The Best Loudspeaker

hearing the recording

Reading the online audio forums you frequently see questions asking about the best speakers for rock & roll, or the best for classical, or the best for you name the category, style, genre. It’s an obvious question. Different musical styles definitely have different characteristics and place different demands on the loudspeaker. And each of us has experienced listening to speakers that sound pretty good playing this, and not so much playing that. Sounds logical.

There are also various schools of speaker design. One that stands out is the “mimic a musical instrument” school. We’re playing music, therefore it follows that a speaker should act like a musical instrument. Sounds logical.

Who’s to refute logic?

No one. In this case, there is nothing to refute, because there is no logic behind the “best loudspeaker for fill-in-the-blank” school, or the “mimic a musical instrument” school. In both cases a conclusion was drawn from faulty assumptions, not faulty logic. Asking the wrong questions guarantees the wrong answers.

Back up for a moment.

Q. What is a loudspeaker supposed to do?
A. Convert the electrical waveform from the amp into the corresponding acoustic waveform for our ears.

There’s nothing musical about that. It’s not trying to create music. It’s not even trying to recreate music. The goal is to transduce the electrical signal into sound waves without adding or subtracting anything. A speaker that mimics a musical instrument will be adding its own resonant sound to the signal—wrong. A speaker that sounds good for R&R, but not classical is incapable of clear transduction of the signal. Its distortions are “good” for R&R, but disastrous on classical. A speaker that sounds good reproducing small acoustic ensemble, but not brassy big band or large chorus, is one that gets overloaded by more complex signals. While its distortions are not objectionable with simpler music, maybe even pleasant, they get amplified with the size of the ensemble and become unpleasant. A speaker that’s good for “blank,” is only, barely good ‘nough for anything.

The fact is, a loudspeaker doing its job will sound equally good on all types of music. It will not add its own sound, like a musical instrument, or be limited by the demands of various styles, as in getting bogged down with complexity. It will not reinterpret or alter the EQ. It will transduce accurately the signal provided. Nothing more, nothing less, nothing musical about it.

Read parts one and two of the Hearing series — [The Color of Sound] & [Pro Gear]

Watch a revealing documentary about the pop music business in the ’60s and ’70s. Tells how many of the big stars of the day only sang the vocals. Leaks a few recording studios trade secrets for getting a BIG sound out of a small ensemble. Makes public why “live” concerts never sounded as good as the recording, and why getting that concert sound at home is not only impossible, it’s nothing desirable to emulate : [The Wrecking Crew].

Posted in Audio, Discover | Tagged , , , , | Leave a comment

Marie, Marie, Quite Contrarie

Jazz singers are not on the top of the charts, however, a few names get regularly tossed about. Not a single one of those commonly repeated names have a strong sense of individuality. I’m not even going to bother mentioning their names. If you’re a Jazz listener, you know; if not, it’s no matter. They’re boring mimics of some middle of the road concept of Jazz vocalization. They sing songs as pallidly as the paper they’re written on. That’s not Jazz.

Jazz is about taking someone else’s music and making it your own. Turning it into a new revelation of what the song is about, or using the skeleton of the music to form a new figure around it. Some argue that few ever did that, and even fewer do it today. I’d have to agree, the most creative, imaginative, and original rarely made it to the top of the charts even back when Jazz was popular. Reason being, big hits and big names don’t make it on big individuality. They make it on keeping in line. Those who stand alone are often left alone.

René Marie is out of line—too far to make the top 20 list of female Jazz singers. No matter, many on the list are dead—you might say, like Jazz. History has proven, though, that music never dies. It may pass in and out of style, but art that speaks always finds an ear that listens.

Let your ears listen—

I Only Have Eyes for You

Moonray

Strange Fruit

Is Marie a contrarian? She doesn’t sound like anyone else. She puts a pronounced personal spin on standards. She lays strong expressive nuances into her voice. She hasn’t buckled to commercial pressures. She doesn’t play it safe. She speaks out. She speaks up. That’s not the middle ground; that’s not being a conformist. Recently she’s gotten some media attention—I’m going to ignore it. It may simply be the scarcity of others on the playing field. It may be she’s finally getting some deserved attention. It may be a fluke. No matter, she’s the only living Jazz singer on my list. She reminds me of another out-of-line singer, Betty Carter, not by her singing style, but by her living style, and her artistic integrity.

I had a hard time deciding on the cuts to sample. There are too many powerful pieces on this album. Don’t cheat yourself with individual downloads. If your ears can hear her, get the whole album.

(||) Rating — Music : A ║ Performance : A ║ Recording : A- ║
 René Marie, Vertigo, MAXJAZZ, 2001

See [Betty]

Posted in Discover, Music reviews | Tagged , , , | Leave a comment