On Thu, 2 Dec 2004 11:59:22 -0500, ScotFraser wrote
(in article ):

Now I'm forced to admit that absolute clarity and purity of sound is not
the only solution in all situations. Sometimes the perfectly accurate
sound is too sterile.

Well, yeah. Sometimes to achieve the appearance of transparency you have to
do
things that purists won't ever consider, on strictly philosophical grounds,
like EQ & compression. And microphones with personality can add spice. Pea
soup
made just from peas may be an accurate representation of the taste of peas,
but
pea soup with spices added is an interesting eating experience.

I'm still not buying into the idea of introducing
any distortion into the recording chain, but I can see how the shimmer of
an "interesting" microphone can add to an already good recording. BRBR

I think one has to simply get over ones opposition to close miking if that's
the flavor that gives us listening pleasure.


Scott Fraser

I agree. And if you're using microphones and speakers to do your work, you've
already given up any and all hopes for sonic purity. All that stuff is a myth
about the size of Lake Erie. We are custodians of the remnants of what our
devices slice off of reality. We never get the full loaf.

As a result, we used those crumbs to form our own personal meatloafs. In the
best of cases, everyone likes what we bring to the table. In the worst of
cases, well, did you ever notice that your own farts always smell better or
more interesting than any one elses?

Regards,

Ty Ford




-- Ty Ford's equipment reviews, audio samples, rates and other audiocentric
stuff are at www.tyford.com