Re: An evening with Michael Bublé [message #96003 is a reply to message #96000] |
Sat, 17 September 2022 08:45 |
|
Wayne Parham
Messages: 18791 Registered: January 2001
|
Illuminati (33rd Degree) |
|
|
I do evaluate the sound systems and the venues, yes. Kinda can't help it. But I do try to just forget about sound quality nuances and just enjoy the show, which is usually pretty easy to do 'cause to tell the truth, most systems and venues are pretty average or maybe I should say most are about equal. Not great, but not horrible either.
There are a few that stand out, that aren't "average" but well above or well below. I only know of one that was consistently well above and that was the band "Yes." They have always had an excellent sound system. Not sure why theirs were better than average but they were. And there are a handful of concerts I've been to that were well below average. Nasty clipped sound seems to be the usual mistake. Concerts like that will make your ears bleed, tinnitus for days. Lots of that in the 1970s and 1980s from popular rock bands.
Venue is a big deal too. All are large enough to enjoy deep full bass, provided they have the power. Basshorns grouped together are key there. But midrange and treble varies considerably. The best venues are the ones from yesteryear, arranged to provide adequate sound even with relatively limited power. They tend to also distribute people - which are the main sound absorbers - such that the sound remains uniform from seat to seat. And better venues tend to avoid large reflectors, like walls of concrete, right behind a group of people. Large reflectors like that make a slap echo that can be horrible.
Both the positions of the sounds sources and the people matter. Ideally, the sound source is grouped rather than being a "wall of sound." And the people are spread around the source. Oddly shaped groups of people and multiple sources are a worst-case scenario. Like the speaker towers at a race track. I don't see that often, but I have occasionally.
|
|
|