The vinyl illusion ?

[Barry]

I'm sure Dr Baylis could be approached to design one - he designed the wind-up radio and the wind-up torch.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Trevor_Baylis

[paulf-2007]

But then, neither does the picture on any TV. It simply creates an illusion of reality, as does a hi-fi system, when reproducing music.

So does that mean we should just watch programmes on a 30-year old portable TV from Tesco, or listen to music on a wind-up gramophone?

Marco.

i must have told you a hundred million times not to exaggerate Marco

[Marco]

Sorry, sir!

Marco.

[Haselsh1]

So when you print your photographs, you don't bother to focus the enlarger correctly, or perhaps use coloured filters?

Really not sure what your point is with this comment...?

[Jimbo]

So after 300 posts are you any the wiser Shaun?

[Qwin]

There aren't many sound engineers that would disagree with the statement that digital is more accurate to the source than analogue.
That doesn't mean that analogue doesn't sound nice and in many cases adds a desirable effect. I joked about it a while back on another thread, saying it would be nice if they could crack what was special about analogue tape and build a filter to replicate this. Little did I know that mastering engineers and producers have been using devices to achieve this for quite a while. Look up the Burl B2 Bomber ADC and DAC on YouTube and see how they rave about the similarity to the old tape sound.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=s9CXBcLLR0U

[Barry]

Really not sure what your point is with this comment...?

As stated by you in a previous post:

... As I have said before, my only interest is in emotion derived from the music which is derived from the hi-fi and the way it is reproduced. I am not interested in how accurate or not the system may be. ....

I wondered if your disinterest in the accuracy of your audio system applied to your photography. Not so much with the taking of a photograph (the source), but with the subsequent reproduction of the image. Is the printing of the negative also part of the creative process, or should it be a perfect 'mechanical' reproduction? If not, would you frame your photographs using tinted glass, or view them under a coloured light source?

Probably not a useful analogy thinking about it.

[RothwellAudio]

There aren't many sound engineers that would disagree with the statement that digital is more accurate to the source than analogue.
That doesn't mean that analogue doesn't sound nice and in many cases adds a desirable effect. I joked about it a while back on another thread, saying it would be nice if they could crack what was special about analogue tape and build a filter to replicate this. Little did I know that mastering engineers and producers have been using devices to achieve this for quite a while. Look up the Burl B2 Bomber ADC and DAC on YouTube and see how they rave about the similarity to the old tape sound.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=s9CXBcLLR0U

In the recording world - certainly at the smaller studio or amateur end of the spectrum - the term "analogue sound" is almost universally taken to mean "a good thing". At the extreme there are studios that use only analogue gear from start to finish, but more often you'll see people using any number of VST plug-ins which claim to emulate old valve compressors or emulate tape saturation or emulate the EQ of early Neve mixing desks or whatever. The idea of analogue seems to have an enduring appeal mixed with romance and nostalgia for a time before many of today's musicians and recording engineers were even born. Why? Because analogue sounds better? Or is simply because people believe what they want to believe?

[Marco]

As stated by you in a previous post:

I wondered if your disinterest in the accuracy of your audio system applied to your photography. Not so much with the taking of a photograph (the source), but with the subsequent reproduction of the image. Is the printing of the negative also part of the creative process, or should it be a perfect 'mechanical' reproduction? If not, would you frame your photographs using tinted glass, or view them under a coloured light source?

Probably not a useful analogy thinking about it.

I think it's a perfectly good analogy. Shaun's an excellent photographer (I love his work), and so no doubt cares very much about the final quality of his images.

However, it would be interesting to know if he applies equal amounts of attention to detail/diligence with his hi-fi hobby as he does with his photographic one

Marco.

[struth]

Visual appeal is similar to a Sonic one for me. If I take a picture I might well adjust it in a lightroom or in a post studio to achieve what I was after. I might do same with music too is similar way. If I cant do it in studio I might post studio
Its the artist in us I guess.... Some want to make stuff using their art to sound as they want it too.