Chris, Obviously, I agree with you, though I wonder if - with the right mic and the right room - even the touch of reverb might be unnecessary. But my tastes may be different from those of many others.
Ned On Jul 24, 2010, at 12:13 AM, Christopher Wilke wrote: > Ron, > > Excellent points. I've given this matter a lot of thought and have come > to the conclusion that the issue involves much deeper psychological matters > of perception than simply what people regard as an ideal sound. > > There is a lot of "historical fiction" when it comes to recording the > lute. There is a strange culture of preciosity surrounding the lute which > seeks to capture not so much the actual sound of the instrument, but rather > protray a pseudo-mystical aura. In this construct, the lute must not issue > forth actual music; it must be transformed into a special body whose very > sound is special and ancient and magical, coming vast distances from afar, as > if it is somehow sent via pixie-dust waves from Olde Douland's fingers > straight to your stereo speakers or laptop. This is why we have guys using > 38 microphones arranged in 152 configurations on flagpoles to capture every > out-of-phase echo bouncing off anything resembling a reflective surface in > the giant, inhospitable airplane hangers where they choose to record. Great > lengths (and expenses) are gone to in order to avoid having the finished > product sound like a real instrument played by an real person in a > room that actually exists in 2010. This has been the norm for so long that > we're now in the strange position that when one hears a realistic-sounding > lute recording, many think it sounds unprofessional. > > This style of recording will eventually pass. Listen to any pop recording > from the 1980's and it will be immediately identifiable by the ton of reverb, > (especially gated reverb on the snare drum) chorusing effects, synth pads, > etc - in short, a lot of extra fluff that adds nothing to the song, but > everyone recorded that way because everyone recorded that way. You couldn't > run a studio unless you could show off your closets full of floor-to-ceiling > racks of analog effects processors and were willing to pile on mounds of the > stuff with a shovel. The situation today with lute recordings and comically > elaborate mic setups in gigantic caverns is analogous to that, although the > aesthetic has been around a good deal longer than a decade. We're slow to > change in ye olde lute world. I am encouraged, however, to hear that many > players with smaller budgets are putting out recordings with better sound > than many of the big guys. > > Recipe for a great solo lute sound: one good mic, a pair of good ears, a > brain in your head and just a touch of reverb for seasoning. > > Chris > > > Christopher Wilke > Lutenist, Guitarist and Composer > www.christopherwilke.com > > > --- On Fri, 7/23/10, Ron Andrico <praelu...@hotmail.com> wrote: > >> From: Ron Andrico <praelu...@hotmail.com> >> Subject: [LUTE] Re: Vice Nisee >> To: nedma...@aol.com, howardpos...@ca.rr.com >> Cc: lute@cs.dartmouth.edu >> Date: Friday, July 23, 2010, 2:51 PM >> Hello Ned: >> Your point is well taken. >> Unfortunately, it is very difficult to >> convince the average listener, even those >> acquainted with the actual >> sound of the lute, that a real, dry, >> non-reverberant sound is ideal. >> The problem, as I see (or hear) it is >> that more people have heard the >> lute on recordings than live and close >> up. Certain >> prolifically-recorded players have opted >> for a sound that was described >> some years back by a Gramophone reviewer >> as a 'psycho-acoustic >> nightmare, distant and close at the same >> time'. If we don't gravitate >> towards a reverberant sound, we can be >> easily dismissed as not ideal. >> Another dimension of the problem lies >> with available technology. It is >> very, very difficult to find a recording >> engineer who understands the >> simplicity of the lute sound well enough >> to record it simplistically. >> When we first approached our current >> engineer (Grammy-award winner, >> Will Russell) and played as an example >> our favorite recording of Emma >> Kirby and Jakob