Please can you spare ten minutes of your time? [Archive]

nicholash

09-05-2001, 03:18 AM

About ten minutes or so is all it should take to listen to the 20 short mp3 excerpts in the file: http://www.btinternet.com/~veridical.sounds/listeningtest1a.zip (\"http://www.btinternet.com/~veridical.sounds/listeningtest1a.zip\") , identify any sampled instruments in those excerpts and post feedback on what you think makes them sound sampled rather than real.

A lack of responses will give me the impression that you are too embarrassed in case you get it mostly wrong. http://www.northernsounds.com/ubb/NonCGI/images/icons/wink.gif

Nicholas
p.s. listening to all 20 excerpts once end-to-end takes only 2 minutes.

09-06-2001, 04:34 AM

>A lack of responses will give me the impression that you are too embarrassed in case you get it mostly wrong. ;)<

Have you received any comments privately already, Nicholas? I hope so. If not, I\'ll give it a try during the next few days, but I actually just listen from the point of view of a \"consumer\" as I do not have access to the big libraries at the moment to compare with and I don\'t have the necessary listening experience. If that is o.k., then I am your man...

regards

------------------
O.H.

nicholash

09-06-2001, 06:35 AM

Hi O.H.

Many thanks for replying. Much appreciated. http://www.northernsounds.com/ubb/NonCGI/images/icons/smile.gif

I\'m afraid I haven\'t yet received any replies period! http://www.northernsounds.com/ubb/NonCGI/images/icons/confused.gif

Please don\'t worry about lack of \'listening experience\'.

I just appreciate any reasonable attempts at this listening excercise, which incidently was initially designed to encourage discussion about micing techniques for recording sampled instruments. (See the \"Orchestral Sampling Manifesto by Maarten, Thomas and Marc\" thread and the \"Today\'s listening test !\" thread).

Please don\'t feel embarrassed if you get the answers wrong. I expect I myself would also get some wrong if I didn\'t already know the real answers.

I hope more people have a go, and at least try and get some discussion going. Maybe I should ask what instruments in the excerpts are real and what makes them sound real rather than sampled. Phrased like this, we might get some discussion going as to the limitations of current sampling techniques.

Best regards
Nicholas
p.s. Thanks again O.H.

Bruce A. Richardson

09-06-2001, 08:09 AM

<BLOCKQUOTE>quote:<HR>Originally posted by nicholash:
I\'m afraid I haven\'t yet received any replies period! http://www.northernsounds.com/ubb/NonCGI/images/icons/confused.gif
<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

Classic catch-22. People with the knowledge won\'t have the time.

Here\'s a suggestion:

1) Pick your 10 favorite film soundtracks.
2) Find out who recorded them
3) Call those people...they have phones, and they\'re in the book. Ask your questions.

Then you will know.

What everyone will probably be totally disappointed to discover is that Franz nailed it in the other thread. For those who misses it...

Soundrack Sessions 101

The players show up at the studio for the session. Drink coffee, talk about the Lakers. How\'s the wife? Same old same old. There\'s the ceremonial dissing of yesterday\'s session across town, how the conductor is a hack and should have his arms removed. Discuss happy hour and who is buying the first round. Hey, you gonna eat that?

Some room mics are up. Some section mics are up. They\'re expensive. Orchestra reads down the first section, OK, OK, roll tape, nobody screws up too badly--it\'s a keeper. Rinse and repeat. Exactly ten seconds before the session goes into overtime, the orchestra is released.

The engineers mix what\'s there. If a section sounds too close they roll off the section mic. If it sounds too far away, they turn it up. If it sounds too dry, they dialed in some \"large hall\" on the Lex, which never moves from this single setting. If it\'s not bright enough, they crank in some EQ. The magic words are spoken (that\'s good enough), Duke Ellington is quoted, the mixes are printed, and it\'s off to happy hour.

nicholash

09-06-2001, 08:49 AM

Hi Bruce,

Thanks for your reply and for quoting the \"Soundrack Sessions 101\" thread. It is an interesting comment.

