Hardest genre to reproduce accurately

Fopp

Scientist
I'm not sure if this has been discussed before, but in my opinion, the answer is classical, and particularly classical piano.

I feel like you'd have to spend loads of dough to even have reproduced classical piano approach "real". Don't get me wrong, Mozart sounds great in my system, but not in a genuine way, as does rock.
 
first thought

Hmmm, don't do a lot of classical (though I do like it). My first thought was Rock. Getting the chest thumping bass and deep rumble and overall giant presence without being just numbingly loud.

But, I am finding that the source has a lot to do with it. Quality recording, both LP and CD, can make a huge difference.
 
I would say you are right on target with the piano but large scale orchestral and vocal works have their own problems with maintaining clarity and detail. For shear frequency range of course the pipe organ is the most demanding with the possible exception of electronic (synth).

mike
 
The recording is half the battle, for sure.

My opinion is that all genres are almost equally difficult, it's just a matter of whether the listener is familiar enough with the music they are hearing to imagine what it must have sounded like in person. This ability probably comes easier to someone who frequents classical piano recitals than someone who mostly sees live rock bands with bad PAs after drinking 10 beers.

If I had to pick something, though? I'd go with acoustic percussion. I'd also go with the human voice, but that's a bit unfair because us humans have an evolutionarily enhanced ability to recognize a real human voice.
edit: unamplified human voice, that is - not really an issue with most genres since we are happy to imagine a singer using a microphone.
 
This ability probably comes easier to someone who frequents classical piano recitals than someone who mostly sees live rock bands with bad PAs after drinking 10 beers.

You have a point, I played classical piano for 15 years.
 
Agree about classical being most demanding. Accurately reproducing rock requires a system that can play loud. Classical requires loud and extremely low frequencies (way lower than most rock music) greater dynamics, and tremendous difficulty getting the timbres of all the musical instruments just right, so a viola is differentiated from a violin, an oboe from a basoon, and a flute from a picolo. Additionally, classical features really quiet passages that most rock music doesn't.
 
I'm not sure if this has been discussed before, but in my opinion, the answer is classical, and particularly classical piano.

I feel like you'd have to spend loads of dough to even have reproduced classical piano approach "real". Don't get me wrong, Mozart sounds great in my system, but not in a genuine way, as does rock.



Classical piano and human voice are the biggest challenges for any audio system to reproduce correctly.
 
Sorry for the double post, but I think I realize why classical is so hard to reproduce genuinely.

When you go to a rock concert, all of the sound that you hear is coming through a PA system. Therefore, the standard for "real" in rock is already artificial.

There is no PA system involved in an orchestra, just the instruments. Therefore, it's incredibly difficult to reproduce via speakers.
 
Accurately reproducing rock requires a system that can play loud.

Eh, technically untrue, but point well taken. Take a listen to songs like "Riviera paradise" (Stevie Ray Vaughan), and you'll see accurate reproduction is a lot more than being loud.

When you go to a rock concert, all of the sound that you hear is coming through a PA system. Therefore, the standard for "real" in rock is already artificial.

There is no PA system involved in an orchestra, just the instruments. Therefore, it's incredibly difficult to reproduce via speakers.

I'm in definate agreement:thmbsp:. I think either tied or a bit harder would be Jazz, but only because each individual instrument has to cover a ton of "space" in a recording, rather than a ton of instruments. Could be argued vise-versa as well. Each genre has its points, but those would be the hardest, I think, to record.To accurately play back, I believe classical (making it a double whammy), and then the other genres, which I don't think one is necessaily weaker, or easier to reproduce. Hip-hop, and organ has the deep bass, metal has overwhelming guitar and high-end, and every type in between has it's place. Classical is my bet though:yes:
 
It's already been said, but I have never heard a truly "natural" sounding human voice, whether speaking or singing. There's just something about it--no matter how good a microphone was used, or the rest of the signal chain for that matter, it just sounds "recorded".

Musically, I would agree with classical, just because of the spatial placement of all those instruments, being picked up by two transducers on both the record and playback ends.
 
I tend to agree that classical can be the most demanding. But not all classical is created equal.

Back when I was first auditioning Hi fidelity speakers, I always brought along a few different LPs for evaluation (this was in the time before CDs, when every self-respecting stereo store had one or two killer turntable setups). It was a real pain to get the different speakers I wanted to evaluate evenly balanced, so that the currently favored speaker (the one the store wanted to sell) wasn't louder or better equalized. But once that was done I could listen to the music

The LPs varied a bit over time, but the genres they came from never changed. The key was choosing a variety of complex music with which I was very, very familiar.

