@chakster
All good points, yet I'm not talking about which is *better*, if you read my post again.
Though I get your point. I do.
If one is, according to my experience, more into high/ultra-high resolution, total possible detail etc. and leave aside... what? 🤔
A certain 'naturalness', a perceived 'artificialness', top MCs (and digital?) will 'kiss the sky'.
No doubt, very cerebral all that.
But as I mentioned 'goose-bumps' (goose-flesh in American English?) which is instantanious, non-intellectual, having nothing to do with that deeper 'relating to the intellect' but more with some simple primordial (basic and fundamental) reaction!
Such it has squad to do with any technical, electrical, physicist's analysis.
In a way quite uneducated, deeply enjoying e.g. some classical piece of music vs reading a musicological analysis into such a piece.
The latter (normally?) would not result in getting a goose-bumps reaction, but simply stimulating ones intellect if it sufficiently resonates being not perceived as 'boring'.
To me that's the difference here, getting an instantanious (unsolicited by intellect) goose-bumps reaction is giving me more joy of listening, than some cerebral sound analysis...
So... to say it again and as memory serves me, MCs and digital hardly, if at all, produce the former but rather the latter.
So, this made me reflect why the heck this was so?
It's sufficiently intriguing I find, bothering to ask.
Michélle 🇿🇦
All good points, yet I'm not talking about which is *better*, if you read my post again.
Though I get your point. I do.
If one is, according to my experience, more into high/ultra-high resolution, total possible detail etc. and leave aside... what? 🤔
A certain 'naturalness', a perceived 'artificialness', top MCs (and digital?) will 'kiss the sky'.
No doubt, very cerebral all that.
But as I mentioned 'goose-bumps' (goose-flesh in American English?) which is instantanious, non-intellectual, having nothing to do with that deeper 'relating to the intellect' but more with some simple primordial (basic and fundamental) reaction!
Such it has squad to do with any technical, electrical, physicist's analysis.
In a way quite uneducated, deeply enjoying e.g. some classical piece of music vs reading a musicological analysis into such a piece.
The latter (normally?) would not result in getting a goose-bumps reaction, but simply stimulating ones intellect if it sufficiently resonates being not perceived as 'boring'.
To me that's the difference here, getting an instantanious (unsolicited by intellect) goose-bumps reaction is giving me more joy of listening, than some cerebral sound analysis...
So... to say it again and as memory serves me, MCs and digital hardly, if at all, produce the former but rather the latter.
So, this made me reflect why the heck this was so?
It's sufficiently intriguing I find, bothering to ask.
Michélle 🇿🇦