurements of some of it using SPLnFFT on my phone.

As a matter of interest, at my seat my wife's voice reached 90dB in the loud bit, and was about 62dB singing quietly.

On the full choir and organ the sound ranged from 48dB to 97dB. Interestingly the choir at full blast was louder than the Organ part in this work.

This means that, had I recorded it, the dynamic range would have been 40-odd dB greater than lots of typical recent pop releases but would have been easily cut uncompressed onto either LP or CD.

16 bit dynamic range is more than enough for this sort of music.

Most hifi systems are incapable of playing even at the sound level of unaccompanied trained singers without sounding strained or "loud".

The friend I was with was astonished how loud it actually was, compared to what he would have expected. It has been one of the things that has surprised me most when comparing live music with my stereo..

 
  • Upvote
Reactions: tuga

SergeAuckland

Certified Measurist
Wammer
May 6, 2008
18,607
1,915
173
Bury St Edmunds, UK
AKA
Serge
HiFi Trade?
  1. No
I was at a concert last night where my wife was singing, with piano accompaniment, conducting an accapella choir, and singing in a choir with Organ.I did the nerdy thing and took measurements of some of it using SPLnFFT on my phone.

As a matter of interest, at my seat my wife's voice reached 90dB in the loud bit, and was about 62dB singing quietly.

On the full choir and organ the sound ranged from 48dB to 97dB. Interestingly the choir at full blast was louder than the Organ part in this work.

This means that, had I recorded it, the dynamic range would have been 40-odd dB greater than lots of typical recent pop releases but would have been easily cut uncompressed onto either LP or CD.

16 bit dynamic range is more than enough for this sort of music.

Most hifi systems are incapable of playing even at the sound level of unaccompanied trained singers without sounding strained or "loud".

The friend I was with was astonished how loud it actually was, compared to what he would have expected. It has been one of the things that has surprised me most when comparing live music with my stereo..
These types of live measurements have been done and documented many times in the past in HiFi magazines, and show quite clearly that a 60dB dynamic range is enough to capture the full dynamic range of pretty much any performance, albeit possibly not enough to capture the small ambient noises, traffic noise, aircon noise, audience noise which perhaps is better buried anyway.

Professional tape without Dolby noise reduction was capable of 60dB dynamic range if peak level was defined as the 3% distortion point, with Dolby A that extended another 10dB allowing either lower noise or lower distortion. Dolby SR added another 10dB or so to Dolby A's figure,(more at HF) so an analogue tape machine running Dolby SR was capable of something around 80dB dynamic range.

All this shows that CD was more than capable of returning a dynamic range well in excess of that needed to reproduce the full dynamic range of an orchestra or choir.

Reproducing the full dynamic range at home is also perfectly possible provided that one can accept peaks of 100dB or so and the home is sufficiently quiet so that the quiet bits aren't lost in ambient noise.

S.

 

awkwardbydesign

Perfect, apparently.
Wammer
Mar 5, 2012
10,399
2,293
173
HiFi Trade?
  1. No
and the home is sufficiently quiet so that the quiet bits aren't lost in ambient noise.S.
428398361_d0862d9847.jpg


 

Who Cares?

Wammer
Wammer
Dec 22, 2012
383
10
23
Except, somehow, dynamic range isn't what it's all about.

I've often thought about this and with live stuff there's the immediacy, the attack and decay, which can never be accurately reproduced.

In fact, many appear to not want that, preferring some amount of "warmth", or however described.

Performance is about look at me and listen, which can probably never be accurately reproduced.

 

navigator

Wammer
Wammer
Mar 6, 2012
470
58
58
m1 j28
AKA
dave
HiFi Trade?
  1. No
Fleng thankyou for this. I hope others more acoustic engineering qualified than I will join in your thread. I wonder if you or others would comment re the studio/PA systems designed to cope with large dynamics and sound levels.

I recently had to relive old DJ days to entertain a hall and used small JBL1 speakers which I find to bass heavy at home but which astounded me with realism in the big venue [same feeds]

They are far from ''flat''[PA heritage] but produce a super stab at orchestral scale. Decays are good /instrumental timbre is ok ish./stereo spatial arrangement is ok.

Subjective Loudness and dynamic is biased towards lower frequencies? And that needs a lot of groove? Stereo placement needs good mid/high? But less probs cutting that?

