On 16 Mai, 16:27, ScottW <Scott...@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> wrote:
> On May 16, 1:10=A0pm, "Arny Krueger" <ar...@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> wrote:
>
>
>
>
>
> > "ScottW" <Scott...@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> wrote in message
>
> >news:0a3e166c-236c-44e3-8b7e-8a7eff7841d1@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
>
> > > =A0Do any two performances, even by the same conductor,
> > > sound the same?
>
> > Chances of something as long and complex as an orchestral work
sounding =
the
> > same =3D 0.
>
> > Even short solo pieces are easy to ABX from performance to
performance.
>
> > > We're talking about replicating. Even a recording won't
> > > sound the same =A0as the original.
>
> > Depends on how you define =A0the origional. If you define the original
a=
s
> > being the electrical signal going into the recorder than the
possibiliti=
es
> > of "sounds the same" are good.
>
> =A0The original sound.
>
> > =A0However the action of microphones and mixing
> > are easy to pick out in a close listening test.
>
> =A0Exactly. =A0 So it seems that to recreate the original sound, the
best
> way is to use the original instruments. =A0The players and conductor
> (not really required) appear to be technically =A0replaceable with
> automatons.
>
> ScottW-
Just like your magazine with ABX tests, it will
have an audience of 1.
"At least" you won't have to put up with an audience coughing!
|
