Beautiful.article. When something is well-crafted and made by hand, such as wood furniture, it also endures. I remember my father making our furniture, piece by piece. Coffee table, end tables, desks, bookcases, bedroom bureaus, bed frames. He was a cabinet-maker who learned his trade in Europe.
The pieces of furniture were both beautiful and durable. Solid wood; no veneers, no fakes. They lasted for decades. In beauty there also resides love and truth. This is why we relate so strongly to all natural materials and the natural world.
Your article is so spot on! The beauty of the art deco days, the fine China, gorgeous couture, but a memory to some, but my home is filled with the items from passed eras, and enjoyed, used and appreciated. It's nothing this generation is interested in, old junk, my great-grandson calls it. The value of antiques has diminished so, that it turned into the chalk paint market. Make old look new again, some is appealing but to desecrate the natural beauty of wood and the fine handwork that went into making such detailed furniture, is sort of a sacrilege to the early artisans. Good job!
Thanks Monica! Indeed the shiny objects of the new has woven a spell rendering to some the exquisiteness of old useless...yet therein lies the real answers they have yet to uncover is what they are truly seeking.
There are those who say analog records just sound better than digital CDs or streams of music. When all is dissected, no one can really tell much difference. So why this media legend?
I've come to the conclusion that it's a biological proclivity, not one of perceiving fidelity. We prefer analog as comfortingly human.
Consider this: as AI matures, the "thinking" being programmed is that of "fuzzy logic," the back-and-forth between the limits that narrow and hone in on a solution. That is as human as the back-and-forth of our tympanic membranes, as sound waves (analog vacillations) strike them.
Thus, we are evolved for analog, yet we embrace the digital as our technology evolves. CDs beat out the hertz limits of records, so there the tech went. It is absolutely fascinating that the digital machinations are gravitating to analog, e.g., fuzzy logic, while our human endeavors are gravitating toward digital perception.
This is as ironic! Analog ("wavy") humans are seeking the digital; digital computing is seeking the analog. So it is as paradoxical as it is ironic.
Considering my basis for this conclusion, hearing, we know that the movement of ear drums mimics (mirrors?) the oscillating waves striking them. These are fluid movements. But digital is not fluid. Digital involves delivery of all-or-none packets (viz, 0s and 1s). This is like the double-slit quantum experiment when a force is delivered as both waves AND particles.
We are creatures of waves; we navigate the universe on the tides of flow and ebb. Is it any wonder that analog embraces us better; that analog just seems friendlier? Is that why analog seems to sound better? Or is that it just sounds more human? More comforting? Like the nurturing of a lactating mother.
But what do I know? I'm a hopeless romantic on my substack, "The FRICTION SECTION" (plug).
(And that's how lactating mothers got into my rant, here.) Don't misunderstand me. I like my "devices." They're pretty and they're fun, and they make the camaraderie of writing on such vehicles as Substack possible. However...
I see your picture of a lover's respite under the tree. Now THAT is analog. I see your picture of persons consulting their digital streams. THAT is NOT analog. As we embrace discrete packets of information and abandon the wave of what's human, we venture off alone.
I think it was in the early 50's that the Rockefeller Foundation changed the frequency of music. They changed it from its natural harmonic resonance of 432hz to the less natural 440hz. Today's stereos have no comparison to the old 40s and early 50s Hi-Fi stereos. Once you heard those beautiful old stereos played, there's nothing nowadays to compare it to!
Beautiful.article. When something is well-crafted and made by hand, such as wood furniture, it also endures. I remember my father making our furniture, piece by piece. Coffee table, end tables, desks, bookcases, bedroom bureaus, bed frames. He was a cabinet-maker who learned his trade in Europe.
The pieces of furniture were both beautiful and durable. Solid wood; no veneers, no fakes. They lasted for decades. In beauty there also resides love and truth. This is why we relate so strongly to all natural materials and the natural world.
So awesome, gosh our society is so far from this way of being.
Your article is so spot on! The beauty of the art deco days, the fine China, gorgeous couture, but a memory to some, but my home is filled with the items from passed eras, and enjoyed, used and appreciated. It's nothing this generation is interested in, old junk, my great-grandson calls it. The value of antiques has diminished so, that it turned into the chalk paint market. Make old look new again, some is appealing but to desecrate the natural beauty of wood and the fine handwork that went into making such detailed furniture, is sort of a sacrilege to the early artisans. Good job!
Thanks Monica! Indeed the shiny objects of the new has woven a spell rendering to some the exquisiteness of old useless...yet therein lies the real answers they have yet to uncover is what they are truly seeking.
There are those who say analog records just sound better than digital CDs or streams of music. When all is dissected, no one can really tell much difference. So why this media legend?
I've come to the conclusion that it's a biological proclivity, not one of perceiving fidelity. We prefer analog as comfortingly human.
Consider this: as AI matures, the "thinking" being programmed is that of "fuzzy logic," the back-and-forth between the limits that narrow and hone in on a solution. That is as human as the back-and-forth of our tympanic membranes, as sound waves (analog vacillations) strike them.
Thus, we are evolved for analog, yet we embrace the digital as our technology evolves. CDs beat out the hertz limits of records, so there the tech went. It is absolutely fascinating that the digital machinations are gravitating to analog, e.g., fuzzy logic, while our human endeavors are gravitating toward digital perception.
This is as ironic! Analog ("wavy") humans are seeking the digital; digital computing is seeking the analog. So it is as paradoxical as it is ironic.
Considering my basis for this conclusion, hearing, we know that the movement of ear drums mimics (mirrors?) the oscillating waves striking them. These are fluid movements. But digital is not fluid. Digital involves delivery of all-or-none packets (viz, 0s and 1s). This is like the double-slit quantum experiment when a force is delivered as both waves AND particles.
We are creatures of waves; we navigate the universe on the tides of flow and ebb. Is it any wonder that analog embraces us better; that analog just seems friendlier? Is that why analog seems to sound better? Or is that it just sounds more human? More comforting? Like the nurturing of a lactating mother.
But what do I know? I'm a hopeless romantic on my substack, "The FRICTION SECTION" (plug).
(And that's how lactating mothers got into my rant, here.) Don't misunderstand me. I like my "devices." They're pretty and they're fun, and they make the camaraderie of writing on such vehicles as Substack possible. However...
I see your picture of a lover's respite under the tree. Now THAT is analog. I see your picture of persons consulting their digital streams. THAT is NOT analog. As we embrace discrete packets of information and abandon the wave of what's human, we venture off alone.
I think it was in the early 50's that the Rockefeller Foundation changed the frequency of music. They changed it from its natural harmonic resonance of 432hz to the less natural 440hz. Today's stereos have no comparison to the old 40s and early 50s Hi-Fi stereos. Once you heard those beautiful old stereos played, there's nothing nowadays to compare it to!
Yes, when the A note upon which most instruments are tuned was rounded up to 440 hz, defying Pythagoras. Thanks for this insight, Monica.