[nathanm]

I received my copy of Romeo & Juliet Suites 1&2 by the Ukranian Radio and Television Symphony Orchestra from recording engineer Russell Dawkins today, CRANKED it up to "11" and blew off all the dishes from the neighbors' cupboards!  

Reference to original thread mentioning this recording

I may not be a real classical music fan by any stretch, but I do know what I like and this kind of recording is what I like!  Absolutely amazing that so much sound was captured with only two ribbon microphones!  Although Prokofiev managed to put the best stuff right at the beginning in my opinion, there's still lots of cool bits in there.  The finale kicked ass too, I thought for sure I was going to hear someone pounding on the ceiling when the guy smacked the snare!  

Sonically it's excellent, really powerful but without being grating on your ears.  I was not kidding when I said I had my system cranked.  The dynamic range is more extreme than just about anything else I own.  Plus the detail, tonality and ambience is excellent.  Normally I don't get much front to back "soundstage depth" on my system, but it's there on this disc.  On most classical I find there's kind of generic din that seems to sound the same.  This one's got more of a gritty and earthy analog feel.  (even though it's not)  Yes, I know gritty isn't a good word to use, but I mean that in a good way.  There's more character in the instruments coming across.

I was even able to disable the two bands of EQ (Don't worry, they're just cuts, wouldn't want to push on jello now would we?  Billy Cosby would be wroth)I usually have on the subwoofer and let it play full on.  Cool.  Also it seems that ribbon mics are a little more forgiving in the high treble.  I can't quite put my finger on how to describe it, but it's not screeching at you.  It's like a warm treble, if that makes any sense.

Time and time again I'm reminded that when enough care is taken on the recording side it really allows even "mediocre" equipment to sound amazing.  I don't know how my Shanling\Monolithic\Tannoy\Manley\VMPS\QSC combo compares to anything else, but all I can say is that if you want a "purist" recording using only a pair of mics that sounds big and warm then you should definitely check this out.  Tomorrow I've have to give it a go on the Gallos.

So don't waste your money on that stupid polished bubinga cable elevator you were going to buy.  Let it sit on the carpet and send Russell a check instead! Good recordings can make you not want to upgrade your gear!

[ooheadsoo]

Hey, how is it not "real" classical music?  Sounds like fun, I'll try to pick it up next on my list.

[nathanm]

No, meaning me not being a real fan of classical music in that I don't have much historical or technical knowedge of the genre, nor does it comprise a great deal of my collection.  That's what I meant.  

[lonewolfny42]

nathan...Maybe you'll be turning over a new leaf....

[Russell Dawkins]

Geez, Nathan, thanks for the compliments! I'll forward a link to the conductor.
Interesting what you said about it being so dynamic since I compressed it to the tune of 8dB overall, although 4dB of that is limiting, which doesn't sound like compression.  Maybe I should have sent you the uncompressed version! It's really antisocial - you would have to turn it up to 12 to get the same levels through the body of it that you are now getting at 11. I think precious few playback systems can actually play the opening chords at realistic levels without distorting - I know mine can't. Not obvious distortion, just that straining sensation. I'm hoping the SP Timepieces can.
Anyone reading this should know this is a CDR, not a CD, and has a label and info sheet, but no colour artwork.
Russell

[Woodsea]

So how can I get a copy of this?  This sounds like it is right up my alley!

[lonewolfny42]

So how can I get a copy of this?  This sounds like it is right up my alley!

I record mostly acoustic music of the classical and jazz variety and have a killer recording of a 95 piece orchestra playing Prokofiev and Tchaikovsky Romeo and Juliet Suites that I could mail out to anyone interested. $10 to cover costs and hassle. It was recorded in 1994 in Kiev with a Speiden stereo ribbon microphone ONLY (NO spot mics) and was released on the Russian Disc label, now defunct, as the first release of their "Audiophile Series", so this is legal, and I have the approval of the conductor to do this, at least until it is re-released. This is a true Blumlein recording and has impressed more than one seasoned professional with what "stereo" really means! Featured on the Royer demo CD.
Russell Dawkins

You can send Russell Dawkins a PM....

[nathanm]

nathan...Maybe you'll be turning over a new leaf....

Doubtful!   Classical music as a rule (in my view) will have moments of absolutely beautiful, soul-stirring themes\riffs whatever you wanna call them, which is then strung together by minutes upon minutes of mostly unrewarding filler where the orchestra just noodles and makes noises in the background while you doze off.  Just about every bit of classical stuff I own exhibits this phenomenon, which is why I say I'm not a real fan.  You have to be able to appreciate the filler bits.  (which are then to you, not filler!)  I never thought I had a 'short attention span' or anything, I TRY to like the whole thing, but if you ask me Prokofiev "blew his wad" with the Montagues and Capulets section and the rest just can't compete.  I can't blame him, it ain't easy coming up with killer riffs and sustaining that for a whole piece.  Same thing with Holst, Orff, Chopin, Beethoven etc. in my experience.  Awesome bits interspersed with muzak.

