R/E/P Community

Please login or register.

Login with username, password and session length
Advanced search  

Pages: 1 2 [3] 4   Go Down

Author Topic: recording on tape, transfer to digital useless?  (Read 9971 times)

benn

  • Jr. Member
  • **
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 52
Re: recording on tape, transfer to digital useless?
« Reply #30 on: February 19, 2006, 03:37:11 pm »

stellar wrote on Sun, 19 February 2006 07:32


werewolf10,

do you think UV-22 is necessary to make a solid 'car mix'?  Or can you get by with software?  Do you actually run the audio back through your apogee in order to get the UV-22 dithering down to 16-bit?  


Some DAWs including cubase use UV-22.
Logged

rjd2

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 593
Re: recording on tape, transfer to digital useless?
« Reply #31 on: February 23, 2006, 10:55:08 am »

can i propose an exercise that could be interesting/helpful to some of us?

record a small passage direct to both formats, daw and analog tape. could be very short-2, 4 bars.. now, convert each to the other. put them out to the same common format, mp3?(i know you guys dont care for mp3, but if they both go to the same crappy conversion, its still a controlled experiment).

now, post them up-blind. and lets see if we can tell which is which, or, more importantly, what the differences are.

if this seems futile, consider what this info may provide to people that only use a digital, or only use analog formats. personally, this could help me decide whether i should take on a tape machine as a signal processing piece/workhorse, or whether dumping to tape after editing in protools would make any difference, sonically. just a thought.....
Logged
rj krohn

Teddy G.

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 369
Re: recording on tape, transfer to digital useless?
« Reply #32 on: March 04, 2006, 03:23:39 am »

Now that the topic has dithered down to dithering(Which is as it should be...), and it is late, I did want to say a few more words about "tape". Seems us old guys have some of the young folks almost convinced that "tape" is "the way to go"! And 2" tape the ONLY REEL way to go!!! Sort've like there was no music made after the Beatles, or whatever... Anyway, let me chat with the youngsters for a minute, ey..?

Kids, listen - settle down, calm yourselves... Uh! Shush! OK. Tonight, before bed, let's talk about "tape" being "better", as opposed to doing your recording with your computer. I'm sorry, but, well, I'm not really sorry, I wouldn't trade my PC for all the old, rusty, 2" tape machines left in the world. Anyway, the "tape thing", even if, somehow, it was better..? I'm afraid, is ... well... OK, here it is. Cover up...

The 2" tape point is moot.

The tape, period, point, is moot. Moot? Ahhh... doesn't matter.

LOOK AROUND KIDS, CHECK YOUR MAGAZINES, LOOK THROUGH YOUR CATALOGS, GO ON THE INTERNET, ASK YOUR BROTHER WHO WORKS AT THE BEST BUY --

THERE AIN'T NO TAPE MACHINES AND THERE AIN'T NO TAPE.

I KNOW you've heard alot about this and... but... no. No. ...Even assuming you DID have a tape machine(You might find one at a flea market, when we make you go along?) AND some tape(Maybe a couple of old "falling apart boxes" of Scotch Highlander will come with it? ...Um... just a mid-range brand of tape. Not exactly Grand Master, ha. No, nothing to do with sorcery, or the wizard-kid, dear, just marketing.)... Anyway, there is no one around to fix the machines anymore, dears. Yes, I've told you before, in the old days there were people who fixed things. Everything didn't just get thrown away when it broke - uh-huh! Believe it or not! Anyhow. All the old engineers are living in Florida, and ah, well, most of them don't really want to play with this old stuff anymore - they all have computers, or they have, sadly, ah... um... died. Even if you read an old book on how to maintain such machines, yourself, there are no parts available for them. So, no more tape - Story over. Goodnight..!

More..? You need more?? OK, it's getting awfully late, and your Mom'll be mad if I keep you up, but... OK. A little more about "tape".

