Carl Nielsen Symphonies

[PJPJ]

....... but when clipping occurs on isolated peaks in real music the effect isn't always as marked and it can be masked by the complex timbre of the music and might not be noticeable.

When it's there and not immediately noticed, it makes itself felt with early onset listener fatigue.

[johnb]

Back to the Nielsen!

I apologise for this post - it would have been more suited to The Techie Board (or PMs).

It seems that, with at least the Chung Nielsen 2 and 3 discs, there was an intention to portray a greater than normal perceived dynamic range. One option would be to expand the dynamic range downwards, making the quiet passages on the CD quieter than the norm. The other option would be to expand the dynamic range upwards, making the climaxes louder than normal on a CD, or a combination of the two. The problem with increasing the dynamic range upwards is that the CD (and indeed any digital medium) has a ceiling beyond which you cannot go. The dynamic range in most classical CDs is carefully engineered so as to be graduated from the loudest to the quietest, within the limits imposed by the medium. However, one way to achieve a perceived increase in dynamic range upwards would be to change that graduation so that more of the louder passages are towards the upper end of dynamic range. This has the required effect but, at the same time, IMO distorts the balance of the dynamic range. This appears to be the approach taken with the Chung Neilsen 3, so much so that the louder passages are pushed into clipping.

Anyway, these are some graphical representations of the first movement of Nielsen Symphony No 3:

1) The Blomstedt, SFSO.
The graduation of dynamic range is fairly typical of classical recordings



2) The Chung, Gotttenburg SO
Note how much louder the loud passages are and how, at times, the peaks form a kind of "plateau" at 0dB, the limit of the digital media.



3) The Chung, Gottenburg SO showing where clipping occurs
Each thin orange line indicates clipping. The thicker bands of orange lines are because there are so many clips that the lines merge.
(The SoundForge clipping detector was set to "Detect Audible Clipping", i.e. 5 or more samples at 0dB.)



4) Chung, Gottenburg SO - showing expanded detail of clipping at around 1 min 42 secs

[Bryn]

John, can you please advise what audio extraction method you used? It EAC with no modification of recorded dynamics then there is cledarly something very wrong with that got onto that disc.

[johnb]

Bryn, yes it was EAC and there was no modification to the dynamics.

[Ferretfancy]

There is a general issue here, and that is whether mixes are monitored in something approaching domestic circumstances, both at the original recording venue, and in mastering for CD. I suspect that engineers using today's technology tend to monitor at very high level, where extreme dynamics can be heard as acceptable providing their ears can stand it. High level monitoring can also affect perceived balance.

I was not a music mixer in my job, but when working on documentaries I regularly checked the sound on modest equipment to make sure that the various components would be heard as intended for home listeners. In my view, excessive dynamic range is not always desirable. We live in domestic environments, usually without the luxury of acoustically treated living conditions or dedicated listening rooms, and most of us do not have sophisticated measuring devices to detect clipping and so forth.

Often, but not always, I find myself more comfortable with issues from analogue sources, where the dynamic range was intended for LP masters. This is not because of all the arguments about vinyl versus CD, but simply because I need not fear upsetting my neighbours in order to hear quieter passages in the music.

Listen to the woodwind at a concert in a good hall, do they ever sound as far away and ethereal in pp passages as they do on disc? As an example, at a Festival Hall concert in November, and of course that is not a perfect hall, Osmo Vanska and the LPO produced beautifully nuanced sound at the beginning of the slow movement of Rachmaninov's Third Symphony, at all times audible and secure. The later climaxes were completely satisfying without battering us into submission, why do so many modern recordings of music like this have us reaching for the volume control to control the exaggerated dynamics ?

[johnb]

Incidentally, today I've listened to both the Chung and Blomstedt/SFSO recordings of Nielsen 3 again and I do find the Blomstedt preferable to the Chung but, to be honest, neither made me fall in love with the piece or like it as much as I felt I should.

Finally, I remembered that I had captured the Colin Davis/LSO R3 broadcast (in HD sound) from November 2011 and played that.

I've no idea what Nielsen aficionados thought of the performance but to me it felt "right", much more so than either of the others. I suspect it would have disappointed people looking for a hard driven reading (and so many Nielsen performances are hard driven) or those wanting to be bludgeoned round their lug-holes but I loved the way Colin Davis let the music breath, the way he balanced the climaxes with passages of delicacy and repose, and how he brought a real sense of exhilaration especially to the first movement and closing pages.

I will definitely be buying the CD when it comes out, though I suspect my preference for Colin Davis will put me beyond the pale.

[johnb]

Jayne,

If you are still reading this thread - I for one do hope you will return to contribute to this forum. Although I don't post that often I keep an eye on the forum and have always found your posts interesting and stimulating, even when I've disagreed with them.