 

themadlatvian

Wammer
Wammer
Dec 28, 2008
7,005
125
0
Huddersfield
AKA
John
I do have quite strong views on this subject. I'm not going to comment on all live music, but concentrate on classical concerts, particularly orchestral ones.

There is a tendency for hifi listeners to want the symphony orchestra to sound 'nice' - by which they mean smooth and euphonic.

In a live concert the 90 strong orchestra is anything but nice - it is alternately brash, shrill, thunderous, or all three at the same time. Quieter moments can be incredibly sonorous. The dynamic range is absolutely huge, way way over the 100db or so of the CD medium, if you include the vicious microsecond-long peaks (of the piccolo played loud for example - but there are many other comparable sounds) which hifi equipment has NO chance of reproducing no matter how elaborate or powerful.

My system does a pretty good job of mimicking a live orchestra in my living room, as do many others in theirs, and it is good enough for me to enjoy and be reminded of the real concert experience, but it gets nowhere near really to the live equivalent.

If you want to hear huge dynamic range in action - go to a live performance of a hugely loud symphony like Nielsen's Fourth or Fifth, Mahler's Eighth, or Prokofiev's Alexander Nevsky Cantata. After that, you will know that a domestic system can only hope to produce a scaled-down representation of the real thing.

And apologies in advance to Serge (who I am usually in agreement with over many issues) if a meter tells me that a system is producing the same dynamic range as a live orchestral concert, then the meter is missing something!

:^

 

browellm

Wammer
Wammer
Sep 9, 2008
23,599
482
128
way way over the 100db or so of the CD medium
Really? That would induce instantaneous hearing damage, wouldn't it?

And apologies in advance to Serge (who I am usually in agreement with over many issues) if a meter tells me that a system is producing the same dynamic range as a live orchestral concert, then the meter is missing something!
I re-read his posts and he didn't say or infer that anyway. Which post are you referring to?

 

SergeAuckland

Certified Measurist
Wammer
May 6, 2008
18,607
1,915
173
Bury St Edmunds, UK
AKA
Serge
HiFi Trade?
  1. No
I do have quite strong views on this subject. I'm not going to comment on all live music, but concentrate on classical concerts, particularly orchestral ones.There is a tendency for hifi listeners to want the symphony orchestra to sound 'nice' - by which they mean smooth and euphonic.

In a live concert the 90 strong orchestra is anything but nice - it is alternately brash, shrill, thunderous, or all three at the same time. Quieter moments can be incredibly sonorous. The dynamic range is absolutely huge, way way over the 100db or so of the CD medium, if you include the vicious microsecond-long peaks (of the piccolo played loud for example - but there are many other comparable sounds) which hifi equipment has NO chance of reproducing no matter how elaborate or powerful.

My system does a pretty good job of mimicking a live orchestra in my living room, as do many others in theirs, and it is good enough for me to enjoy and be reminded of the real concert experience, but it gets nowhere near really to the live equivalent.

If you want to hear huge dynamic range in action - go to a live performance of a hugely loud symphony like Nielsen's Fourth or Fifth, Mahler's Eighth, or Prokofiev's Alexander Nevsky Cantata. After that, you will know that a domestic system can only hope to produce a scaled-down representation of the real thing.

And apologies in advance to Serge (who I am usually in agreement with over many issues) if a meter tells me that a system is producing the same dynamic range as a live orchestral concert, then the meter is missing something!

:^
There are several reasons why a HiFi system can never reproduce the full live experience. Dynamic range is only a small part of it. I don't know what the maximum "micro-peaks" are, as I've not seen them measured, but bear in mind that our hearing doesn't hear such micro-second long peaks, as has been demonstrated over and again, given that our eras respond to energy, and there's very little energy in a very short peak, even if the levels are quite high.

The live experience includes the venue, and at most symphonic concerts, one hears the sound-field, of which the largest part by far is the reverberant sound from the hall walls. Listen to an orchestra in the open air, and it sounds very weedy indeed compared to the way it sounds in a concert hall.

At home, although we do hear the room as part of the sound, we also hear a fair amount of the direct sound from the loudspeakers. If one plays large loudspeakers in a hall and listens in the far-field so get closer to the live experience, it's much more realistric a portrayal than one normally gets at home.

I completely agree that HiFi doesn't do justice to a live performance, but there's rather more to it than just dynamics.

S.

