home *** CD-ROM | disk | FTP | other *** search
- Path: sparky!uunet!munnari.oz.au!ariel.ucs.unimelb.EDU.AU!ucsvc.ucs.unimelb.edu.au!lugb!news
- Newsgroups: rec.audio
- Subject: Re: analog pride
- Message-ID: <1992Dec22.010918.5848@lugb.latrobe.edu.au>
- From: MATGBB@LURE.LATROBE.EDU.AU (BYRNES,Graham)
- Date: Tue, 22 Dec 1992 01:09:18 GMT
- Sender: news@lugb.latrobe.edu.au (USENET News System)
- References: <1992Dec18.102248@trc.amoco.com> <1992Dec18.205458.14740@news.ysu.edu>
- Organization: La Trobe University
- In-Reply-To: joe@avs.com's message of Fri, 18 Dec 1992 20:54:58 GMT
- X-News-Reader: VMS NEWS 1.24
- Lines: 25
-
- In <1992Dec18.205458.14740@news.ysu.edu> joe@avs.com writes:
-
- > Norman P. Tracy (znpt01@trc.amoco.com) wrote:
- >
- > : I'm just reporting what I've read.) Sometimes they will take a certain set
- > : of tracks, say the drums, and bounce from a digital recorder to analog and
- > : back to digital to get 'that analog sound'. Or as in the case of this album
- >
- > This makes me think of TV shows that are filmed (using movie film) rather
- > than video (like Cheers as opposed to most sitcoms). Film gives a more
- > unrealistic, softer look. The crispness of video makes shows look "cheap".
- > Maybe this is just because we are conditioned by movies...
- >
- > Joe
- Hey, I know this is a bit off the track, and your header suggests you know your
- stuff, but:
-
- I always believed film had much better resolution and max contrast/colour
- saturation than video...
- Can CCD still cameras get anywhere near eg 35mm panatomic X? (or whatever
- it's called these days?
-
- (No that doesn't make me an analogue junkie, for audio in any case)
- Merry xmas
- Graham
-