You say \"Classic catch-22. People with the knowledge won\'t have the time.\"

I suppose they don\'t have the time to read messages on this forum. I suppose they don\'t have the time to download, listen to and comment on any of the many recent demos composed by others that are mentioned in this forum.

Bruce, I notice you have taken some of your valuable time to answer quite a few posts on this forum, so I suppose it is unfair of me to expect some knowledgeable person like yourself to take ten minutes and respond with feedback on the recorded excerpts that I provided a link to. Maybe there are easier ways to stimulate a discussion on the current limitations of sampled instruments and micing techniques for recording sampled instruments. It took me more than ten minutes to read the \'Sampling Manifesto\' and listen to all the excerpts linked to within it. It is interesting to note that the \"Orchestral Sampling Manifesto by Maarten, Thomas and Marc\" thread has had 97 replies at the time of writing this message (i.e. more replies than most threads in this forum; so maybe there is some interest after all in discussing how to produce better sample libraries).

I see that you have taken the trouble to contribute messages in 19 different threads in the Sample Libraries Discussions forum within the last couple of months. I really don\'t know how you have the time.

Best regards
Nicholas

KingIdiot

09-06-2001, 09:15 AM

Nicolas,
I admit Ilistened to the old clip but did not reply. Mostly because you were asking too much in reply (mics, mic distance, blah blah), aned the examples were just way too short. I\'ll take a crack at the new example later today when I get off the laptop and to some decent headphones/monitor system. I can guarantee that I\'ll probably be wrong with alot of my guesses. A few of the mixes sounded like they may be a blend of samples and live playing. This usually tricks my ear into thinking the instruments could all be real. In fact the only reason I may guess an instrument is a sample is because you\'re asking us to tell you which one is so I may \"listen too hard\". IMO its not whether you can tell which instrument is sampled or not, but whether a piece is \"realistic\".

I remember I originally disagreed with Thomas about the Hi Hats being fake

------------------
Really...I am an Idiot

KBub

09-06-2001, 09:26 AM

nicholash

09-06-2001, 09:49 AM

Hi KingIdiot,

Thank you very much.

Again, please don\'t worry about getting the answers wrong. If I didn\'t know the true answers already, I would probably make some incorrect guesses myself.

I think you are right when you say that, with a blend of samples and live playing, it can trick one\'s ear into thinking that all the instruments could be real. Did you try Jamieh\'s excerpt in his \"Another listening exercise\" thread? Despite not replying to his challenge myself (!), I also correctly guessed that the horns were fake. In that case, I thought this was so because the horns had a different recorded acoustic to my ears when compared with some of the other instruments. If I hadn\'t been listening to his excerpt critically, I probably wouldn\'t have noticed.

I agree with you that IMHO it\'s not whether one can tell which instrument is sampled or not, but whether a piece is \'realistic\'. I think musical phrasing is important here, and the difficult to achieve \'legato\' phrasing aspects of most sampled instruments can detract from \'realism\'.

I\'m sorry to say that the more recent smaller file contains even shorter versions of some of the excerpts. I made the smaller file because I had feedback saying that the size of the original one might put people off responding. I don\'t think it\'s necessary to \'listen too hard\' to the excerpts since most listeners probably wouldn\'t do so also.

Thanks
Nicholas
p.s. Like when I say \"Hi\" to MidiDimwit, I almost feel that I\'m insulting you when I say Hi to your user name! http://www.northernsounds.com/ubb/NonCGI/images/icons/wink.gif (or http://www.northernsounds.com/ubb/NonCGI/images/icons/cool.gif if, like MidiDimwit, you get nervous about me winking -- see the \"Vote your favorite Piano\" thread!)

nicholash

09-06-2001, 09:55 AM

Hi KBub,

Thanks for your good suggestion.

I\'ll try and follow it up fairly soon.

