Jump to content
Maestronet Forums

Recommended Posts

Posted

NI find that I prefer church-like acoustics for Bach pieces. I realize that live spaces may cover weaknesses in a violin. I would like to hear my current violin recorded, preferably in a live room. In my dreams I would like it to sound like this:


Saints Peter and Paul church in Zurich.

FYI: “In terms of acoustics, especially high-pitched sounds, as indicated by Navarro and Sendra [1], the conditions in Baroque churches improved with respect to the earlier Renaissance churches, mainly due to ornamentation. The mouldings, pilasters, entablatures, cornices, capitals, wooden altarpieces and other decorative elements contribute to the better diffusion of high-frequency sounds, while the larger side chapels result in a greater diffusion of low-pitched sounds. Thus, they show that the extensive ornamentation used in churches during the 17th and 18th centuries, especially in large religious celebrations, results in modified characteristics for the acoustic absorption of the walls, accommodating musical and choral performances.” From 

Acoustics in Baroque Catholic Church Spaces 

by 
Enedina Alberdi
 1, 
Miguel Galindo
 2,*, 
Angel L. León-Rodríguez
 1and 
Jesús León

 1

Anastasiya Petryshak plays a modern violin by Bologna's violin maker Roberto Regazzi.

Posted
7 hours ago, violins88 said:

NI find that I prefer church-like acoustics for Bach pieces. I realize that live spaces may cover weaknesses in a violin. I would like to hear my current violin recorded, preferably in a live room. In my dreams I would like it to sound like this:

Here is a different perspective. Can you hear the rather large differences ?

 

Posted
2 hours ago, David Burgess said:

A lot the computerized recording programs can add a variable amount of reverb in their post-processing options.

Yes, and I can’t help but think that a lot of people that post video of themselves playing violin on YouTube use doctored sound to add reverb rather than sharing the true acoustic sound of their playing.

Either that or I’m a horrible player by sound comparison.

Both statements have merit.

Posted
1 hour ago, outofnames said:

can’t help but think that a lot of people that post video of themselves playing violin on YouTube use doctored sound to add reverb rather than sharing the true acoustic sound of their playing.

What’s the „true“ acoustic sound of your violin considering that each of the five or more different microphone constructions ( leaving out the enormous differences in quality) produces completely different spectral distributions and that room reverb and echoes are also dependent on of factors like one or two directional recording, distances, spheres and so on?

 

Posted

Has someone defined a set-up of a specific recording arrangement for recording violins? I think the bridge tap protocol has been defined. Joe Curtin? Oberlin people? George Stopanni?

I imagine a stable, consistently available lab somewhere. You take your violin there. Its bridge taps are recorded, along with thousands of others. Famous violins and others. This data would eventually be useful.


My version of this set-up would be a padded room with 10 microphones. Can we get a volunteer to design it? Then another volunteer to write the plan so that a billionaire who is interested can fund the project?  Anyone?

 

I know some of you are tired of watching too many YouTube videos and tired of watching your 401k go down the toilet. This project would actually be useful.

Wouldn’t it?

Posted

Wood and plaster definitely make for better acoustics than stone.

If you like this type of sound, then get thee to a small space with the same building materials - maybe some draperies and wall tapestries.

Also, an empty old pub or wooden ship with wood panelled ceilings and walls, wood floors, and wood furniture - all of different species can be a sonic delight.

The best performance I attended was in a humble church building of historic Colonial Williamsburg: Baroque music on Baroque instruments; both 18th century creations and instruments newly made in the lutherie shop of the living museum.

If you are able to attend a rehearsal and a sold-out performance, you can compare the sonic effects of all those human bodies. 
 

Posted
1 hour ago, Randall The Restorer said:

Wood and plaster definitely make for better acoustics than stone.

If you like this type of sound, then get thee to a small space with the same building materials - maybe some draperies and wall tapestries.