Lindberg on BIS, his >> immediate reaction was to ask >> permission to make us sound better than >> that. It was a process, but we >> finally convinced him that a simple mic >> placement yielded the sound and >> natural balance we were seeking. >> We have experimented on Youtube with a >> few different representations of >> sound, and it is interesting to see the >> results. Typically, the more >> reverberant sound seems to get more >> repeated hits. Our recent posting >> of Sicut cervus/Sitivit anima by >> Palestrina is recorded in a live space >> with absolutely no tampering with the >> Zoom H2, place about 10 feet >> away. >> http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BUDplApE45U >> But we deliberately recorded the Christ >> Child Lullaby at home in a dry >> acoustic with the Zoom closely placed in >> an attempt to judge how >> listeners would react. The appeal >> of the music seems to have attracted >> hits despite the dry sound. >> http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9atiweh44WU >> Personally, I agree that one does not >> want to hear a lute's volume >> boosted to represent something it is >> not. The idea of having my head >> trapped inside of a lute makes me >> afraid. But the fact is, we have to >> aim for a standard that is not going to >> drive the average listener away >> because the music is 'better than it >> sounds.' A quandary indeed. >> Best, >> Ron Andrico >> www.mignarda.com >> > Date: Fri, 23 Jul 2010 13:53:26 >> -0400 >> > To: howardpos...@ca.rr.com >> > CC: lute@cs.dartmouth.edu >> > From: nedma...@aol.com >> > Subject: [LUTE] Re: Vice Nisee >> > >> > I think my point about lutes being >> 'enlarged' in the recording >> process could best be made by referring >> to specific lute recordings. >> Comparing Jakob Lindberg's recordings of >> Dowland (reissued on Brilliant >> ) with Hopkinson Smiths recording >> "Dowland: A Dream" on Naive, I hear >> considerably more reverberation on the >> Smith recording than on the one >> of Lindberg. At the same approximate >> volume, Smith's instrument sounds >> much larger (to me) than Lindberg's. More >> importantly, Lindberg's >> instrument sounds more natural to me than >> Smith's; more like what I'm >> accustomed to hearing from a lute played >> live. To be sure, the >> recordings of both instruments underwent >> some electronic processing >> before being transferred to CD. My >> subjective impression is that >> Smith's received more added reverb than >> Lindberg's. That's what I hear >> in the Vice Nisee video/audio and - >> perhaps(?) - what Suzanne also >> heard. >> > >> > Ned >> > On Jul 22, 2010, at 6:37 PM, howard >> posner wrote: >> > >> > > The lute would necessarily be >> amplified and there would necessarily >> be microphones; that's the nature of >> electronic transmission of sound. >> If it sounds too loud for you, turn down >> the volume on your computer. >> If it then doesn't sound loud enough, >> turn the volume up. Repeat >> process until it sounds just right. >> > > >> > > On Jul 22, 2010, at 3:05 PM, >> Edward Mast wrote: >> > > >> > >> I agree with Suzanne, both >> about the sound and the playing. I've >> made this observation here before; the >> tendency of recording engineers >> today seems to be to make lutes sound as >> large as concert grand pianos. >> > >> >> > >> Ned >> > >> On Jul 22, 2010, at 11:36 >> AM, Suzanne Angevine wrote: >> > >> >> > >>> Was it the acoustic >> that was lush? I almost had the feeling that >> it was an amplified instrument and was >> looking for the cord or tiny >> mike somewhere. But it was nice playing. >> > > >> > > >> > > >> > > >> > > To get on or off this list see >> list information at >> > > http://www.cs.dartmouth.edu/~wbc/lute-admin/index.html >> > >> > >> > >> >> __________________________________________________________________ >> >> Hotmail is redefining busy with tools for >> the New Busy. Get more from >> your inbox. [1]See how. -- >> >> References >> >> 1. >> http://www.windowslive.com/campaign/thenewbusy?ocid=PID28326::T:WLMTAGL:ON:WL:en-US:WM_HMP:042010_2 >> >> > > > To get on or off this list see list information at http://www.cs.dartmouth.edu/~wbc/lute-admin/index.html