[teamsaint]

There is a general issue here, and that is whether mixes are monitored in something approaching domestic circumstances, both at the original recording venue, and in mastering for CD. I suspect that engineers using today's technology tend to monitor at very high level, where extreme dynamics can be heard as acceptable providing their ears can stand it. High level monitoring can also affect perceived balance.

I was not a music mixer in my job, but when working on documentaries I regularly checked the sound on modest equipment to make sure that the various components would be heard as intended for home listeners. In my view, excessive dynamic range is not always desirable. We live in domestic environments, usually without the luxury of acoustically treated living conditions or dedicated listening rooms, and most of us do not have sophisticated measuring devices to detect clipping and so forth.

Often, but not always, I find myself more comfortable with issues from analogue sources, where the dynamic range was intended for LP masters. This is not because of all the arguments about vinyl versus CD, but simply because I need not fear upsetting my neighbours in order to hear quieter passages in the music.

Listen to the woodwind at a concert in a good hall, do they ever sound as far away and ethereal in pp passages as they do on disc? As an example, at a Festival Hall concert in November, and of course that is not a perfect hall, Osmo Vanska and the LPO produced beautifully nuanced sound at the beginning of the slow movement of Rachmaninov's Third Symphony, at all times audible and secure. The later climaxes were completely satisfying without battering us into submission, why do so many modern recordings of music like this have us reaching for the volume control to control the exaggerated dynamics ?

FF, I think this was touched on in another thread, (can't remember which)and its an important issue. For listening under less than perfect conditions, (which is most of us most of the time) too many discs seem to suffer from the problem you talk about.

[jayne lee wilson]

Incidentally, today I've listened to both the Chung and Blomstedt/SFSO recordings of Nielsen 3 again and I do find the Blomstedt preferable to the Chung but, to be honest, neither made me fall in love with the piece or like it as much as I felt I should.

Finally, I remembered that I had captured the Colin Davis/LSO R3 broadcast (in HD sound) from November 2011 and played that.

I've no idea what Nielsen aficionados thought of the performance but to me it felt "right", much more so than either of the others. I suspect it would have disappointed people looking for a hard driven reading (and so many Nielsen performances are hard driven) or those wanting to be bludgeoned round their lug-holes but I loved the way Colin Davis let the music breath, the way he balanced the climaxes with passages of delicacy and repose, and how he brought a real sense of exhilaration especially to the first movement and closing pages.

I will definitely be buying the CD when it comes out, though I suspect my preference for Colin Davis will put me beyond the pale.

Yes, the LSO/Davis 3rd was most enjoyable on those webcasts, the 2nd even better. Too many Nielsen performances are indeed overdriven, even parts of the sacrosanct SFSO/Blomstedt cycle. Kuchar, Chung, even Schonwandt find a greater range of mood and colour - breathe and relax more lyrically when apt. Nielsen is not just about energy.

Robert von Bahr's comments and the soundforge analysis seem irreconcilable, but to be truly scientific one would want to see the Chung disc ripped and analysed a second time with different tools. (And to be REALLY scientific, by a different person...)
That still leaves the problem of all those very positive reviews and contrasting responses, but that has to be down to ears, rooms and systems (amplifier power/headroom especially).

Johnb - there is one crosscheck you might care to try, by downloading the same Espansiva movement in its current lossless Flac format from eclassical and seeing if it behaves similarly. It only costs $1.67!

[BBMmk2]

JLW, great to see you herer again! much missed!! Outof thye three you mentioned, what one brings out the best? Chung, Schwondt or Kuchar?

[PJPJ]

Bryn, yes it was EAC and there was no modification to the dynamics.

I don't find your graphs surprising - the Chung sounds to me just like it looks. If it sounds wonderful to others, so be it. Jayne, your opinion of this recording is extremely positive, so why not analyse your copy? Perhaps johnb and I have faulty pressings.

[PJPJ]

JLW, great to see you herer again! much missed!! Outof thye three you mentioned, what one brings out the best? Chung, Schwondt or Kuchar?

Do sample Schonwandt's cycle where you can. He actually follows the score without being po-faced about it, and is too much of a musician to distort the score just to have something "new" and "different" to say.

[BBMmk2]

Do sample Schonwandt's cycle where you can. He actually follows the score without being po-faced about it, and is too much of a musician to distort the score just to have something "new" and "different" to say.

Thank you PJPJ.

[HighlandDougie]

His Pye recording is I believe back in the catalogue on a Barbirolli Society release.

Best €5.98 I've spent in some time. I'd forgotten how good this was as a performance. The occasional bit of rough playing adds to its character - and the sound (EMI Phoenixa 1990 reissue) is, unsurprisingly, miles better than the (mono) Pye Golden Guinea LP which was my introduction to the work.

[amateur51]

Jayne,

If you are still reading this thread - I for one do hope you will return to contribute to this forum. Although I don't post that often I keep an eye on the forum and have always found your posts interesting and stimulating, even when I've disagreed with them.

Seconded