I played a cassette tape the other day and I was surprised by the quality compared to conventional streaming today. It seems to me that we should get away from the two channel recording process. For example the recording of a solo violinist. You are just processing a recording in two channels at one specific point in space. You need a system that can create the violinist in your space eg living room without the sound of the environment of the room where the sound of the violinist was recorded. This would give you the sound in two listening environments. The recording also needs to be 360 degrees around the violinist in an anechoic chamberā¦.
Welcome to the world of Spatial Audio. But hereās the rub, or rather rubs. There already exists millions of performances based upon the ātwo channelā approach which, it is important to note, creates an illusion that is greater than two point sources. Much of this is one of a kind that will never be equalled. For better or worse, there will never be another Michael Jackson or Pavarotti. They can never be in the Spatial Audio you seek. And what exactly are we seeking? For most, it is the center section 15 or so rows back in the auditorium. And having achieved that sensation of closing our eyes and being there is heaven. We donāt need it to continue to sound life like as we get up to refill our glass. I guess it boils down to: do we seek a system to show off our music or select music that lets us marvel at our equipment. I think the rather lack luster response to Appleās Spatial Audio provides the general answer.
You could achieve both outcomes with artificial intelligence. Iām not sure apples Spatial Audio is true multi directional recording allowing for natural dispersion in your listening room. Apples Spatial Audio still relies on discrete speakers in your room which will cause a multitude of unnatural artefacts like phase cancellation or addition. Also time alignment problems too. Apples Spatial Audio is just a fancy name for a 5.1 home theatre system.
Whether you want an artist or artists playing in your Room or in the Venue should be your choice. That technology is not here yetā¦
No argument but my point was why would you want to? Sort of like watching the latest Tom Cruise ego trip thriller with insane stunts but no real plot.
1 Like
I do not quite see the point of your analogy. I think it is beyond one persons capability to judge if something will be successful or not. Out of the Billions of people who listen to music, what proportion of them would like their favorite artist or artists play in an intimate concert just for them? Wherever that may beā¦.
Sorry, my sarcasm got in the way of clarity. Was trying to say that even under the best of circumstances, only a very small fraction of available music would be available in a rather unique format that requires substantial additional effort at the front end end during production. As a result, it would be rather unlikely that you would have that opportunity to enjoy that special experience with you special artists playing their best. For me, that would mean that, as much as I would like too, I could never experience Kieth Jarrett play the Koln concert for me. Even if he tried, I doubt that he would be able to recreate those moments when he vocalises his joy in performing. That was my point about Apple Spatial Audio and even there where it can be applied retroactively to existing recordings, only a small fraction will ever be converted.
I quite agree with you. I have shellac 78rpm records dating back to the 1900s and they would loose their auditory, visual and physical experience if they were digitised into a lossless high res music file. However I think there is room for an Nāth type of recording that does not use conventional technology which has been around for over a centuryā¦