In 1974, when Earthquake came to the theatres, we experienced "Sensurround" for the first time. I recall feeling the bass in the room as we watched the action unfold before us. The rumbling of the engulfing bass added to the "real" feeling of the movie and contributed to the experience of watching the movie. Although not necessarily an advanced nor refined sound, the audiences were treated to very low frequencies produced by subwoofers in a studio. Excellent acting and cool sounds did little to make up for a weak plot, and the movie has found a small cult following along with The Towering Inferno and other disaster films of the 70s. As an aside, the film included an outstanding performance by the former revivalist Marjoe Gortner, famous for his childhood role as an added enticement for more money during revivals with this father. But I have digressed from the purpose of this essay.
As a young teenager destined for a musical life, I was not aware that "Sensurround" (a goofy but effective technique) would actually change the way we hear music and thus alter the musical world perhaps forever. The subwoofer became the norm for sound enhancement and we now hear the subwoofer in most musical performances that are not naturally acoustical. Ironically, despite its frequent use and obvious benefits, the subwoofer does not really produce comprehensive, musical tones by our human definition. The sounds of a subwoofer are too low for human reproduction and aside from the occasional replicated anomalous sounds in nature, not fully understood by our ears. While one could argue that the fundamental tones of the natural harmonic series are occurring all the time in nature and in the atmosphere, our limited ability to hear all tones around us prevent us from identifying the extreme low and high frequencies. Not unlike atoms which we know exist but cannot see, fundamental tones are not always audible, but by virtue of their foundational existence, are essential to sounds we actually can hear and understand.
Subwoofers greatly enhance the bass of a musical ensemble and open up the sound to a richness not previously experienced prior to the subwoofer. It is what makes our bodies want to move, it makes us feel the music, it provides a wide range of sound that amplifies not only the sound but the entire audible experience as well. It is also what annoys us when a "loud" automobile is nearby, and it can spark fear in us when we are near a jet airplane or when a tornado is close. In short, the subwoofer has changed the way we hear and respond to music, and there is no going back. It is here to stay and music (many would argue) is better for it.
But the human experience of making music cannot replicate the subwoofer in any kind of natural way. Before explaining further, I must qualify that a large pipe organ as well as a few musical instruments such as a contrabasson, contraclarinets, and bass drums do come close to this replication although with limitations. Admittedly, having experienced pipe organs in large cathedrals, I believe I responded to the sound much in the same way I have felt the subwoofer in rock concerts and at the showing of Earthquake many years ago. These examples aside, concerts of people singing or playing instruments without sound enhancement cannot have the added benefit of the subwoofer. An acoustic environment is certainly appealing but only insofar as the human can perform well. This is not to disparage the remarkable abilities of great musical performers, but it is to say that sound enhancement has dramatically altered societal preferences for music making. With exceptions, we are no longer as enamored with the natural acoustic sound as we once were. We have been given a taste of amplification, of mixing, of effects, of new frequencies, of sound control, and of subwoofers and most people like it.
Herein lies the cultural clash: between those who prefer the natural acoustical sound made by humans without electronic enhancement, and those who prefer some kind of electronic manipulation of the sound. This tension is felt in churches, in academic circles, in concert venues, and in music education where we teach an acoustical approach to music but are subject to the joyful or, in some cases, subversives whims of sound enhancement and sound managers. Few academically trained musicians have knowledge in or even interest in electronics, amplification, woofers, subwoofers, frequencies, or really anything besides excellence in performance. In a way, however, their rejection or at least lack of consideration is their loss, for well-managed sound enhancement can certainly add to most performances. If this is a battle between natural acoustics and sound enhancement, who will win and will the cultures ever merge?
In the end, the subwoofer improves the overall quality of the experience for the listener and most people will agree that it provides depth and warmth to the music. In defense of acoustically pure music performances in an ideal space for natural music making, it sure is easier to deal with than having to worry about sound systems. Perhaps the clash we musicians feel is partly about the fear of giving up a modicum of control to sound managers who have little musical training. But that, my friends, is yet another subject for discussion.
No comments:
Post a Comment