And surely I can't be the only one who feels this way - why is it that Royer put that same section on the demo disc?  Cause it's the coolest part, that's why! Ha!  Why do cartoons only use the ear-catching classic themes?  Well, because they're tuneful, not noodling.

Dynamics is an interesting thing.  I think many people have been conditioned to dislike it.  They want their music and the sound coming from the TV set at ONE general volume that feels comfortable.  If a peak comes in they get startled and rush for the volume knob.  My mom does this, drives me nuts.  I played her a bit of choral stuff from AIX Records.  Well, when the singers got loud she freaked out and went for the volume.  So then naturally the quiet bits you can't hear. *sigh*  I have a friend who is a notorious "level rider".  I can't stand being in a car with him because his fingers never leave the volume knob.  So maybe the hyper compression thing may not exclusively be a radio pissing contest but perhaps because people just don't want music that changes volume?  Dynamics lovers are a minority group of weirdos I guess.  (and yet everyone loves movies which are overall much more dynamic than popular music.  But then they put in those "night mode" compressors in there so as to not wake wifey or little Billy when the Death Star blows up.  Modern audio gear can be painfully democratic!)  

On this recording in particular, if I set the volume control where it usually is the whole thing would be generally hard to hear.  None of the quiet bits would be audible.  The little bell sounds and the occasional person inhaling or whatnot.  It would be interesting to hear the uncompressed version, to see just what 4db of limiting actually translates to the ears.  I would guess it is a very subtle difference.

[_scotty_]

Russell, what was the dynamic range before limiting and compression were
applied and where did the average level fall. Also do you know what the  
SPL was at the mic location during the loudest passages in the music?
Scotty

[Russell Dawkins]

Scotty,

I just checked to be sure, and going by the meters on my Masterlink, before compression the range from the violin section playing pianissimo to the entire orchestra playing fortissimo (actually, Prokofiev notated it pppp and ffff - one p and one f more than convention allowed) is around 55dB. On the opening chords (ffff) the max level is -1.57dB which transitions to the following pppp unison note by the 1st violins at -57dB.
When the orchestra is playing mezzopiano I am seeing -36dB. Mezzoforte, about -30dB. The bulk of the program ranges between -18 to -36dB. In the last 1m20s of the last movement of the Prokofiev multiple loud chords reach 0dB on the master tape which shows: 1) that digital overs have occured, although they are inaudible, and 2) the levels were pretty optimally set, given that I used an 18 bit A/D converter (Apogee AD500). These days, recording at 24 bit, I use -6dB for my peaks.
It also shows that, although very quiet for the most part, this recording cannot be any louder without compression.

Dan Banquer of R.E Designs (great amps) http://www.redesignsaudio.com/LNPA150.html found the levels unacceptably low and was hard pressed to believe I was not throwing away headroom, but I wasn't. To amuse myself and test the effect on him, I performed the compression on it which I now prefer and sent it to him. He loved it and left me a message on my answering machine saying "I have two words - print it!". I agree and when it is re-released it will have this compression on it, if I have my way. The initial release on Russian Disc had, at the insistance of the conductor, no compression. I agreed after informing him that it would take 20 years before many people would have systems capable of playing it at natural levels. That was 1994. Looks like I wasn't far off, what with recent developments in amplification.

As to your second question, I would have to guess. If you are talking in terms of true peaks (which in my experience simply don't register on any ordinary level meter) I would hazard a guess at 115dB which would read as 105 dB on the C scale of a typical decibel meter. I would imagine that, if the truth were known, there might be what I would call micro spuriae of as much as 125dB. When I say micro, I'm talking in terms of duration.
I applied 4dB of limiting to the peaks, which would only kick in perhaps 8 times on the whole disc, but raise averages 4dB. I then applied compression with the following characteristics for the technically inclined - attack, 125 msec; release, 1.5 sec; threshold, -27.5dB; ratio, 1.373:1; makeup gain, 4dB.

All of this boosts the average playing level 8dB, yet Nathan notes that the dynamic range sounds extreme, and even with this compression and his volume control in the normal position, the recording is "generally hard to hear" This is not background music, even with compression!

Incidentally, the tonality of the orchestra sounds correct only at near realistic levels. This is by design. Played quietly, the orchestra sounds a little muffled - a good demonstration of the Fletcher Munsen effect. The intention at the outset was to create a recording that invited being turned up, consequences be damned! This recording is intended to be played at natural levels.

I have had quite a few requests for both the compressed and uncompressed versions. I guess I should not be surprised. I would be curious, too, but I thought that was just me!

Hope this answers your questions.

Russell

[Rob Babcock]

Sounds really cool- is it for general sale?  I'd love to buy a copy, too!

[PeteG]

Russell, you have a PM.

Pete

[_scotty_]

Thank-you Russell, Theoretically I can reach 115db peaks with my current system 110watts/ch 8ohms and 95 db efficient loudspeakers. This does
not include any room gains or losses. It looks like I need more power to deal
with the uncompressed version.  I am curious as to why the compression is applied asymetrically with different attack vs release times?                          I would like to buy one each, please check your PMs.
Scotty

[nathanm]

When I played it on my Gallo system I had the SCPA 2 clicks away from the max.  If I had less efficient speakers it wouldn't have been loud enough.