Even 30 years ago(Yeah, when your Mom was your age!). Anyway, even 30 years ago, only the fewest of the few used 2" tape(Yeah, like the Stones! Yes, Mr. Jagger really did look old during the football game, didn't he, sweety. Well, he is old! Ha, Ha... Yes, maybe he lives in Florida? Oh, you guys...). Anyway, yes, only people like the Rolling Stones, recorded on 2" tape, running at 30ips, of course(Otherwise why bother?). 30 ips? Ahh, really fast! No, Mr. Jagger didn't record really fast - well, sometimes - no, the tape went round and round really fast... Honestly honey, some of this stuff is gonna' be hard to explain and we don't have much... Yes, OK, on with the story. ANY-way! The tape, alone, even 30 years ago, cost a couple of hundred bucks a reel!!! Yes! As much as your brothers, stupid, sneakers! And "A REEL" lasted only 15 minutes at 30ips! AND, the folks that DID use it USED A REEL ONCE!!! RIGHT! "The best" people used a reel of recording tape only ONCE! Yep, just like if your brother wore his sneakers ONCE, then threw 'em in the closet, never to be worn again! Well... running recording tape "past" the heads on a tape machine is exactly like "riding the brakes" while driving your car(Like when we're following your Grandma, in her car, when she's driving down the street? Ya'know how her bright red tail lights always seem to be on? Yep. And Grandpa has to pay out alot of cash to keep ... well... let's move-on, dears... Anyway, the tape recording process, itself, quickly ruins "the best" of recording tape - and, unfortunately, "the best" recording tape was last made in the 1970's. Yes, the whole thing does sound stupid, ha, ha, but, it's the best they could do at the time. Of course the studios, in which these machines appeared, were "the best", too!!! We're talking here, kids, 30 years ago, a MILLION DOLLAR FACILITY!!! A million dollars may not sound like much, today, but, in the 1970's it was alot of money. Of course, to do less -- a 1/4" 4 track format, or a 1/2 inch 8 track format, or even a 1" 16 track format wasn't considered "the best"(Though a 1" 8 track format was "pretty spiffy"! hehhehheh...), today though, the little church on the corner uses 56 tracks for it's hour-per-week service, so, what good would an 8 track tape recorder be today..? Ah, well... Oh yes, later on, after the demise of the tape machine, one brave and wise company did come up with a pretty neat-o method of trying to "replicate" the "sound of tape", while still using the "new-fangled" computer. Uh-huh! Sort've like trying to make your Toyota Camry "sound" like a Ford Model A. The Model A? It was a really old, difficult to maintain, very innefficient car - that for years after they were gone, "the old folks" would still claim it "was the best car ever!" - and, ya'know, they may have been right, but, YOU have to live NOW, NOT like grandma and grandpa did. This is as it should be. Anyway, this company gathered up as many of the best old tape machines they could find(Or at least they gathered up the best machines they could find that were also, conveniently, the highest selling brand, at the time, in the US, where this company was..IS!). Anyway, they reasoned(May not have been "their" idea, actually, but, hey...) that if one recorded using the computer, mixed all the tracks down to just two(For stereo), than sort've "ran it over here to the corner", via cable, to where the old(Now beautifuly remanufactuered!) tape machine was, and ran the sound through the machine(A 1/2" 2-track, by the way! Didn't see many - if any - of these babies in the old days! Was no need for them then.), actually going to the extra step of recording, AGAIN, TO TAPE, THEN, believe it or not(!), they then play this tape back-INTO the computer! And, kids, there are people who say that this makes "the sound" just like it used to be, when the old guys were just kids, like you are now. Wonderful, huh? ...Yes, alright... complete crapola, hahaha - you got me! Ha, Ha, Ha...ahhh, you guys are smart... But, we all had a good laugh, huh! Sort've like putting an old Holley 4-barrel carburator on your Mom's Camry, ON PURPOSE, huh? HA, HA, HA..! What's a carb--- well, ehhh... forget that one... Anyway, lots of people with more money than, ahh, shall we say... time left on earth? - yes, I mean they're old, bought into this and so did some of the young people! Does your Grandpa have a corvette? Does he ever drive it over 55? Does he drive it at all? Ha Ha... Ah, old people... they are a scream... IS tape better? Who knows, who cares? Even if it was, there ain't no more tape...

Goodnight... sleep tight...