Best regards
Nicholas

EBrown4

09-06-2001, 02:35 PM

Nicholas,

You\'ve gone to a lot of trouble to prepare these examples, so I\'ll take the risk of embarassing myself (I\'ve done it so many times already, what difference would one more make?).

First, an excuse, in case I do pathetically poorly: I listened to the MP3\'s on my office computer\'s little Harman/Kardon speakers.

Here goes:

#1: The horn sounds sampled because there are some \"beats\" occurring. Not sure about the violin because it is largely covered by the horn.
#2: Vibrato is realistic -- I\'ll guess this is a real instrument?
#3: Clarinet sounds real to me.
#4: There\'s something happening in the background here that throws me off -- I\'m inclined to say the sax sounds sampled though.
#5: This one has a steady tone in the background that is also distracting - the flute sounds very good, but I would guess sampled.
#6: The drums sound sampled, because they don\'t quite have the \"in your face\" quality of well recorded live drums.
#7: Everything sounds very realistic, until the trumpet comes in -- it sounds sampled, but still very good.
#8: Could be all real -- ?
#9: This harpsichord seems to have a harshness you might hear with a sampled one.
#10: This sounds real.
#11: The sax vibrato sounds unrealistic, and therefore my guess is: sampled.
#12: Very tough. Could be real, but I would lean toward: sampled.
#13: Hi-hat sounds very realistic. Could be real, to my untrained ears.
#14: The drum playing in unison with the ensemble makes it tough to hear details in the timbre of the other instruments. I\'d guess sampled, but if so, it is very good.
#15: There\'s a \"whooshing\" sound in the background again, and I really can\'t tell on this one. I know there are really some excellent sampled pipe organs out there, and this could be one.
#16: Again, a fairly noisy recording, and a very short clip, both of which make it very difficult to tell. My guess: sampled.
#17: Between the 3rd and 4th second of this clip there is a low pitched resonant sound which seems unnatural. Of course this could happen because of a poorly placed mic, or some other faulty recording technique. Otherwise it all sounds pretty real.
#18: The piano in the background sounds real, but the instrument in the foreground (clarinet, I think) could be sampled. It does sound very good, though.
#19: Definitely a sampled piano.
#20: The horns sound sampled on this one. The other instruments could be real, but I would guess all sampled.

OK, when the game is over, let us know the real score (pun intended).

Dennis Brown

KingIdiot

09-06-2001, 03:09 PM

1- posibly a layered fake horn
2- real
3- real
4- fake sax
5- could be fake but sounds real
6- real
7- snare could be fake
8- not sure....may be looing too hard again
9- don\'t listen to enough harpsichord o I wouldn\'t know.
10- real
11- real
12- fake
13- real
14-same recording as ...snare sounds real ow http://www.northernsounds.com/ubb/NonCGI/images/icons/smile.gif
15- dont listen to enough organ so I\'ll say fake as a guess
16- real
17- real
18- hmmm I may be jsut geting tired, but I\'ll say real
19- real
20- fake trumpet atleast

Ok I rushed through the last few. I did get a little tired , and felt like I was in school doing a test or something...and somehing ept nagging at me letting me know I DIDN\'T HAVE to do this.

the diference between people posting and asking what they thnk of their particular pece is ALOT different than this kind of test, so don\'tbe disappointed if peopel dont respond. Its not just that people are afraid of being wrong....its more that not all people want, or rather even like, to be tested.

sorry for the rant...It\'ll be neat to know that my monicker has some base in fact when the answers are revealed http://www.northernsounds.com/ubb/NonCGI/images/icons/smile.gif

------------------
Really...I am an Idiot

KingIdiot

09-06-2001, 03:14 PM

>the diference between people posting and asking what they thnk of their particular pece is ALOT different than this kind of test<<<<<

Holy Crap did I really type this? I dont do spell checks as most of you guys know...and I do type fast, but I rarely type something as incoherant as that http://www.northernsounds.com/ubb/NonCGI/images/icons/smile.gif

hmmmm Difference being...different.....

