Re: [ARSCLIST] Poor sounding concert halls.

[Karl Miller <lyaa071@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>]

On Mon, 10 Apr 2006, Mike Richter wrote:

> My understanding is that they know why the great halls are great, but
> reproducing one is economically out of the question - too much money per
> seat. The solution today is to use electronics which can be tuned to
> simulate a fine hall; the results have been debatable even when a highly
> sophisticated setup has been set up by experts.

I believe that there are a few success stories, but, as in the case of
Philharmonic Hall at Lincoln Center...I am reminded of a cartoon in the
New Yorker...as I recall it pictured a dumpster filled with building
material and two people walking by. I think the caption read, "Well here
we go again."

As for the electronic "sound reinforcement..." I was amused the other day
when one of our TV announcers referred to the superb acoustic in our major
concert hall. I was amazed he did not know that there is no natural
acoustic in that hall and it is all done through electronics. I informed
him and suggested he take a tour of the hall...he was amazed. I sincerely
wonder if most of us listen closely enough to be able to tell the
difference...so it might as well be "memorex."

I have often wondered if organizations that usually make use of musicians
(opera, symphony, ballet, etc.) might not save some money by just using
canned music and hiring a bunch of non-musicians, dressing them up in
suits, loaning them fake instruments and having them make believe they are
playing...

Karl