As a matter of fact, the human visual system has an automatic white balance with lots of delay. Unlike perfect pitch, there is no way the human eye can discern pure grey. Hence the need for grey cards or to find known grey objects in street photos in order to get the white balance right. Etc., etc., your thinking reminds me of this 5 Mètres 80: An Absurd Animation Depicting a Herd of Giraffes Leaping Off a High Dive by Nicolas Deveaux | Colossal
There is no consistency whatsoever in people's preference for color gamut. I say so what if everyone in the family adjusts the color to their own taste. It is simply not possible to match exactly film to video monitor or to print.
I rely heavily on test equipment and standards to adjust to. Hopefully the pro's at the recording studio do same and then we all display/see the same. In some cases we just need to know some markers of limits to be under or within... like distortions, noise, tolerance, etc. Then testing will quickly root out the ones that i dont want to use. It is becoming fairly straight forward..... audio or video.
But there are complex issues with digital... like interfacing caused jitter and how to avoid causing it or eliminate it or reduce it to a threshold number. Good practices and digital standards adheard to in DAW/recording is needed, also. Then consistency in quality will be maintained.
The largest problem I have seen is under-estimating the visual or audio thresholds of detection.
THx-RNMarsh
Last edited:
It's still about consistency ... people might "prefer" hyped up colour at the time, because it's about intensifying the experience, making it "realer than real" - but that's just a gimmick, getting a hint of specialness for the immediate buzz, hit that it gives. What I look for is that over a long term living with the output of whatever that it doesn't feel unnatural - turn you attention to something completely different, go into another room for a bit, then suddenly return for an eyeful of the display - the instant you look at it does it have a cartoony, garish feel about it, is it "fake"? If so, then it's wrong ...
I have noticed an increase in your cynicism lately....but more humorous unless you take all this seriously
*zzzzzzzzzz*
se
The largest problem I have seen is under-estimating the visual or audio thresholds of detection.
And the largest problem I have seen is a bunch of self-anointed elitists grossly over-estimaing them with nothing but a bunch of hand-waving and empty claims.
se
Doesn't matter ... it's all about making something feel right for the particular individual. As regards sound, I want it to come across like the real thing, rather than a hyped up, fancified variation - the latter very soon wears thin, at least for me. And I find very well presented, "natural" sound highly satisfying - a special plus is that the volume can be wound up to very high levels with zero discomfort or irritation, assuming the system is up to it ...
True. Just about everyone can immediately pick the real thing from audio playback of something like a piano, it's trivially easy to do normally. So people can tell the difference, but the interest isn't there to fully understand why ...
I think you cannot find the answer solely by measuring volts, amps, freq., distortion, etc. It isnt a purely electronic issue. But, we have advanced in both audio and video with better film, better optics, better cameras, better microphones/amps, video resolution, better computers, software et al and I think we are closest ever to best sound and video. But we arent totally there as far as realism is concerned..... a lot better than the days when the A-7 Voice of the Theater speaker was the recording standard etc etc etc. It just keeps getting better step by step by step.
THx-RNMarsh
THx-RNMarsh
It's mainly an electronics issue IME - the ability to do correct dynamics in playback is essential, which means the peaks are fully there, and the the level of distortion of the low level information is minimal. This is why acoustic piano is so good for weeding out the pretenders, the attack of a big note is often compromised, and the fade out to silence doesn't gell. We have a Yamaha keyboard, which has a terrible piano sound from a cold start, is completely wrong to the ears - but after a proper, long-term conditioning and good isolation from outside interference comes on song - absolutely nothing has altered throughout this timeframe in the conventional electronics sense, yet the perceived sound changes enormously.
yes, yes. There are many facets to it and explained in a lot of different ways. Most all the improvements I mentioned over time is elelctronics, speakers, acoustics... engineering. i always start with engineering and tests.
I just dont ignor those who do not and evaluate by listening primarily -- that feedback is also important IMO. Esp if a large number of people over time agree on something they hear.
THx-RNMarsh
Last edited:
But Richard,
You'll hear those old classic movies exactly as intended with a pair of A7"s for that real theater experience. All you need is a perforated screen and an old pair of Mac or Altec tube amps and your there.
And those old tube pre/amps were sooo quiet... no hiss could be heard from them thru the A7's.
- Status
- Not open for further replies.