------------------
Really...I am an Idiot

nicholash

09-06-2001, 04:30 PM

Hi Dennis and KingNotSuchAnIdiot,

Thanks very much for taking the time to listen to the excerpts and respond.

After I get seven (was ten) responses, I\'ll reveal the results.

I\'m definately now thinking that I shouldn\'t have used the word \"test\" to describe this exercise (?) which is meant to encourage discussion of what makes for \'realism\' in recordings (i.e. What makes a sampled instrument performance sound \'real\' and what makes a real instrument performance sound \'sampled\'/\'fake\'?).

Probably too late now but, if possible, try not to think of this as a test. I can appreciate why this aspect is putting some people off responding.

If the real thing sounds like a sample, it would be interesting to know what aspect(s) make it sound so. Similarly, if a sampled thing sounds real, then it is pleasing to reflect on this achievement.

Please keep the responses coming.

Thanks
Nicholas
p.s. Dennis and KingIdiot: Only if you are able to spare the time, for those instruments that sound \'fake\', please can you describe why they do so. Examples include:
- Sampled intrument doesn\'t blend well with the real ones due to different acoustic perspective used
- Repetitive similar sounding attacks
- Static sounding sustain due to looping
- Poor legato phrasing (convincing legato being hard to achieve with current sampling technology)
- Unnatural sounding releases
- Obviously artificial reverb added
- You recognise the instrument\'s sound from an existing sampled sound library (specify which).

EBrown4

09-06-2001, 06:02 PM

Nicholas,

In general, the vibrato that naturally occurs (or is added by the player) toward the end of held notes on many instruments (saxes especially) often sounds fake on sampled instruments.

I thought I detected some of this unnatural vibrato in #4 & #11, but -- who knows?

Other times, the LACK of vibrato can give away a sampled instrument; in other words, if the tone is too pure it can sound fake. In #18, the clarinet almost sounds too pure, and therefore slightly unnatural. But it is very subtle, and I wouldn\'t be shocked if you told me it was real.

You mention \"blending\" - in file #1 I thought the horns blended unnaturally toward the end. That\'s why I guessed \"sampled\" for #1.

You also mention \"acoustic perspective\", which I guess would include perceived depth (is the instrument closer or further away in the sound stage)? In #18, again, the clarinet does seem a bit more in your face, and perhaps therefore sampled, but this could certainly be the result of mic placement.

As for the other sampling problems you list (poor legato phrasing, unnatural sounding releases, obvious artificial reverb, etc.) I think I would need longer excerpts, more time, and a better playback system to detect these things.

I didn\'t recognize any of the samples from any libraries that I have heard, though.

One more thing: on a couple of the clips there was some background noise, and I wasn\'t sure if it was deliberately added to simulate some \"ambience\", or if it was part of a real recording in a real acoustic space. I mention these background \"distractions\" in my earlier post.

I fully expect to be all wet on many or most of these guesses, and it should be fun to find out which were real and which were sampled! And also to find out what kind of tricks you used to fool us.

Thanks,

Dennis

nicholash

09-06-2001, 06:50 PM

Hi Dennis,

Many thanks for your further comments, all of which are very helpful to the discussion.

You make some very good points about vibrato. I also think that if lfo produced vibrato is used, it usually sounds far too regular.

Mixing in some additional background noise to simulate some \'ambience\' can be a very good trick to help the illusion of \'realism\'. I\'ve made quite a few such recordings of the background noises in concert halls and churches. (Also recordings of applause can come in handy on occasions! ).

I also agree with you that the perceived depth (i.e. is the instrument closer or further away in the sound stage) makes a significant contribution to \'realism\'.

Thanks again for such intelligent comments.

