I'm not so sure I agree.  It's happened a few times that I was at a
concert and obtained an audience recording of the concert weeks after
the fact.  I distincly remember thinking to myself "wow, this recording
very faithfully captured the sound of the performance - flaws and all".

With pictures and video, framing in addition to visual quality come
into a play.  Take a crappy picture, crop it to frame it more properly,
and you have a totally different picture.  I've experienced this myself
many times.

Another thought - evaluating an audio recording in this manner is
complicated by the fact that both the playback and recording setups are
in play.  With amateur and stealth audio recording, equipment and
equipment placement have a huge bearing on the sound.  A crappy
recording played back on the best sounding multi-million dollar
audiophile's wet dream system will still sound like crap - just very
faithfully reproduced crap :-).

Yet another thought - how you feel about this depends on what "type" of
person/learner you are.  I am both visual and auditory, leaning toward
the auditory side.  Taking this into account, my thoughts on this
aren't surprising.  Take somebody that is very visual in their
learning/thinking (as perhaps you might be) and they have a completely
different opinion.


-- 
maggior

Rich
---------
Setup: 2 SB3s, 4 Booms, 1 Duet, 1 Receiver, 1 Touch, iPeng on iPod
Touch.  SuSE 11.0 Server running SqueezeBoxServer 7.5.0, MusicIP, and
SqueezeSlave.  
Current library stats: 33,696 songs, 2,720 albums, 499 artists.
http://www.last.fm/user/maggior
------------------------------------------------------------------------
maggior's Profile: http://forums.slimdevices.com/member.php?userid=9080
View this thread: http://forums.slimdevices.com/showthread.php?t=86577

_______________________________________________
audiophiles mailing list
[email protected]
http://lists.slimdevices.com/mailman/listinfo/audiophiles

Reply via email to