No, tommorow night we'll talk about tubes - right "valves", heh, heh... very good! - valves... oh, yes... or film cameras... whichever... Goodnight... I love you, too... No, no .mp3 players tonight, too late. Goodnight...

No, I'm going down to try to figure out how to fix Grandpa's turntable, you know he still has hundreds of records. Yes, dear, they do sound bad, yeek! But, ya'know, Grandpa doesn't hear that well anymore anyway... "What? What? hahahaha...

Goodnight... Lights out... Yes, I love you too.
Logged

Bob Olhsson

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 3968
Re: recording on tape, transfer to digital useless?
« Reply #33 on: March 04, 2006, 09:36:40 am »

wwittman wrote on Thu, 16 February 2006 12:24

...yours or the better sounding one?
Forget downloads, a lone music reviewer who loves the songs and loves the sound of your cd on his $30,000. hi fi system could easily make the difference between a top ten single and 1000 pressings sitting in the garage.

Anyone who thinks sound quality doesn't count big-time is seriously deluding themselves.

maxdimario

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 3811
Re: recording on tape, transfer to digital useless?
« Reply #34 on: March 04, 2006, 12:18:42 pm »

Define recording quality!

What is quality?

s/n ratio makes a big difference?

THD makes a big difference?

To me the big difference is in the medium's capacity to carry FEEL!
Where does feel come from? ... I have my ideas...

ANYWAY just the other day I finally got myself to start building a phono preamp using ONE amazing german pentode with an anode inductor and a passive EQ curve.
When I put some good VINYL  through it I can hear the INTENTION of the music, not only  good sound.

this is evident on those records that were recorded on all analog, and had little generation losses.
I can hear the musician's thoughts... and whether people are conscious of it or not, powerful performances communicate through feel, not 'sound'
Again, it's not as misterious as it seems.
you can predict what kind of medium will lose on feel, and what other kind will preserve it.

I find that if I record to tape the DEPTH of the perfomance is noticeably preserved (the intention is clearer).
this makes the subtle stuff more compelling and groovy... and easy to understand.
...for instance I was listening to an unknown singer-songwriter on a PATHE record (new never played) and although I really don't understand French, I found myself 'learning' as I was listening because it seemed as if she (the singer) was singing TO ME... more or less.

this wasn't happening with my old pre... so sound Quality can make the listener more EMOTIONALLY INVOLVED! which is what you want to do when you try and break an artist ...right?

once you pass into digital, there is an immedate loss...slight maybe but there.
but tape adds distortion artifacts that help the ear 'identify' what was there in the first place.
Logged

lucey

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 1043
Re: recording on tape, transfer to digital useless?
« Reply #35 on: March 04, 2006, 07:48:27 pm »

Han S. wrote on Mon, 06 February 2006 09:49

Track to 2", mix to the ATR and make it a nice SACD?


nice
Logged
Brian Lucey
Magic Garden Mastering

"the economy is a wholly owned subsidiary of the ecology" - unknown

vernier

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 809
Re: recording on tape, transfer to digital useless?
« Reply #36 on: March 04, 2006, 10:36:27 pm »

Quote:

I listened back to the tape machine straight through to the monitors, no conversion. Shit! It IS LEAGUES beyond what it sounds like when it's transferred to digital.

I went back and listened to an acoustic guitar part I did the same thing with - tracked to tape, bounced to digital. NOT EVEN CLOSE - it sounded so beautiful directly from the tape...
----
BUT it kills me that eventually it will be on a cd or mp3,

All-analog recordings hold-up extremely well when ending up on CD. And when mastered well, they can sound great.
Logged

Werewolf10

  • Newbie
  • *
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 39
Re: recording on tape, transfer to digital useless?
« Reply #37 on: March 04, 2006, 11:06:29 pm »

Teddy G. wrote on Sat, 04 March 2006 00:23

 Sort've like there was no music made after the Beatles, or whatever... Anyway, let me chat with the youngsters for a minute, ey..?

