Reply To: [unofficial weekender] Friday again!

[blinky465 17028xp 2]

I agree with the ritual of playing vinyl – the smell as you take it out of the album cover, taking it out of the paper wallet, wiping with alcohol to clean it, preparing the needle/arm etc. It’s a ritual and it can be comforting. But that doesn’t make it “better” (to those who insist a lower-fidelity makes it sound “warmer” they’re talking about *limitations* in playback hardware that filter out higher frequencies – that’s the exact opposite of “better *quality*”; poorer quality for a preferable sound, but definitely not “better”).

But the “I prefer analogue modelling and playing vinyl preferable” analogy falls apart when comparing to 3d modelling. Because the guy in the video is reviewing *the finished product*. He hasn’t been part to the “ritual” – the sculpting, pushing the putty around – the process of creating the mini is like the the ritual of preparing the vinyl for playing.

But in his review video, his argument is that the finished mini, sculpted by hand, is better than a mini sculpted digitally. Having had no input into the preceeding steps, he’s sitting there listening to a crackly crap recording of his dad’s favourite skiffle band *that someone else put on the record player* and insisting the sound coming out of the speakers is “better” than the pin-sharp clarity of the latest remastered [insert band name here] album.

I just disagree with almost every sentiment in the video (both on digital scuplting and the idea that the original HeroQuest artwork was “better” just because it was an oil painting). But maybe that’s because I work with technology and embrace it – and in doing so recognise that the failures in “modern” technology-driven art are with the artist, not the technology?

When this track first came on my CD player, I didn’t listen to it and think “wow, that sounds much better” – nor did it fill me with comfort. I just thought “god, that’s annoying”