Re: [MLUG - DISCUSSION] Audio file quality tests

[Mike Miller <EMAIL:PROTECTED>]

On Tue, 8 Jan 2008, Scott Hussey wrote:

> Very few venues, let alone recordings, can capture the sound quality of 
> Red Rock. Quite possibly the best rock venue in America.

Here is what I would guess:  If you are listening to a concert at Red 
Rock, you are standing in some place with your two ears, one on each side 
of your head, taking in the sound.  If two microphones were placed to 
mimick the position of two ears, they would take in essentially the same 
sounds as the two ears.  You could record using two such microphones and 
then produce stereo channels from them.  Played back on high fidelity 
equipment should recreate the sound from the Red Rock venue very well 
(maybe with one excellent speaker on each side of the head in a 
sound-proof room).  Why not?

The best sound in the place is probably going to be at the location of the 
sound board.  This is because the guys at the sound board control the 
sound so that it is good for them.  They are usually in the middle of the 
audience somewhere.  So two microphones placed there should do an even 
better job of capturing the sound than microphones placed elsewhere. 
Thus, a recording of the concert could be better than the original for 
most people in attendance.  Will anyone ever admit this?  I doubt it. 
Concert tickets cost so much that people who buy them will have a hard 
time saying that the CD sounded better.  It's called cognitive dissonance 
theory:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cognitive_dissonance

The same kind of logic applies to people who are investing massive disk 
space and money in storing FLAC files.  If MP3 sounds as good, they won't 
say so.  You'll have to prove it to them in a carefully-controlled study. 
We can't do a carefully controlled study of the concert experience though, 
as far as I can tell.

Mike

_______________________________________________
discussion mailing list
EMAIL:PROTECTED
http://mlug.missouri.edu/mailman/listinfo/discussion