Rerurn to Romy the Cat's Site

Antonio J. wrote:

If you face audio as the means to get everything that was recorded, then you need no high-end devices, get some professional gear and you're done.

Antonio, you did nailed it but with a minor correction. If you need a factual, a materialistic, an accurate representation of everything that was recorded then you might use any audio devise and the result will be only upon you (or somebody else) sell to you the definition of reproduction success. However, the “everything that was recorded” is NOT musical representation of performing event. The “everything that was recorded” is just a projection of the original event into a language of physical, mathematical or acoustic approximations.  The approximations describe Really but it is not Really itself and pointing attention to description of Really we unavoidably take out aim out of the Really itself. It is like an infant is crying because it experiences hanger for instance and you recognize the sound of the baby’s voice without recognizing the needs to feed it. The TAS does with this vision of “Absolute Sound” exactly that – they eliminated the commodity that they can’t trade - the human consciousness - and they use the “Absolute Sound” as a set of external approximations that compare Really and the clone of Really. The “Absolute Sound” doe not exist in this situation, what exists is ONLY the “Relative Sound”. The true “Absolute Sound” is a perception and it could not exist without awareness of listener.  The TAS version of “Absolute Sound” is in fact “Relative Sound” spiced with ever-changing industry literature to wrap the “Relative Sound” into the glossy paper of “Absolute Sound”.

Antonio J. wrote:

But if you assume audio as a means to get from the recorded music the essence that better comunicates with yourself, not trying to mimic a reality which is unattainable, then you're into a completely different practice.

Yes, I would not be able to express it better myself. Actually, Guy did express it better than me in his post above. What Lucien Freud does is in my view is the highest form of artistic expressiveness imaginable and I am very glad that someone sees some similarity between what Lucien Freud does with painting and what I am trying to do with audio. Lucien Freud paintings are like the Gabriel Márquez’s Melquiades - the gypsy who poses the “another knowledge” and that saw other side of the sings – the essential core side – the side the made everything else derivative. Can the Lucien Freud’s paintings be considered as “Relative Depicturing” or “Absolute Depicturing” (read Sound)? The answers would wary depending of what you are doing. If you are a little whore who made own objective to sell audio devises then what Lucien Freud does is very far from “Absolute Depicturing”. You would probably stick with the painters who practice Realistic Painting techniques and would be abscessed how a painting is differ from the same photograph. That is where the “Relative Depicturing” rules and it where TAS’s awareness operates. However if one have interest into the eccentric character of the things then we are in the “completely different practice” and in completely different set of demands. Here is the realm where “Absolute Depicturing” aka “Absolute Sound” might be possible.

Rerurn to Romy the Cat's Site