Best regards
Nicholas

nicholash

09-06-2001, 11:03 PM

Following on from what KBub suggested, you can now download the 20 excerpt mp3s individually from my web space:
http://www.btinternet.com/~veridical.sounds/ex01.mp3 (\"http://www.btinternet.com/~veridical.sounds/ex01.mp3\") http://www.btinternet.com/~veridical.sounds/ex02.mp3 (\"http://www.btinternet.com/~veridical.sounds/ex02.mp3\") http://www.btinternet.com/~veridical.sounds/ex03.mp3 (\"http://www.btinternet.com/~veridical.sounds/ex03.mp3\") http://www.btinternet.com/~veridical.sounds/ex04.mp3 (\"http://www.btinternet.com/~veridical.sounds/ex04.mp3\") http://www.btinternet.com/~veridical.sounds/ex05.mp3 (\"http://www.btinternet.com/~veridical.sounds/ex05.mp3\") http://www.btinternet.com/~veridical.sounds/ex06.mp3 (\"http://www.btinternet.com/~veridical.sounds/ex06.mp3\") http://www.btinternet.com/~veridical.sounds/ex07.mp3 (\"http://www.btinternet.com/~veridical.sounds/ex07.mp3\") http://www.btinternet.com/~veridical.sounds/ex08.mp3 (\"http://www.btinternet.com/~veridical.sounds/ex08.mp3\") http://www.btinternet.com/~veridical.sounds/ex09.mp3 (\"http://www.btinternet.com/~veridical.sounds/ex09.mp3\") http://www.btinternet.com/~veridical.sounds/ex10.mp3 (\"http://www.btinternet.com/~veridical.sounds/ex10.mp3\") http://www.btinternet.com/~veridical.sounds/ex11.mp3 (\"http://www.btinternet.com/~veridical.sounds/ex11.mp3\") http://www.btinternet.com/~veridical.sounds/ex12.mp3 (\"http://www.btinternet.com/~veridical.sounds/ex12.mp3\") http://www.btinternet.com/~veridical.sounds/ex13.mp3 (\"http://www.btinternet.com/~veridical.sounds/ex13.mp3\") http://www.btinternet.com/~veridical.sounds/ex14.mp3 (\"http://www.btinternet.com/~veridical.sounds/ex14.mp3\") http://www.btinternet.com/~veridical.sounds/ex15.mp3 (\"http://www.btinternet.com/~veridical.sounds/ex15.mp3\") http://www.btinternet.com/~veridical.sounds/ex16.mp3 (\"http://www.btinternet.com/~veridical.sounds/ex16.mp3\") http://www.btinternet.com/~veridical.sounds/ex17.mp3 (\"http://www.btinternet.com/~veridical.sounds/ex17.mp3\") http://www.btinternet.com/~veridical.sounds/ex18.mp3 (\"http://www.btinternet.com/~veridical.sounds/ex18.mp3\") http://www.btinternet.com/~veridical.sounds/ex19.mp3 (\"http://www.btinternet.com/~veridical.sounds/ex19.mp3\") http://www.btinternet.com/~veridical.sounds/ex20.mp3 (\"http://www.btinternet.com/~veridical.sounds/ex20.mp3\")

I hope this makes things more convenient.

Nicholas

Chadwick

09-07-2001, 12:10 AM

OK I\'ll bite, just don\'t make me look too silly!

Having listened to them, most of this sounds like a small group rehearsing or mucking around. The excerpts are very short, which means fairly often you don\'t get a chance to hear an instrument play the same note twice -which is often the giveaway. The tuning in many is such a distraction it can make you think twice.

1. Sounds real enough
2. Real - -no question
3. Real or badly played samples? Not sure
4. Again, badly played real thing or samples of same - not sure. Tremolo doesn\'t sound in \'tempo\' with the music, and the style varies radically for no apparent reason.
5. Could be either. Not much expression, so it\'s hard to tell. My guess? Home grown sample. Something about the similarity of the attack on all notes.
6. Could be either realistic samples or crappy performance of the real thing...
7. If that\'s samples, I\'ll buy a hat to eat.
8. Sounds real - the vibrato has too much ebb and flow.
9. Really crappy harsicord performance. So out of tune it\'s hard to tell whether its a sample or real.
10.Sounds pretty real, or a lot of hard work has gone into it.
11. Real clarinet. Lots of expression which flows from one note to the next.
12.There are so many mistakes in this it\'s distracting. It could be a real performance cut up in a sampler.
13.Pretty real sound. Lots of variation in the openness of the hat and timbre of the closed hits.
14. It\'s possible the wind/violin line could be a sample. It\'s very uniform in attack. Mostly sounds real though.
15. Church organ? Don\'t know.
16. All sounds real.
17. Sounds real.
18. Sounds real
19. Piano could be real or a sample recorded through mic\'d up speakers. The guy saying \'watch the strange note\' is definitely sampled http://www.northernsounds.com/ubb/NonCGI/images/icons/wink.gif
20.Sounds real enough, although the bite on the troms doesn\'t vary much.

