Re: [Leica] for sale as a result of our studio going digital

[Ken Iisaka <kiisaka@pacbell.net>]

> A long time ago I read a short story, probably a children's story,
> about a faraway land in which people competed by stacking blocks atop
> one another. This was a national sport, and champions who could pile
40
> blocks instead of 38 blocks were made into heros. Schoolchildren
> collected pictures of the top players, and the most dextrous dreamed
of
> becoming competitive stackers some day.
>
> Then one year a young boy started being able to beat the champions,
and
> by the time he was an adult he could stack 200 blocks. The next
closest
> competitor could only do perhaps 50. He won every contest. Very
> quickly, People lost interest in the sport, and took up baseball
> instead.

snip snip

Indeed, the whole discussion also reminds me much of the recent
classical music scene.

Thanks to high-fidelity recording, MIDI and digital editing, technical
perfection is now within reach of many musicians.  As the bar of
technical perfection was raised, all the music students and young
artists now strive for such perfection in live recording.  No, not a bad
thing at all, if it did not come at an expense of all other aspects of
music.  Because the level of quantifiable technical scrutiny became
severe, many qualitative aspects of music seemed to have disappeared out
of sight or priority.  If you look at competitions, it's often the most
boring, but the most "accurate" performer who wins the gold prize.

The scene is somewhat like photography: the lens is sharper, and
exposure is more accurate.  But the composition and contents of so many
photographs are still so rotten, but many of the audience only look at
quantifiable aspects such as lens sharpness, and colour saturation.

I for one prefer Ronald Smith's carefully analysed though technically
imperfect rendition of Charles Valentin Alkan's formidable Concerto, Op.
39, No. 8-10, to Marc-Andre Hamelin's brilliant, precise, but sterile
recording of the same.