Better sound coming to Target Center

If all goes according to plan, Celine Dion will sing with new clarity for Target Center concertgoers when she performs on Halloween eve in Minneapolis.

If that happens, a city-paid upgrade of nearly a million dollars may have been worth the money.

Installation started in late August of the equivalent of more than three acres of sound-dampening surfaces designed to raise Target Center's much-maligned sound quality to match its arch rival, St. Paul's Xcel Energy Center.

But will this be enough? One local sound expert doesn't think so.

The city's acoustical consultant promises "large improvement" in the die-off times for voices and instruments, as well as improvements in the echoes that affect maybe 20 percent of the seats.

This $926,000 contract will cut reverberation time -- the time it takes for a sound to drop 60 decibels--by at least one second at lower frequencies, according to consultant calculations. That would mean a crisper sound.

The city also is spending another $52,000 to replace aging draperies covering the arena's vomitories -- the passages between seats and concourses -- to keep sound from bouncing off the concourse walls.

Testing, testing

The city's consultant built a computer model to mimic the room's configurations, but it didn't do an actual listening test to show how the various improvements would sound.

That process, called auralization, is crucial, said Steve Orfield, an acoustic expert consulted by the Star Tribune. Orfield boasts that his Orfield Laboratories in Minneapolis are the most highly equipped among acoustical consultants in the country. He wasn't involved in the Target project.

"You can actually hear the room before and after," Orfield said. "If you're spending all the money, can anybody notice the difference? Can the public walk in and say, 'Wow! This has changed!'"

Steve Kvernstoen, whose firm analyzed the city-owned, privately run Target Center, said auralization isn't practical. "In a big space like that it would be too complex and very doubtful you'd get reasonable results," he said.

Target vs. Xcel

But the basic box still was designed for playing basketball, and it's one of the NBA's oldest.

In contrast, the newer Xcel took a look beyond hockey, according to Jack Larson, vice president and general manager of that arena.

"From the beginning, the planning stages of the arena, acoustics was part of the plan. There were some things done in the facility as they built it," Larson said.

For example, Xcel's suites lack glass, which means less hard surface for sound to bounce from. Larson said that makes it easier for technicians to mix concert sound. Target's boxes have glass fronts, although Kvernstoen said the arena tries to get them opened up so that only one-third of the glass is exposed.

Concert promoters were diplomatic about the sound differences. "In both rooms I've done shows that sounded great and I've done shows that didn't sound great," said Tommy Ginoza of Live Nation. "A lot depends on the tour's sound guy."

"It can't hurt," said Randy Levy of Rose Presents of the Target improvements. "If it works and makes the building sound better, the fans and the bands will be happy. We don't hear too much resistance to the Target Center. We do hear so much positive about the Xcel."

Much of the blame for bad sound can be placed on the bands themselves, said Orfield, who tested and then wrote a manual for setting up sound in the Metrodome.

He said he could hardly hear the piano in one Elton John concert at Target, just the bass. "Most of the time people come in and bring these big banks of speakers for speakers. And they punch the bottom end up too high, and they punch the volume up too high," he said.

The city is consciously choosing Celine Dion, a different kind of artist for showcasing Target Center's new acoustics on Oct. 30.

Orfield hopes they're right.

"If the average citizen from Minneapolis can't come in and hear a difference, it's a failure," he said.

Steve Brandt • 612-673-4438