[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: [ARSCLIST] Dynamic-frequency Range
Trying to make recordings sound like "real life" is a trap that has 
resulted in thousands of deadly boring records. TV doesn't look like 
what my eyes see, but that's not the point of it. It's lots of little 
dots on a piece of glass that approximate an image, but as long as it is 
funny or interesting, I still enjoy it. Realism isn't the point of 
making records either, despite Edison and his silly "tone tests" or 
Philips and their "blind" (maybe deaf is the better word) comparisons 
between CDs and a live string quartet.
I think the best people figured out very early that making records is 
like making any sort of art and it could be anything they wanted it to 
be and "photorealism" was not a criteria for quality.
David Seubert
UCSB
Tom Fine wrote:
If you consider that, for instance, an Edison Gem player has a horn 
with a bell about the size of a flugelhorn, one can see how the medium 
did not allow anywhere near fidelity to a piano. I've heard cylinders 
played on the more deluxe types with huge horns and they still sound 
awful to my ears. A musician who actually cared about how his 
instrument sounded, especially someone like a solo piano player who 
cares about dynamics and subtle shading of notes, would want to avoid 
the medium altogether. I guess cylinders were something different in 
their day, obviously greatly admired for the leap of being able to 
time-shift a performance and have repeated hearings of something, but 
sheesh, I can't see how anyone who has grown up in the high fidelity 
era can stand to listen to them. 10 grades worse than 78's, and I 
think you all know how I feel about most 78's so I won't belabor that 
one. I'm talking specifically about using the medium for music, not 
for spoken word or sung "skits" (usually racist and none too funny by 
today's standards) that cylinders were also used for. In those cases, 
no better or worse than most modern AM radio (ie not too good but the 
words are usually intelligable). I know, I know, they're historic 
artifacts, which is why I'm glad they're preserved and people still 
care about them. Just not ever my choice for quality listening time.
-- Tom Fine