Although I haven't A\Bed the uncompressed version yet, I would not be surprised if it is like Russell says, "antisocial".  You will likely think that it's just too quiet of a recording, but I think it demonstrates that the recording\playback medium just isn't quite analagous to the real event when the absolute limits of redbook audio are utilized.  (and with 24\96 or DSD even moreso I'd assume)  It's like we almost need some form of dynamic range compression to make listening to canned music in our homes more palatable.  At least in music where the real world dynamics are so extreme as in this piece.  Unfortunately it gets taken to the opposite extreme these days, with this peak limiting\compression stuff.

The only place I can see extreme compression making sense is in the car.  For example Russell's recording would be mostly useless if I played it in my car!  Same thing happened when I tried to listen to an opera recording in there.  With about 70db of road noise there's no way you're going to hear the quiet stuff, and when the loud stuff kicks in the system distorts.  But I'd rather have control over that in the car stereo itself.  Yeah, like that'll ever happen!  We don't need a compressor, we need an animated dolphin on that display! Whee!

[Russell Dawkins]

Hi Scotty,
I have attempted to apply what is termed a "levelling" characteristic to the compression by using the longest attack times that will control the elements I am seeking to control within the mix without affecting those elements I want to preserve. Too short an attack time will blunt very steep wave fronts, such as the sound of bow on string or trombone blat, in this context, air on a vocal in another context. Too short a decay time will create subtle "pumping". The intent was to uniformly and unobtrusively lower the gain thoughout loud sections, and that requires the much longer release times. Further, I think the values I tend to choose mirror the compression process in the human hearing mechanism.
Russell

[Russell Dawkins]

further to what Nathan posted,
in thinking this through a couple of months ago, I came to the conclusion that the compressed version of this disc resembles more closely what you would hear in the hall, since you would be sitting further away than the microphone was placed, which was 12' up and 15' back from the conductor. In the audience, a larger percentage of what you would hear would be the hall reverberation which is less dynamic in nature than the direct sound, so the overall dynamic range heard would be less than at the microphone position.
The uncompressed version would sound more as it would sound 12' up and 15' back, but you would not choose to listen from that position. This orchestra, remember, was large - 95 pieces and I "should" have been further away to conform to proper practice, where the entire orchestra fit within the front 90º quadrant. A compromise was made - the outer basses and 1st violins are just outside this arc and thus the imaging on them is not perfect in that they occupy no specific spatial position. This was to achieve a good ratio of direct to reverberent sound and the sacrifice was worth it, especially as the imaging on 5 of the 6 basses was kosher.
As to car audio, head units in cars really should have switchable compressors, as Yamaha, I think, did for this sort of recording. Radio stations do it for you, of course, but what about when you want to play a CD?
Russell

[_scotty_]

Russell do you still have any discs for sale.
PM me with the necessary details for purchasing these discs if you do.
Scotty

[kyyuan]

Russell do you still have any discs for sale.
PM me with the necessary details for purchasing these discs if you do.
Scotty

I'm interested in one, as well.  Thanks.

Ken

[nickspicks]

you gatta love a well exectuted blumlein recording.

crossed figure of 8s in a 4 leaf clover pattern.  Mmmm....
And Royers are a damn fine mic.  they make a stereo mic...wonder why that was not used (or was it).
that is the SF12 and 24 I believe.  wonderful guns.


you want sick sonics..
try and get yourself some recordings from a Soundfield ST-250 or other Soundfield mics.  they are the ultimate orchestral recording tool...but not many use them.  very expensive.

[Russell Dawkins]

Actually, Nick, it was the Speiden SF12, predecessor to the Royer. Externally, apart from the name plate on the Royer, they are identical, and very similar to the mid 50s B&O on which the Speiden was patterned. The difference in the Speiden was the ribbon was 0.2 microns thicker (2 vs 1.8, I believe) and the transformers were conventional Sowters instead of the toroidals Royer uses. Also, apparently, Royer sourced a higher grade of Neodymium than Bob Speiden used. All of these differences make the Royer about 2.5 - 3dB more sensitive than the Speiden. That all said, I understand my SF12, the one I used on this recording, was the most sensitive in the world after Bob's - the one he kept as a reference.
I had two Speidens. Now, the least sensitive of them has been modified to Royer specs by Royer and that's the one I am currently using. I had the luxury of three days to find the best spot for the mic at the sessions, while the orchestra rehearsed.
And, yes, image placement (and tonality) are two strengths of this recording.
Russell
P.S. I tried out the new SF24 last year in Armenia. This in conjunction with the Metric Halo MIO 2882 gave me the best string sound I have ever recorded. I haven't heard the current Soundfields, but I think the Speiden sounds better than the old one. I did a direct comparison on orchestra and string quartet back in 1992 and the consensus was the Soundfield sounded more "hi-fi" and was too thin and edgy. Sense of space was nice, though. I tried to post an image but I guess I will have to open a gallery. R.