 

themadlatvian

Wammer
Wammer
Dec 28, 2008
7,005
125
0
Huddersfield
AKA
John
Really? That would induce instantaneous hearing damage, wouldn't it?
I don't believe so no, but it does sometimes approach short-term pain in the concert hall.

I re-read his posts and he didn't say or infer that anyway. Which post are you referring to?
I wasn't referring to any specific post, and Serge's response below shows that he understood what I meant by mentioning him - not as a particular challenge but to highlight the measurements vs. listening debates that frequently occur here on the Wam.

There are several reasons why a HiFi system can never reproduce the full live experience. Dynamic range is only a small part of it. I don't know what the maximum "micro-peaks" are, as I've not seen them measured, but bear in mind that our hearing doesn't hear such micro-second long peaks, as has been demonstrated over and again, given that our eras respond to energy, and there's very little energy in a very short peak, even if the levels are quite high.The live experience includes the venue, and at most symphonic concerts, one hears the sound-field, of which the largest part by far is the reverberant sound from the hall walls. Listen to an orchestra in the open air, and it sounds very weedy indeed compared to the way it sounds in a concert hall.

At home, although we do hear the room as part of the sound, we also hear a fair amount of the direct sound from the loudspeakers. If one plays large loudspeakers in a hall and listens in the far-field so get closer to the live experience, it's much more realistric a portrayal than one normally gets at home.

I completely agree that HiFi doesn't do justice to a live performance, but there's rather more to it than just dynamics.

S.
Agreed Serge, it is much more than just dynamics, but it is a factor IMV. As to short-term peaks, they do exist in the concert hall I am sure, and certainly when younger I was aware of transient sounds much more than I am nowadays, and I have no reason to think that I was out of the ordinary.

My first concert - at the age of 8 - was Nielsen's Fifth Symphony in the Festival Hall. It almost knocked me off my chair. Yes there was an element of surprise and novelty admittedly, but I have searched for similar experiences from audio equipment, to no avail. :(

Your open-air point is a good one, and of course is true of all music, not just the orchestra.

:^

 

browellm

Wammer
Wammer
Sep 9, 2008
23,599
482
128
I don't believe so no, but it does sometimes approach short-term pain in the concert hall.
Are you sure you aren't confusing peak level with dynamic range?

 

f1eng

Wammer
Wammer
Dec 13, 2009
2,550
181
108
Wantage, U K
AKA
Frank
I do have quite strong views on this subject. I'm not going to comment on all live music, but concentrate on classical concerts, particularly orchestral ones.There is a tendency for hifi listeners to want the symphony orchestra to sound 'nice' - by which they mean smooth and euphonic.

In a live concert the 90 strong orchestra is anything but nice - it is alternately brash, shrill, thunderous, or all three at the same time. Quieter moments can be incredibly sonorous. The dynamic range is absolutely huge, way way over the 100db or so of the CD medium, if you include the vicious microsecond-long peaks (of the piccolo played loud for example - but there are many other comparable sounds) which hifi equipment has NO chance of reproducing no matter how elaborate or powerful.

My system does a pretty good job of mimicking a live orchestra in my living room, as do many others in theirs, and it is good enough for me to enjoy and be reminded of the real concert experience, but it gets nowhere near really to the live equivalent.

If you want to hear huge dynamic range in action - go to a live performance of a hugely loud symphony like Nielsen's Fourth or Fifth, Mahler's Eighth, or Prokofiev's Alexander Nevsky Cantata. After that, you will know that a domestic system can only hope to produce a scaled-down representation of the real thing.

And apologies in advance to Serge (who I am usually in agreement with over many issues) if a meter tells me that a system is producing the same dynamic range as a live orchestral concert, then the meter is missing something!

:^
I agree with a lot of what you write.

I would take some convincing that orchestral swings are 100dB though.

If you want the dynamics of a big orchestra horn speakers are essential, in my opinion, not least since normal speakers of even good sensitivity are non linear. Very much so in a lot of cases.

My system is pretty convincing at reproducing live classical concerts, IMHO.

 

navigator

Wammer
Wammer
Mar 6, 2012
470
58
58
m1 j28
AKA
dave
HiFi Trade?
  1. No
I referred to the capability of PA in earlier posting .An 'in the field' orchestra [National Trust do] and choir performed to a several 100's on a hillside using arrays of trunk size amps to 12''horns boxed with 2 15'' 'plastic'cones . I wandered down to the rostrum to hear the 'real' thing. The amped sound was so very much better!! Credit to the techies! Same orchestra and 'Jupiter' in hall was better than amped.

