garyrc Posted February 17, 2009 Share Posted February 17, 2009 Yes, truly amazing. What would the audio equivalent of pictures taken with an 8 x 10 view camera (like a Linhof) be? I'm afraid it would not be digital, but the old technology (ultra) analog magnetic that used to be used for certain road show motion pictures. The few times I heard the (rarely used) double system variety of soundtracks for 70 mm films (especially Todd-AO) that used a separate, synchronized strip of full coat 35 mm magnetic film with 6 tracks -- with each of the 6 tracks slightly wider than one of the 2 tracks on 1/2 track (1/4") open reel audio tape -- I heard sound that has been unequaled (in my experience) to this day. Mercury Records also used 35mm full coat magnetic film for it's Living Presence series for a while (Fine had been involved in movie recording, and knew the virtues of 35mm mag film), only Mercury used 3 tracks instead of 6, and by the time it got on vinyl (or onto the CD reissues) it didn't sound as good as the best road show film sound. The Todd-AO dynamics were incredible and surprising, but the music remained warm and rich, which is more than I can say for most digital recordings. This is all the more amazing because the magnetic oxide was not one of the more evolved formulations that started in the '70s with tapes like TDK SD or Scotch 206 / 207, but was very basic professional stock, perhaps 111, AND, the behind the screen speakers (in the cases I'm referring to, JBLs specified by Ampex for the Todd-AO 70 mm process) were in the grand horn tradition, but not benefiting from later improvements (if they were, in fact, significant improvements). I believe that the amplifiers were special issue, Ampex speced tube models. The quality of sound went from amazing for double system, to excellent for single system 6 channel mag with the tracks on the 70 mm print, to pretty good for 4 track magnetic reissues in 35 mm (optical sound that went to the boonies -- or even to the cities, if they didn't have enough mag prints -- was atrocious). This state of afairs persisted from the '50s through the early '70s, when movie sound began to get harsh. I wonder if that was because of a combination of the amplifiers being replaced with solid state, and the new Dolby tracks, while dynamic, never sounding as smooth and silky to my ears. My quest for sound to equal that of double system Todd-AO fizzled, but the closest I heard was probably 15 ips magnetic tape on Crown or Revox open reel tape decks, with Klipschorns with relatively powerful TUBE amps like the McIntosh 275, Marantz (model?), or even the Dyna MK IVs. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
LarryC Posted February 17, 2009 Share Posted February 17, 2009 We've probably got less than 100 slides. Even so I almost looked at a slide projector at the local Goodwill the other day. Slides would be worth storing as the images are often amazing. I'm not sure why but I just never took very many nor did my family that I'm aware. Dad left as quite a few reels of 8mm and super 8mm home movies as old as 1950 that still look very good the last time we viewed any of them. I had a history professor in college that had slides of practically everywhere we talked about in class. They were all at least pretty good. We joked that she probably had some of the cave paintings in Lascaux France while they were being painted. Taking good slides is a SERIOUS challenge! One has to do VERY accurate exposure, since that's how to get really good, accurate color! In-camera light meters WON'T do it, and a lot of the time, neither will hand-held reflected-light meters!! After all, the in-camera light meter is a reflected light meter. I went through a LOT of reading and "exposure" courses to get exposure down right, which focused me on doing mostly incident light metering. Anyway, it took a lot to get good-looking slides.Naturally, one has to have some minimum number or proportion of slides to make it worthwhile to get a projector and take the time to set up. 100 total just isn't going to do it. It also takes a minimum number in a single showing to give the sense of the "story" of the show, like your history professor no doubt did. Now, people are used to being satisfied to look at pics on those little 1" - 2" screens on the backs of digital cameras. All part of the compression of time we used to take to enjoy seeing bigger, more dramatic pics. Also a companion to being so pressed for time is the fact that automated exposure in our digital cameras is SO accurate that all that labor to do incident metering is out the window and long forgotten by even professional photogs nowadays, let alone by the casual guy who pulls out his shirt-pocket camera, snaps, and drops it right back in. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Hifi jim Posted February 17, 2009 Share Posted February 17, 2009 Nah. We use AppleTV to "project" our digital images on our 46" TV. It's pretty darn close to the slide projector experience. And........WAY less noisy! Oh, and we can use the "Ken Burns" effect, or pan and zoom. Oh, did I mention we can put good music to it also? Yes! Streaming photos to my AppleTV is very cool. I find myself viewing my photos much more often and the music feature is great. [Y] Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
LarryC Posted February 18, 2009 Share Posted February 18, 2009 Nah. We use AppleTV to "project" our digital images on our 46" TV. Wow, I knew I was in a different century from almost everyone else, but that's just wild! How do you use an Apple TV to project pics on a 46" TV? Thanks, Larry Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.