Rerurn to Romy the Cat's Site


In the Forum: Didital Things
In the Thread: Credibility of digital information
Post Subject: Credibility of digital informationPosted by el`Ol on: 5/25/2008
 Romy the Cat wrote:
 tuga wrote:
I am now more inclined to describe that sound as a portrait taken in broad daylight with some overpowering fill-in flash (I believe nowadays this technique is quite fashionable)... But the model wasn't wearing any makeup.
Wonderful, wonderful, wonderful. I even experience an epistolary envy that I did not come up with it myself. However, I would very much argue the concept of “system specifically tailored for absolute faithfulness to the recording”. I feel that “faithfulness to recording” is very fealty concept. I would not develop this idea about it in this Stahl –Tek’s thread, but I think that it was worth to state my disagreement.

The caT




Hello Tuga, hello Romy!


I was about to stuble across an other language deficit, when my Google toolbar told me "faithfulness" can be used both in the sense of honesty or credibility. Even if the recording chain is perfect, honesty of the playback chain means revealing the faults of the format, like filter artefacts, quantization noise, or aliasing rests due to the slow reaction of long FIR filters. Most of the time I tend towards getting the maximum information out of a recording, including some unwanted parts. Sometimes I remember my encounter with the Linn CD12 many years ago, that seemed to hide everything that could sound electronic or un-natural behind some fine mist. In my ears Burmester tends in this direction, but from my limited experience with highend gear I would say this philosophy has not become very popular since then. I am currently in the mood of thinking this is the real thing because it makes the given information more credible.

Regards,
Oliver

Rerurn to Romy the Cat's Site