Analogue vs Digital - A generational thing?

[green van man]

One of my other hobbies is photography, I still use film and print in a darkroom. Why? Because I enjoy it and digital photography holds no appeal whatsoever for me.

I work on my landrover, regularly, it is a landrover after all. It is a mecano car, fix it in a field with a hammer and adjustable spanner. It is a hobby car. The xc just goes and keeps going it is transport. I make the best of it and enjoy driving it as I enjoy driving, don't get the same sence of satisfaction from it as I do driving the landrover.

If there was a night school course for me to learn how to use my Vida dice properly rather than muddleing through I would join in a shot, just so I could be sure that the transport kept going as it should but it would be used of necessity rather than desire.

Paul.

[john.wigley]

I think you're right, Paul. Everything (Sweeping generalisation, I know! ) today is so sterile. If that is what you want, fine; but it does lack any engagement or interaction, as you rightly say.

Regards, John.

[canis]

Hmm. That's how i was with CDs. They slide away anonymously, but once you're over the digital counter (well, it seemed awfully clever in the '80s), there's nothing else. You can't even tell if it's begun playback, or if it's even working at all, until it blares out. No wonder, turning it up to 4!

The tactile involvement of hearing the needle find the lead-in groove, settle into it's track visibly and auraly in the speakers. Noticing the little wiggle of the stylus as the arm moves too, echoing stereo-phonically from each end of the room. And being so practiced at this it was practically muscle-memory. Honing that skill of picking it up and placing it exactly on the band prior to a favourite song.

Leafing through someone's records was a window into their soul. Same with a bookcase. Scrolling through somebody's playlist on a tiny shiny LCD device isn't the same, but the effect is more than cosmetic. Because the pastime and conversation is lost, cultural changes will occur. Instead of seeing a record sleeve and asking, tracks which aren't known by the user are scrolled away. Unless the title is shocking, or instantly recognisable, that'll get it mentioned. Yeah! That thong! That thong th-thong-thong-thong.

This manifests as cheesy or cheeky "instant thrill" music. The emphasis is on grabbing attention more than art. Sales, of course - and what happens to culture when sales are the driving force? You get X-Factor.

Meanwhile, the lyrics which lack blockbuster televisual endorsement must seek attention by other means. They're not disguised in clever literary device, but are blantant to the point of puerility. You make my head spin 'round when you go down, I mean, it's just so desperate!

Yeah. I'm with you guys. So what if it wasn't digital - you could get long wave anywhere. And medium wave didn't even need an aerial. Brilliant. Now, a vast wasteland of empty staric and the occasional digital modulation carrier.

There's a lot to like about analogue. It doesn't matter how much resolution you have, a computer cannot grok a third. That swing 9th, no sequencer can play. About the jazziest that can be achieved is an approximation, firmly four/four time, called Drum & Bass. No disrespect, I love it, but it's not swing. A computer cannot swing. Even at 68000Hz, like a CD, it cannot be properly divided by 3. This is called "quantisation". It can get very close, but it can't strike a third exactly - so, almost exactly like a bad jazz musician.

Go on, do it. Drag some swing out of the loft, set up a player and listen (through the crackle). The CD is more mechanical music, like a glorified player piano which can never truly express the human touch.

No, plugging a borrowed turntable into a USB port on your laptop computer will not work. It must he analogue throughout.