SHOULD ART TAKE THE PLACE OF INFORMATION ?

by Alfred Huntchcock*

I’ve been an avid jazz listener since my early teens. In those days, canned music employed vinyl records and these used to be enclosed in large cardboard wrappings which had ample space to receive written information. Some of them were truly works of art and are, today, treasured by collectors.
In spite of it, on the back covers, all necessary information were found, so that the musical content was properly listed, numbered and one could know the extension of each tune. The art – many times of highest caliber – never interfered with information, as much as this one never bothered the cover artistry.
Time has changed and CD took the place of vinyl (mostly). Now the front cover of their jewel cases were substantially smaller. The front art had to be happy with only some 16% of the space of yore.
To offset this, the producers increased the allowed space by inserting multiple pages in the booklets of the plastic cases. Since then, it has solved the problem… if the subject is… classical music!
We, jazz listeners, who are always striving to know all about the performers (as it should be, as jazz is mainly a product from them) don’t have received the same treatment: many, many times, the art mixes with the information just to make it less clear, sometimes on the verge of making it unreadable! Aficionados like me, who are not teenagers anymore and, so, are kinda shortsighted, have all the difficulties in the world to distinguish a black letter in a dark blue background, or to read a multicolored written word made this way to help (help?) the reader, as it is foreground to a colorful mixed scenery.
Please, graphic artists: don’t do that. Remember that jazz listening isn’t exactly a children hobby an the lettering of CD’s booklets HAS to be small. Don’t make it even more difficult for us! (And, please, if possible, don’t forget to number the songs and specify how long each one lasts…)
We – the short sighted – will ever be grateful…

ODYSSEY AUDIO

by Alfred Huntchcock*
http://www.odysseyaudio.com/
A great percentage of domestic music reproductive systems are grossly implemented, producing only a small amount of their capabilities. As a result, their owners, unhappy, start out never ending processes of changing components. Each “increment“, very often, represents much more a waste of money than any real improvement in sound. In fact, a reproductive music system, to be great, depends much more on how it was assembled, as opposed to how much money was spent in the process.
Energy quality to begin with: there’s no great song in the absence of decent energy, no matter how much cost its respective electronics. Faulty energy is socialist: no matter its origin, the amount of money spent to acquire it, its importance or fame; your equipment will sound thin, disembodied, lifeless, and shallow. So, never take energy for granted. Go to as far as possible to get it right.
You can begin with by throwing away each and every general purpose power cables you have. It’s nothing short of extraordinary the improvement a good power cord can do, and, as a general rule, the heavier, the better. You can spend from 50 to 2.000 bucks in a single cable and, accordingly to which and how assembled your equipments are, the amount can represent a real bargain in view of the improvements it brings.