I always brought at least one popular album with well defined vocals. A regular choice was Stand Up by Jethro Tull. I brought this record because I knew it inside out, and I knew how it could sound with great speakers. I always had such an emotional response when songs like "Reason for Waiting" or "Fat Man" or "Look into the Sun" were played right. Playing this album gave me a baseline for what kind of imaging I could expect. Other favorites included Kate and Anna McGarrigle's first album, Teaser and the Firecat, Crosby, Stills, Nash & Young, or early Joni Mitchell.

Once I had an idea of imaging, and of the detail potential on relatively simple pieces, I would pull out complex classical music to see just how much information and detail a given speaker could handle. In particular, large choral pieces with full orchestras could trash many big name offerings.

Again, I chose pieces I was quite familiar with. This wasn't hard, as I sang in classical ensembles and choirs for many years. Some of my friends choose over-the-top pieces like The 1812 Overture, but that piece was more a workout for a turntable (keeping the stylus from jumping the groove) than it was for the speakers.

"Ode to Joy", from Beethoven's 9th, however, was especially brutal on speakers. Here you had Beethoven at his finest; with overlapping orchestral themes and 4 or more simultaneous voices. I remember trying it out on highly respected offerings from then-new companies Polk and Bose. Both performed so poorly on vocal details (compared to Klipsch, Kef and B&W), that I refused to take either company seriously for quite a while.
 
I think classical music in general is the most revealing of system shortcomings - and because I am so fond of it, I think of classical piano in particular.

I have heard it said (by someone on AK - can't remember who) that if your system can reproduce the sound of a (solo) female singer well - then there can't be much wrong with your system - or words to that effect. The implication here being that all other forms of music will be reproduced well by that system.

This assumes however that most, if not all, female voices are supposed to be the most difficult to reproduce accurately, no matter what the genre.
 
Any music performed by musical instruments with no amplification, like all of classical music and some jazz. Once you put some electronics in the musical instrument, its sound cannot be easily identified as unique (e.g. think of an oboe, a trumpet or a viola). This is my 2 cents on this.
 
but I have never heard a truly "natural" sounding human voice, whether speaking or singing.
a pair of magnepans might cure that with the proper associated equipment :yes:
seems the problem I have is finding one speaker that does it all. Admittedly I do not have the best ear in the world, but I find bits and pieces in a couple of different speakers that seem to do the job, for me. If I could just combine the 2.
Overall though, for me, the closest thing I have heard is a pair of magnepans. At times, especially on acoustic stuff, it is the closest thing to real I have ever had, often amazes me.
For "harder" rock tho, while still good, for me, they just do not seem to have the "dynamics" of being there, unless cranked really, really loud.
Is just hard to find one speaker to do it all in my price range.
 
Having just heard Beethoven's 9th live, I can say that the impact of a full symphony, 4 solists and a 110 voice choir is difficult to describe but incredible to experience. By the way there were more than "two transducers on the recording end".

Reminds me that the best we can do at home is a pale imitation of live.


"Ode to Joy", from Beethoven's 9th, however, was especially brutal on speakers. Here you had Beethoven at his finest; with overlapping orchestral themes and 4 or more simultaneous voices. I remember trying it out on highly respected offerings from then-new companies Polk and Bose. Both performed so poorly on vocal details (compared to Klipsch, Kef and B&W), that I refused to take either company seriously for quite a while.
 
How can you tell the differences in reproduction between classical or vocal or rock? All we have is an imprinted disk; do we know how it 'suppose' to sound?

Classical is more complicated with more range. Does that mean harder to reproduce? Personally, I say its even across the board. If the engineer mixing it has lousy equipment then the final product will be poor, voice or otherwise. We are interpeting what we hear from our systems which we trust (too much) is accurately interpeting the imprinted media.

So, instead of listening objectively, enjoy the music.
 
I'm not sure if this has been discussed before, but in my opinion, the answer is classical, and particularly classical piano.

I feel like you'd have to spend loads of dough to even have reproduced classical piano approach "real". Don't get me wrong, Mozart sounds great in my system, but not in a genuine way, as does rock.

Piano, classical or not, is by far the most difficult instrument to make sound genuine on an audio system IMO.
 
Back
Top Bottom