Re: arsclist Re: Thoughts...

[Don Cox <doncox@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx>]

On 04/12/02, George Brock-Nannestad wrote:

> However, why not educate the listeners that original shellac noise 
> is their guarantee of authenticity, as is a cough with all its 
> reverberation in the sonic environment of a real-life situation. I am 
> terrified of the present processors made available for *live* sound 
> transmissions, some of which made by CEDAR, which are able to 
> fake a clean sound on the fly, because they remove the traces of 
> "unwanted" signals that might be the clue to a real event. I detest 
> an edited "reality". I have a forensic attitude.

There is a fundamental difference between noises that were in the air at
the event and hiss and crackles that are present only on the recording
(or broadcast).

I can see absolutely no reason to conserve noise in the recording, so
long as the original sounds are not affected.

You are suggesting that it would be better to make a transfer from a
noisy pressing than a quiet one.

Regards
-- 
Don Cox
doncox@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx

-
For subscription instructions, see the ARSC home page
http://www.arsc-audio.org/arsclist.html
Copyright of individual posting is owned by the author of the posting and
permission to re-transmit or publish a post must be secured
from the author of the post.