Kids, listen - settle down, calm yourselves... Uh! Shush! OK. Tonight, before bed,

Goodnight... sleep tight...

whichever... Goodnight... I love you, too... No, no .mp3 players tonight, too late. Goodnight..."What? What? hahahaha...

Goodnight... Lights out... Yes, I love you too.




Yea know,  Teddy G.  

        I suspect that your post would make much more sense If you wasn't trying to be [Mr. Funnyman/Condescending Asshole].  I am not impressed by your cheeseball 70's "oh um geee" humor.  
Logged
Laugh and the world laughs with you.  Weep, and you weep alone. "oldboy"

wwittman

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 7712
Re: recording on tape, transfer to digital useless?
« Reply #38 on: March 05, 2006, 01:20:03 am »

Quote:

Anyway, even 30 years ago, only the fewest of the few used 2" tape


That's just not true.

Logged
William Wittman
Producer/Engineer
(Cyndi Lauper, Joan Osborne, The Fixx, The Outfield, Hooters...)

John Ivan

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 3028
Re: recording on tape, transfer to digital useless?
« Reply #39 on: March 05, 2006, 01:31:41 am »

Teedy,
There are tape machines all over the damn place and tape is not hard to get.There are enough machines laying around in varying conditions to keep those who want to use them happening for a long time.

Some of use {I'm in my early 40's} like how it sounds. You can like or not like what ever you want too.

I don't get, at all, the point your making. We already know that one can choose either tape or digital. We already know that one has been around longer too.

Are you saying that we want to use tape to be "hip" or what? Do you not believe folks who say, like me,, " Properly done tape sounds better to me than any digital device I have ever heard." ???

I don't understand why you feel "there's a bunch of stuff I need to tell you about tape". A whole bunch of us already understand the implications of using tape. I think it's fine that you've decided that tape is "OLD" or it sounds no better or what ever.

But please understand. Some of us are trying to make records that WE like the sound of. We think that if we do our best work, others may like it too.. I've made records I'm happy with on digital. These records, in my opinion would sound better had they been done on a tape machine.

Tape is under $200.00 per reel {for now} and 15 ips is fine with me.

There was no lesson  in your post.

"let me tell you punks the truth about tape" ?? Really now.. Do tell.

 Ivan........................................................ ............................
Logged
"Transformation is no easy trick: It's what art promises and usually doesn't deliver." Garrison Keillor

 

scottoliphant

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 721
Re: recording on tape, transfer to digital useless?
« Reply #40 on: March 05, 2006, 10:48:15 am »

teddy g? what was that about? must have been close to bedtime.  Smile
Quote:

THERE AIN'T NO TAPE MACHINES AND THERE AIN'T NO TAPE.
umm, maybe in PA? maybe this will give you bad dreams: I'm one of the younger guys, 28, and i record to tape. MOST of the people I know record to tape. I know a 24 year old guy who just outfitted his studio with a 2" after starting with digital. Why do people insist on trying to convert folks from tape to digital? I don't often hear the argument coming the other way around with such fervor. Why do people fall in love with and drive old classic cars? New ones run better (arguably) and are more fuel efficient.

Jean Taxis

  • Jr. Member
  • **
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 72
Re: recording on tape, transfer to digital useless?
« Reply #41 on: March 05, 2006, 03:53:20 pm »

I suppose Teddy never would work with an U67, for example ? This tube-thing is so old fashioned, old technology...

I just don't understand how recording with such dogma.

In my opinion, in a studio, for each project, there are some esthetic/colors of sound that we would like to hear, depending on our taste and musical style. Not on the engineer's age.

We can choose our "tools" to reach it. It can be a 40 years old mic, a 20 years old tape analog, a 2 years old monitoring system, a new digital effect...SO WHAT ?

Jean

Apemandan

  • Newbie
  • *
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 8
Re: recording on tape, transfer to digital useless?
« Reply #42 on: March 26, 2006, 08:17:34 am »

Buy a A-80 1" 8-track!!