All were better than my setup!!

Did get a rendition of Shostakovitch 5 [vinyl] last movement to come out with impact and meaning but only when sub added [a little] May try at Scalford To clear room!!!!!!

[Aside Love Nielson-first heard Rattle with CBSO -thanks for reminding me]

 

lowendall

Wammer
Wammer
Feb 14, 2009
1,345
274
113
Scotland
AKA
happy enough
HiFi Trade?
  1. No
not sure you would actually be happy with a proper full dynamic range in your house , and not even sure it would be very enjoyable as in a large hall with a large orchestra you got all the far away walls adding to sounds etc, and getting a set of hifi speakers cranked up in a smaller room sized space with anything like a full dynamic range I mean quiet soft to loud and gutsy would sound perhaps terrible as you would be near the sound source etc, .

I aint sure many commercial cds actually have recordings with out a fair big of backing off in the loud sections, .I am sure there will be some , out there , .

I would say a more limiting effect on quality sounds is perhaps idiots at the recording session and 16 bit cd as a master medium , but I have a few good sounding cds, so it all depends on care being taken at the recording capture stages for a start , .

I still like my own recordings made on little portable sony mini disk recorders mz n710 and another r500 I think , with a small sound craft mixer and a couple 40 pound condenser mics ,

in the front of the group about 8 feet away , they sound great , especially on headphones , .

regards

lowendall

 

f1eng

Wammer
Wammer
Dec 13, 2009
2,550
181
108
Wantage, U K
AKA
Frank
16 bit cd as a master medium , but I have a few good sounding cds, so it all depends on care being taken at the recording capture stages for a start , . I still like my own recordings made on little portable sony mini disk recorders mz n710 and another r500 I think , with a small sound craft mixer and a couple 40 pound condenser mics ,

in the front of the group about 8 feet away , they sound great , especially on headphones , .

regards

lowendall
I have yet to see any convincing evidence that 16 bit is a limiting factor for replay, 24 bit makes it easier for a halfwit not to screw up the levels, but if you pay attention 16 bit is fine IME.

Poor mastering, excessive manipulation and modern microphone choice, perhaps is.

I have lots of home recordings on cassette, R2R and DAT which sound great. The biggest influence on the sound IME was always microphone choice, and where you put them. DAT was (is) more accurate than Cassette or my Revox R2R, but doesn't compensate for microphone choice and location to the sound of the recording. IME.

 

SergeAuckland

Certified Measurist
Wammer
May 6, 2008
18,607
1,915
173
Bury St Edmunds, UK
AKA
Serge
HiFi Trade?
  1. No
I have yet to see any convincing evidence that 16 bit is a limiting factor for replay, 24 bit makes it easier for a halfwit not to screw up the levels, but if you pay attention 16 bit is fine IME.Poor mastering, excessive manipulation and modern microphone choice, perhaps is.

I have lots of home recordings on cassette, R2R and DAT which sound great. The biggest influence on the sound IME was always microphone choice, and where you put them. DAT was (is) more accurate than Cassette or my Revox R2R, but doesn't compensate for microphone choice and location to the sound of the recording. IME.
Completely agree. At one time, trainee balance engineers spent a lot of time in learning how to mic up instruments, what the various types of microphones did, how different mic arrangements sounded and so on. From what I hear, this sort of training has pretty much gone, microphone placement isn't considered important, far too many instuments are direct injected and with a general attitude of getting the recording done as quickly as possible as musicians are expensive, then fix it in the mix in post-production with the odd overdub if necessary.

S.

 

Who Cares?

Wammer
Wammer
Dec 22, 2012
383
10
23
Drama, you know acting and stuff, often described as the viewer or listener having to "suspend disbelief".

Similar applies to listening to reproduction of music stuff.

It is often said that the best way of appreciating drama is by radio listening because the listener will create their own "mind pictures", much the same applies to music listening.

I've read that many musicians listen on what many here would consider inferior reproductive systems but that doesn't matter because those musicians then create a "better" experience in their heads, the reproduction is just a cue for them.

This might apply to us all, the emotive experience we take will depend upon what we, internally, add.

Your favourite stuff, because of an associated experience?

 

Latest posts

Forum statistics

Threads
113,444
Messages
2,451,263
Members
70,783
Latest member
reg66

Latest Articles