Nicholas, you owe us answers soon...

nicholash

09-07-2001, 05:16 AM

Hi Chadwick,

Thanks for your detailed answers.

Don\'t worry, my intention is not to make you look silly.

I only want four more responses (hopefully at least as detailed as yours) before I reveal the answers. Not long to wait now (I hope).

Best regards
Nicholas

franz

09-07-2001, 08:51 AM

1 string sample, live horn
2 live
3 live
4 live
5 sampled
6 sampled
7 mixed
8 don\'t know
9 sampled
10 sampled
11 d k
12 d k
13 sampled
14 sampled
15 d k
16 live
17 sampled
18 live
19 sampled
20 live

feels like mid term!
http://www.northernsounds.com/ubb/NonCGI/images/icons/wink.gif
franZ

nicholash

09-07-2001, 01:24 PM

Thanks very much Franz,

I regret calling it a \'test\' now! http://www.northernsounds.com/ubb/NonCGI/images/icons/wink.gif

Three more response attempts, and I\'ll reveal the answers. http://www.northernsounds.com/ubb/NonCGI/images/icons/smile.gif

Best regards
Nicholas

09-08-2001, 07:46 AM

>Three more response attempts, and I\'ll reveal the answers.<

Hi Nicholas!

As promised, I give it a try, but if you don\'t mind I\'d like to say something before: As my backround isn\'t that of somebody who does orchestration, but only of an electric-hobby-guitarist doing some home composing stuff, my \"being is spoiled\" with what I hear on televesion, cinema etc. What they present to me as real (might all be samples) I might therefore \"hear\" as real, while some real recordings I wonder if the strings for example were right or not. I recently listened to an orchestral piece and somehow had an idea in mind of what some things have to sound like but I had difficulties to hear a major difference between some of the string sounds and some of the brass sounds. It basically sounded very similar. I just say all this to remind of an earlier discussion that everybodies impressions of something can differ greatly depending on what one is used to. Reading the user-tests on harmony-central always reminds me to first try something oneself. While one is saying THIS IS THE REAL THING, others feel it to be faaaaar too weak to come close.

O.K. Enough OT-talking (I refer to whatever is brass or woodwind as brass/woodwind and please excuse my poor exactness regarding what I mean. English isn\'t my mother language):
1. brass/woodwind: the first part sounds real (the first 3-4notes) while the rest more like somebody with a different instrument trying to imitate. The way the tone/sound of a note is achieved/starts off seems to be un-real.
strings: first of the three-&a- half \"sections\"/parts seems real, but I assume it is \'fake\' as the 2nd & 3rd miss human character.
2. real. The way the player \"gets into the tone\".
3. could be real or from a PM synth. I believe exactly this melodic line could be achieved this way with a sample.
4. too short to evaluate: could be both real or sample. But I feel there to be a human factor in playing.
5. real
6. real but can be done with a sample
7. first part (the fast thing) all real. The string then sound out of tune and not quite real while the brass/woodwind misses human character and is fake.
8. a combination of real & sample, but don\'T know which is what
9. real, but I am sure it can be done this way with a sample
10. flute real but the brass/woodwind thing that starts close to the end I am not sure about
11. tone good sampled but I somehow feel it wouldn\'t be played exactly this way
12. real
13. real
14. a mix of both. Don\'t ask me to separate please.
15. both possible, but is real
16. fake. I feel the notes/tone not to merge properly (move the right way from one to the next)
17. real
18. too static the (oboe?), piano real
19. I believe a real piano would show more overall vibration.
20. timpani: not the right deepness/fullness
brass/woodwind fake
strings: not sure but more sampled than real

This is it. Sorry for the poor description-capability of mine.

regards

------------------
O.H.

nicholash

09-08-2001, 12:24 PM

Hi O.H.