I am starting an album in a few weeks which may interest.  We are tracking the live band to Studer A820 2" 24-track through an MCI 500 (which would be enough for me!) in a great studio called Rockfiled in Wales, UK.  
My client then wants to dub and mix digitally.  We are transferring to PT HD  via apogee converters at 96kHz and working at that rate right through to mix down.  I use a great sample rate conversion box made by Weiss Gambit which takes the audio down to 44.1, but (somehow) retains alot of the extra information captured at 96k.  I have experimented alot in this area and this is the best sounding way I have found to work digitally.  
On most projects, If I can, I usually slave Protools to the tape machine and try to keep as much on analogue as possible.

cheers, Dan. Very Happy
Logged

Apemandan

  • Newbie
  • *
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 8
Re: recording on tape, transfer to digital useless?
« Reply #43 on: March 26, 2006, 08:29:55 am »

Teddy G. wrote on Sat, 04 March 2006 08:23

Now that the topic has dithered down to dithering(Which is as it should be...), and it is late, I did want to say a few more words about "tape". Seems us old guys have some of the young folks almost convinced that "tape" is "the way to go"! And 2" tape the ONLY REEL way to go!!! Sort've like there was no music made after the Beatles, or whatever... Anyway, let me chat with the youngsters for a minute, ey..?

Kids, listen - settle down, calm yourselves... Uh! Shush! OK. Tonight, before bed, let's talk about "tape" being "better", as opposed to doing your recording with your computer. I'm sorry, but, well, I'm not really sorry, I wouldn't trade my PC for all the old, rusty, 2" tape machines left in the world. Anyway, the "tape thing", even if, somehow, it was better..? I'm afraid, is ... well... OK, here it is. Cover up...

The 2" tape point is moot.

The tape, period, point, is moot. Moot? Ahhh... doesn't matter.

LOOK AROUND KIDS, CHECK YOUR MAGAZINES, LOOK THROUGH YOUR CATALOGS, GO ON THE INTERNET, ASK YOUR BROTHER WHO WORKS AT THE BEST BUY --

THERE AIN'T NO TAPE MACHINES AND THERE AIN'T NO TAPE.

I KNOW you've heard alot about this and... but... no. No. ...Even assuming you DID have a tape machine(You might find one at a flea market, when we make you go along?) AND some tape(Maybe a couple of old "falling apart boxes" of Scotch Highlander will come with it? ...Um... just a mid-range brand of tape. Not exactly Grand Master, ha. No, nothing to do with sorcery, or the wizard-kid, dear, just marketing.)... Anyway, there is no one around to fix the machines anymore, dears. Yes, I've told you before, in the old days there were people who fixed things. Everything didn't just get thrown away when it broke - uh-huh! Believe it or not! Anyhow. All the old engineers are living in Florida, and ah, well, most of them don't really want to play with this old stuff anymore - they all have computers, or they have, sadly, ah... um... died. Even if you read an old book on how to maintain such machines, yourself, there are no parts available for them. So, no more tape - Story over. Goodnight..!

More..? You need more?? OK, it's getting awfully late, and your Mom'll be mad if I keep you up, but... OK. A little more about "tape".

