...........that streaming a movie (Netflix) will compromise picture quality as it's compressed to reach you.
But a DVD will provide the best quality.
So you have an option of either buying a DVD (as there are no Blockbusters anymore) and add to your clutter (specially when you won't be watching it again) or compromise on quality and stream.
TP, are you for real??!!
Did you know that streaming music (Spotify) will compromise sound quality as it's compressed to reach you. But a CD will provide the best quality. So you have an option of either buying a CD and add to your clutter (specially when you won't be listening to the same CD often) or compromise on quality and stream.
Is this a prank?
Posted by: Veglia | 10/26/2017 at 05:13 PM
Never understood most people's keen interest [ obsession? ] with super-high fidelity in audio and video.
To me, the CONTENT has always been far-and-away the thing.
I mean, yes, if it's something like a symphony orchestra where you want to hear
every single note from every single instrument articulated...fine.
But some of the greatest pieces of music that I enjoy regularly
are boot-legged living-room solo piano performances by Art Tatum from the late 1940s/early 1950s.
The numerous scratches and hisses just add that much more ambience, in my book.
Posted by: Gary Moser | 10/26/2017 at 06:20 PM
Sore spot for me as I am an audiophile (nasty disease) but I agree content is what matters. Some of my audiophiliacs would say though that content and even spirit of music is lost if not reproduced in high fidelity. Like reading a book summary instead of the book.
Posted by: Veglia | 10/26/2017 at 09:42 PM
My all-time musical idol, Frank Zappa, in the early years [ say, late 1960s/early 1970s ]
would occasionally release a live recording --- sometimes an entire album, sometimes just a single track ---
where the sound was noticeably "muddy" compared to the rest of his catalog because of the sub-standard hall that
he had been booked into. On a few of those, I have lamented ever since that the overall sound quality isn't better.
But, as he explained throughout his career --- especially in the liner notes of a 12-disc series
called "You Can't Do That On Stage Anymore" --- he saw himself as a sort of musical anthropologist,
and since he was truly IMPROVISING every guitar solo he would do, instead of reproducing note-for-note
what he had done on the previously-released studio version, each performance was a unique "air sculpture".
Hence, the final uniqueness his fans got to hear was less sunny (smog-affected?) on some days than others.
But even a relatively sullied version of "The Nancy And Mary Music" from CHUNGA'S REVENGE, for example,
is worlds better for a true Zappaphile like myself than no version at all.
Posted by: Gary Moser | 10/26/2017 at 11:38 PM
Is Fabrice Santoro your all time favourite player to watch?
Posted by: Veglia | 10/27/2017 at 06:35 AM
No, not even close. Why?
Posted by: Gary Moser | 10/27/2017 at 10:11 AM
"he was truly IMPROVISING every guitar solo he would do, instead of reproducing note-for-note " Is this not Santoro playing tennis?
Posted by: Veglia | 10/27/2017 at 11:37 AM
Oh, I see what you mean.
No. Zappa's improvising greatly enhanced his serious artistic output. Kind of like Federer.
Santoro, and players of his ilk --- Gael Monfils? Dustin Brown? ---
IMO have thrown their lot in with comparative pop art, or outright entertainment...
Posted by: Gary Moser | 10/27/2017 at 01:22 PM
How true.
Like Dustin, though. Maybe because I watch him rarely? Or not so wealthy, hehe.
Posted by: Leon | 10/27/2017 at 05:20 PM
I see, art as entertainment as opposed to art as a way to winning. OK.
Posted by: Veglia | 10/27/2017 at 05:34 PM