Thank you very much for your excellent and intelligent comments: Especially your point about what one is presented with on television, cinema etc. I expect a lot of people rarely hear real live orchestras/ensembles, and so may not actually know or remember what the real thing sounds like. In the early 1980\'s a lot of \'pop music\' records used a Linn Drum (i.e. sampled sounds) instead of real drums. I expect a lot of people thought that the Linn Drum \'sound\' was that of a real drum kit.

Like you say: What the media presents to us as \'real\' may well indeed be samples. Also the sound of a multi-close-miked ensemble can be very different to hearing the same thing in the flesh so to speak. Most recordings these days use compression and eq which can change the perceived characteristics of an instrument\'s sound significantly.

I really do agree with you when you say: \"... everybodies impressions of something can differ greatly depending on what one is used to.\"

Your point about the user-tests on harmony-central seems so true. As you point out: \"While one is saying THIS IS THE REAL THING, others feel it to be faaaaar too weak to come close.\"

Also, if one is listening \'too hard\' for things that one has been (mis-)lead to expect to hear, erronious judgements are easily made. I think the hi-fi sales industry is somewhat based on this! http://www.northernsounds.com/ubb/NonCGI/images/icons/wink.gif Also, one hears anecdotes of people adjusting an effect in a recording studio setting, thinking the sound has been changed/improved, only to subsequently discover that the effect was not even in patched into the audio path!

Again many thanks for your valuable feedback, and your \"description-capability\" has been fine.

Best regards
Nicholas
p.s. Only two more responses please...

MidiDimwit

09-09-2001, 06:49 PM

God, I hate this. I really really do.

1)fake strings, real horn
2)real
3)real
4)fake
5)fake
6)real
7)fake drums and trumpet, rest real
8)real
9)fake
10)dunno
11)fake
12)fake
13)fake
14)dunno
15)fake
16)fake
17)real
18)real piano, fake clarinet
19)fake
20)fake

This better not be something lame like \"they are all sampled, tee hee\". That would blow .

MidiDimwit

09-09-2001, 06:53 PM

Did I mention that I really hated that. Ok, just checking http://www.northernsounds.com/ubb/NonCGI/images/icons/smile.gif

nicholash

09-09-2001, 09:03 PM

Hi MidiDimwit,

You may have hated doing it, but you were brave enough to have a go, so well done!

Only one more response to go now...

Best regards
Nicholas
p.s. Thanks for your investigatory work concerning the \'pirate\' site talked about in the \"Pirate site...\" thread.

nicholash

09-09-2001, 11:39 PM

Assuming that I\'ve correctly interpreted the six responses so far, here is a table summarising them:

Columns are Excerpt number (Ex), Real (R), Sampled (S), Mixture (M) and Don\'t Know (D).

Ex R S M D
-- - - - -
01 1 1 4 0
02 6 0 0 0
03 5 0 0 1
04 1 3 0 2
05 2 4 0 0
06 3 2 0 1
07 1 0 5 0
08 3 0 1 2
09 1 3 0 2
10 4 1 0 1
11 2 3 0 1
12 2 3 0 1
13 4 2 0 0
14 1 2 2 1
15 1 2 0 3
16 3 3 0 0
17 5 1 0 0
18 3 0 3 0
19 1 4 1 0
20 2 3 1 0

Please make an attempt to try this exercise and respond.

Thanks
Nicholas

[This message has been edited by nicholash (edited 09-10-2001).]

