Perhaps as proof that I am a bit weird, I have always thought of
the difference between analog and digital audio in terms of
furniture. I compare my vinyl albums to old, well-crafted solid
wood furniture, with dovetail joints, smooth-finished surfaces and
rounded edges, maybe even with a scratch or ding or two, but with
drawers and doors that open and close smoothly and effortlessly.
Some CDs, on the other hand, I think of as unfinished furniture,
particle board in unseen places, with rough surfaces on cheap wood
veneer with lots of little splinters sticking up in need of some
fine sandpaper or steel wood to knock them down, sharp edges and
corners, ill-fitting and loose joints, balky drawers and sticky
doors.
I have a pretty decent digital setup, a Philips 1000 SACD player,
but for some of the more egregiously "unfinished" CDs, a
widdershins twist of a knob on the preamp redirects the input to
the output of a decade-old Meridian 563 D/A converter connected to
the digital output of the Philips. I think of the Meridian as my
CD furniture finisher, because it at least rounds off the sharp
corners, sands the surfaces a bit, and maybe sometimes even lays
on a thin coat or shellac. The doors and drawers, though, still
need work on a lot of digital recordings.
Why should I think of digital cameras any differently? They all
seem to have splinters, rough edges, and the doors and drawers
still just don?t seem to fit right.
Maybe someday.
Walt, sitting on a 62-year-old analog butt in a 75-year-old solid
oak analog chair.
_____________________________________________________________
Never underestimate the power of stupid people in large numbers.
---------- Original Message ----------------------------------
From: Dorothée Rapp <om@xxxxxxxxxxxx>
Reply-To: olympus@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
Date: Thu, 06 Nov 2003 16:11:44 +0100
>Andrew Gullen schrieb:
>
>>Now that's interesting, and I think it's true. I suspect that
>>for all the work that goes into delivering high frequency
>>performance, people actually find it easier on the ears if this
>>is muted a bit.
>
>I don't know if it's to do with high frequency, which in itself
>is not necessarily *sharp. Very low frequencys tend to make us
>sick too :)
>Maybe it's the exactness that we feel is unnatural. Sort of too
>much USM ;) or so.
>
>> Come to think of it, sonic "warmth" and image "warmth" have a
>>similar feel also.
>
>I would guess that the *warm feeling is something we build up
>inside. And I think you're totaly right. But what is it that's
>provoking it? Certainly something too clean or sterile isn't.
>The colour rendition of the Zuikos - analog or digital -
definetely is warm.
>
>cheers
>:Doro
< This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List >
< For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx >
< Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html >
|