Looper's Delight Archive Top (Search)
Date Index
Thread Index
Author Index
Looper's Delight Home
Mailing List Info

[Date Prev][Date Next]   [Thread Prev][Thread Next]   [Date Index][Thread Index][Author Index]

RE: Re: surround looping

Title: RE: Re: surround looping

it's very depressing, all this, for it's true. despite the exciting prospect of multi-channel music production, both studio & stage, there really isn't much call for it, even with the most immersive & abstract instrumentation.

then there are the practical difficulties- multi-channel delivery formats have yet to settle down unless you're in the movie business, & even then it tends to be a bit fireworky, detracting from the main body of the action. directors regard it as a necessary evil.

I've been to one gig in twenty-odd years that used a quad p.a., & it added nothing to what was going on in front of us, save to drown out some of the usual disrespectful chatter one tends to hear at live music venues in london these days.

like it said on the quad version of tubular bells, "for people with four ears".

I'm still going to mate my two repeaters up & see what happens though.


>4) the term "sub woofer" has changed it's meaning in recent years,
>the term originally referred to a speaker to handle just the very
>low frequencies that a regular speaker wouldn't produce, hence the
>perception that it just added a bit of depth, and that  it didn't
>matter where the sub was placed. The 0.1 in 5.1 is for one tenth of
>the  frequency range ....20,000/10 = 2000Hz , which makes it a
>regular "woofer".

I agree that the original idea was to have only non localizable
frequencies on the subwoofer, up to 120 Hz. But 2000Hz cannot be
true, the main part of the voices would come out of the woofer under
the table!
I searched arround and it seems 250Hz is common.

>6) in a gig situation there's no way to get the whole of an audience
>into the sweet spot,  and many audience members will be close to
>just one speaker.
>  So when mixing a band on a stereo pa I put them in mono anyway :-(

stereo is great for effects and if you put some stuff a little out of
center, you reduce annoing phase cancelations a lot. But I dont mix
any instrument far right or left either.

to have rear speakers is almost impossible because the public behind
will hate them and the public in front will not hear them.

>7) stereo FX (like polyechoes) can sound pretty good, so more
>speakers could really
>    add something.
>8) 5.1 is designed for "making the explosions behind you", while
>keeping the main attention on the screen. It's not designed for
>spatial music.

exactly. and most of the 5.1 mixes I heard so far are not spatial
compositions but a band in front and some reverb behind.
In 2002 when I was in California, Gary Hall helped me to create a
surround mix of a piece of mine at Larry O's studio. There the
percussion really jumped happily arround the room!

>When Pink Floyd were using quadrophonics (1967), they had 2 sets of
>pa speakers,
>a main pa, which was stereo(maybe mono, I don't know) and a second
>pa (of smaller wattage) for effects. Mostly the sound came from the
>main pa, but the quad was used just to highlight certain instruments
>at various times.

I heard the pigs show (76?) and was not impressed

>I'm all in favour of multi-channel sound, but I don't think there's
>anything special in the 5.1 format.

true. Its quadro with a useless (for music) center speaker and a
subwoofer which is not related to the spacialization...


          ---> http://Matthias.Grob.org


The contents of this e-mail are confidential to the ordinary user
of the e-mail address to which it was addressed, and may also
be privileged. If you are not the addressee of this e-mail you may
not copy, forward, disclose or otherwise use it or any part of it
in any form whatsoever.If you have received this e-mail in error,
please e-mail the sender by replying to this message.

It is your responsibility to carry out appropriate virus and other
checks to ensure that this message and any attachments do not
affect your systems / data. Any views or opinions expressed in this
e-mail are solely those of the author and do not necessarily
represent those of MTV Networks Europe unless specifically stated,
nor does this message form any part of any contract unless so stated.

MTV reserves the right to monitor e-mail communications from
external/internal sources for the purposes of ensuring correct
and appropriate use of MTV communication equipment.

MTV Networks Europe