Shared room acoustics let 1920 phonograph demos fool live audiences

Evidence

These events avoided the circle of confusion problem (see Figure 1.8) because custom recordings were created for reproduction through specific loudspeakers at those events. But there is another factor. Most of the comparison demonstrations took place in concert halls or auditoriums. The hall sound is a huge embellishment to live performances, and it similarly benefits these reproduced sounds. Villchur (1964a) recognized this, saying: “Playback at the recording site may not sound as similar to the live music as at the actual concert, because the reverberation which will cloak both live and reproduced music equally is missing.” His choice of the word “cloak” is interesting, considering the normal meaning of the verb: to hide, cover, or conceal. — Toole, Floyd E, Sound reproduction- the acoustics and…, 398 (#contradicts, via linked claim)

Categorization

• XREF: connects to: Small playback rooms impose their own early reflections on recorded sound; Hall reverberation cloaks loudspeaker defects in live-versus-reproduced demonstrations — Toole, Floyd E, Sound reproduction- the acoustics and…, 398; Loudspeakers and rooms function together as a single audible system (+5 more)

Related

• Hall reverberation cloaks loudspeaker defects in live-versus-reproduced demonstrations (similarity 0.90)
• Small playback rooms impose their own early reflections on recorded sound (similarity 0.86)
• A small listening room’s first reflections mask the recorded acoustic space (similarity 0.86)
• Loudspeakers and rooms function together as a single audible system (similarity 0.86)
• Live-versus-reproduced demonstrations were contrived marketing that flattered flawed loudspeakers (similarity 0.85)
• Room acoustics act as another system modifying the instrument’s output (similarity 0.84)
• We mostly listen to recorded sound in small rooms, not performance halls (similarity 0.84)
• Room acoustics and presentation method alter how listeners perceive sounds (similarity 0.84)
• Recorded venue acoustics masked loudspeaker resonances that technical signals reveal (similarity 0.84)
• Recorded room ambience may distract listeners from evaluating raw loudspeaker quality (similarity 0.82)
• Reproducing the live venue experience has been the longstanding goal of audio enthusiasts (similarity 0.82)
• Room acoustics contaminate loudspeaker listening tests needing controlled environments (similarity 0.82)
• Reproduced recordings can reveal high-frequency detail inaudible in live concert halls (similarity 0.82)
• Master recordings must be evaluated in reflective rooms to translate to consumer listening (similarity 0.81)
• Loudspeakers and rooms act as a combined system that cannot be judged separately (similarity 0.81)

Broader Connections

• Small playback rooms impose their own early reflections on recorded sound #expands (0.85)
• Hall reverberation cloaks loudspeaker defects in live-versus-reproduced demonstrations #contradicts (0.82) — Toole, Floyd E, Sound reproduction- the acoustics and…, 398
• A small listening room’s first reflections mask the recorded acoustic space #corroborates (0.80)
• Room acoustics and presentation method alter how listeners perceive sounds #expands (0.80)
• Loudspeakers and rooms function together as a single audible system #expands (0.75)
• Room boundaries alter loudspeaker output through reflected image sources #expands (0.75)
• Room acoustics act as another system modifying the instrument’s output #expands (0.72)