The best performance I attended was in a humble church building of historic Colonial Williamsburg: Baroque music on Baroque instruments; both 18th century creations and instruments newly made in the lutherie shop of the living museum.

If you are able to attend a rehearsal and a sold-out performance, you can compare the sonic effects of all those human bodies.

Nothing kills sounds better than draperies, tapestries, curtains and .... public in winter. I take it you are not a recording engineer ???

Posted
3 minutes ago, Victor Roman said:

Nothing kills sounds better than draperies, tapestries, curtains and .... public in winter. I take it you are not a recording engineer ???

Judicious application and careful positioning of textiles play a major role in live performance spaces and dedicated recording studios. 
I am not a recording engineer - but I have been recorded in, and broadcast from, world class studios in Toronto.

Randy

Posted

One key problem here is our inconsistent frame of reference for judging recordings. Many lack the playback equipment to make an informed decision. What sounds fine on Apple AirPods (I have them and enjoy using them), may not sound the same as listening through a studio reference headphones like the Sennheiser HD600 (a reference in many recording studios for over a generation). The latter gives one a much more accurate FR from 300 Hz to 10kHz where are ears are most sensitive. 

As for microphone placement techniques - the Blumlein pair has been used to good effect for classical recordings

 

 

Posted
8 hours ago, David Burgess said:

A lot the computerized recording programs can add a variable amount of reverb in their post-processing options.

It is possible to go to an interesting space, record a sharp noise like a pistol shot or s clapboard, and the echos which follow at different locations, and use those recordings to create virtual reverberation via a process known as convolution --- the impulse response is convolved with a sound recording. It can be done in (almost) real time with a small amount of latency.  Reverb and latency are intertwined anyway. As far as digital recordings go you cannot tell the difference from a genuine locational recording and you have the option of doing this from the different locations processed, combining them,  or creating a virtual acoustic space and synthesising its impulse response and applying that. 

 

PS.

Reverb is a trivial application of this pricess. It can also be used to emulate various microphones, speaker systems and instruments eg to make your violin sound more like a heavy metal guitar solo. If it doesn't already.

Posted
5 hours ago, LCF said:

As far as digital recordings go you cannot tell the difference from a genuine locational recording and you have the option of doing this from the different locations processed, combining them,  or creating a virtual acoustic space and synthesising its impulse response and applying that. 

It isn’t even complicated to apply such effects to a recording, there are enough tools available (a lot of them for free), to enhance or create any combination of reverb or delay.

Therefore it’s very naive to assume that the above embedded professional recordings reflect a “natural“ reverb of any real place.

Posted
15 hours ago, Blank face said:

What’s the „true“ acoustic sound of your violin considering that each of the five or more different microphone constructions ( leaving out the enormous differences in quality) produces completely different spectral distributions and that room reverb and echoes are also dependent on of factors like one or two directional recording, distances, spheres and so on?

 

I’m thinking of videos I’ve seen where people are playing outside yet the reverb and acoustics make it sound like they’re in a cathedral.  If they’ve electronically doctored their sound I become suspect of how much clean up they’ve done.

The analogy is some singers using autotune and then you hear them live and they’re terrible.

Posted
6 hours ago, Blank face said:

It isn’t even complicated to apply such effects to a recording, there are enough tools available (a lot of them for free), to enhance or create any combination of reverb or delay.

Therefore it’s very naive to assume that the above embedded professional recordings reflect a “natural“ reverb of any real place.

Reverberation has similarity to certain types of photographic blurring, and de-blurring algorithms sometimes use deconvolution techniques. Conditions apply ... You can also use these techniques to 'de-verb' or extract other information from audio files.

If you play around with recordings, adding different reverb 'environments' it raises awareness of how reverberation affects perception. It's a bit weird.

Posted
42 minutes ago, David Burgess said:

Is the microphone disguised as a peach? I think I recognize the sound of a peachophone. :ph34r:

No, I think it's a potatophone. Not much else would explain the... fine musicianship. 

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.


×
×
  • Create New...