[This message has been edited by nicholash (edited 09-10-2001).]

nicholash

09-14-2001, 03:58 PM

Hi,

I\'ve decided to reveal a summary of the answers now:

So many times have sampled instruments been accused of not sounding realistic, that I thought it would make a change for some real instruments to be accused of sounding sampled! http://www.northernsounds.com/ubb/NonCGI/images/icons/wink.gif

All the instruments in all 20 excerpts are 100% real. All those recordings date from the late 1970\'s to the early 1980\'s.

All except excerpt 5 (i.e. solo recorder) were recorded with a single crossed pair of high quality cardioid condenser microphones straight into a stereo tape recorder. No additional reverb, eq or compression, etc. was added.

I hope those who tried the listening exercise found it interesting.

Best regards
Nicholas

franz

09-17-2001, 09:42 AM

Nicolas,
This proofs that recording with a crossed pair of condensors is bad and makes things sound artificial to many ears.
Very interesting!

franZ

franz

09-17-2001, 04:57 PM

Nicholas,
My binaural head is phase compensated and does not have any problems with speaker playback (therefore about 6 times as expensive as a Neumann head). It works everywhere and does not require a listener to be in a \"sweet spot\". Actually I find that the realism and \"3d ness\" is better when you listen from out side the sweet spot. And of course on headphones its fully binaural. pretty cool!

franZ

nicholash

09-17-2001, 06:11 PM

<BLOCKQUOTE>quote:<HR>Originally posted by franz:
Nicholas,
My binaural head is phase compensated and does not have any problems with speaker playback (therefore about 6 times as expensive as a Neumann head). It works everywhere and does not require a listener to be in a \"sweet spot\". Actually I find that the realism and \"3d ness\" is better when you listen from out side the sweet spot. And of course on headphones its fully binaural. pretty cool!

franZ<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

Hi Franz,

Compared with your \'phase compensated\' head, my binaural head must be a \'dummy\' in more ways than one! http://www.northernsounds.com/ubb/NonCGI/images/icons/wink.gif

Best regards
Nicholas
(It is a pity for me that I can no longer afford a decent binaural head).

nicholash

09-17-2001, 11:28 PM

<BLOCKQUOTE>quote:<HR>Originally posted by franz:
Nicolas,
This proofs that recording with a crossed pair of condensors is bad and makes things sound artificial to many ears.
Very interesting!

franZ

<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

Hi Franz,

One of my favourite miking techniques is binaural, but I have received criticism from others when such recordings are heard over loudspeakers rather than headphones.

All but one of the recordings for the 20 excerpts where recorded with a pair of high quality Calrec cardioid condenser mics mounted on a \'stereo bar\', one being angled approximately 110 degrees with respect to the other. Initially, I tried to get the mics coincident for X-Y Blumlein-style coincident pair recording but, in practice I prefered the timbre of the sound when there was about ten centimetres distance between them.

For most of those recordings, I was there when the recordings were being made, so I could compare the real thing to the recorded! Over a good loudspeaker system, I thought the recordings were pretty natural sounding (although not perfect).

Still, it is interesting to get people\'s opinions. I was hoping this \'excercise\' would allow people to get some idea of what a fairly purist stereo miking technique actually can sound like. With most orchestral music CDs one can buy, the recording technique(s) used don\'t get described much at all in the accompanying cover/booklet. Most of the aforementioned orchestral excerpts were recorded with the mics about 10 to 15 feet away from the nearest musicians. The harpsichord, solo violin and hi-hat excerpts were recorded with the pair of mics being only a few feet away from the instruments.

I\'m glad you found the exercise interesting. With so few responses, I\'m not sure many other\'s did! http://www.northernsounds.com/ubb/NonCGI/images/icons/confused.gif

Best regards
Nicholas
p.s. Its a pity you missed my \'pipe organ listening test\' since that featured some binaural recordings.
p.p.s. Also, I\'ve just remembered that you wanted me to remind you to send me some mp3s of your sampled pianos playing my test piece.