Even 30 years ago(Yeah, when your Mom was your age!). Anyway, even 30 years ago, only the fewest of the few used 2" tape(Yeah, like the Stones! Yes, Mr. Jagger really did look old during the football game, didn't he, sweety. Well, he is old! Ha, Ha... Yes, maybe he lives in Florida? Oh, you guys...). Anyway, yes, only people like the Rolling Stones, recorded on 2" tape, running at 30ips, of course(Otherwise why bother?). 30 ips? Ahh, really fast! No, Mr. Jagger didn't record really fast - well, sometimes - no, the tape went round and round really fast... Honestly honey, some of this stuff is gonna' be hard to explain and we don't have much... Yes, OK, on with the story. ANY-way! The tape, alone, even 30 years ago, cost a couple of hundred bucks a reel!!! Yes! As much as your brothers, stupid, sneakers! And "A REEL" lasted only 15 minutes at 30ips! AND, the folks that DID use it USED A REEL ONCE!!! RIGHT! "The best" people used a reel of recording tape only ONCE! Yep, just like if your brother wore his sneakers ONCE, then threw 'em in the closet, never to be worn again! Well... running recording tape "past" the heads on a tape machine is exactly like "riding the brakes" while driving your car(Like when we're following your Grandma, in her car, when she's driving down the street? Ya'know how her bright red tail lights always seem to be on? Yep. And Grandpa has to pay out alot of cash to keep ... well... let's move-on, dears... Anyway, the tape recording process, itself, quickly ruins "the best" of recording tape - and, unfortunately, "the best" recording tape was last made in the 1970's. Yes, the whole thing does sound stupid, ha, ha, but, it's the best they could do at the time. Of course the studios, in which these machines appeared, were "the best", too!!! We're talking here, kids, 30 years ago, a MILLION DOLLAR FACILITY!!! A million dollars may not sound like much, today, but, in the 1970's it was alot of money. Of course, to do less -- a 1/4" 4 track format, or a 1/2 inch 8 track format, or even a 1" 16 track format wasn't considered "the best"(Though a 1" 8 track format was "pretty spiffy"! hehhehheh...), today though, the little church on the corner uses 56 tracks for it's hour-per-week service, so, what good would an 8 track tape recorder be today..? Ah, well... Oh yes, later on, after the demise of the tape machine, one brave and wise company did come up with a pretty neat-o method of trying to "replicate" the "sound of tape", while still using the "new-fangled" computer. Uh-huh! Sort've like trying to make your Toyota Camry "sound" like a Ford Model A. The Model A? It was a really old, difficult to maintain, very innefficient car - that for years after they were gone, "the old folks" would still claim it "was the best car ever!" - and, ya'know, they may have been right, but, YOU have to live NOW, NOT like grandma and grandpa did. This is as it should be. Anyway, this company gathered up as many of the best old tape machines they could find(Or at least they gathered up the best machines they could find that were also, conveniently, the highest selling brand, at the time, in the US, where this company was..IS!). Anyway, they reasoned(May not have been "their" idea, actually, but, hey...) that if one recorded using the computer, mixed all the tracks down to just two(For stereo), than sort've "ran it over here to the corner", via cable, to where the old(Now beautifuly remanufactuered!) tape machine was, and ran the sound through the machine(A 1/2" 2-track, by the way! Didn't see many - if any - of these babies in the old days! Was no need for them then.), actually going to the extra step of recording, AGAIN, TO TAPE, THEN, believe it or not(!), they then play this tape back-INTO the computer! And, kids, there are people who say that this makes "the sound" just like it used to be, when the old guys were just kids, like you are now. Wonderful, huh? ...Yes, alright... complete crapola, hahaha - you got me! Ha, Ha, Ha...ahhh, you guys are smart... But, we all had a good laugh, huh! Sort've like putting an old Holley 4-barrel carburator on your Mom's Camry, ON PURPOSE, huh? HA, HA, HA..! What's a carb--- well, ehhh... forget that one... Anyway, lots of people with more money than, ahh, shall we say... time left on earth? - yes, I mean they're old, bought into this and so did some of the young people! Does your Grandpa have a corvette? Does he ever drive it over 55? Does he drive it at all? Ha Ha... Ah, old people... they are a scream... IS tape better? Who knows, who cares? Even if it was, there ain't no more tape...

Goodnight... sleep tight...

No, tommorow night we'll talk about tubes - right "valves", heh, heh... very good! - valves... oh, yes... or film cameras... whichever... Goodnight... I love you, too... No, no .mp3 players tonight, too late. Goodnight...

No, I'm going down to try to figure out how to fix Grandpa's turntable, you know he still has hundreds of records. Yes, dear, they do sound bad, yeek! But, ya'know, Grandpa doesn't hear that well anymore anyway... "What? What? hahahaha...

Goodnight... Lights out... Yes, I love you too.



Teddy, have you been drinking again??!!

There are loads of tape machines out there if you look around..

and tape is still being manufactured, Quantegy are very much in business and making some great tape..GP9 being my fave.  There is rumour that Emtec 900 is about to go into production again which is GREAT sounding tape.

Have a look at some of the machines we have collected in the past 4 years or so, for not as much money as you may think..

http://www.apestudios.com/html/machine_room.html

most have come from online auction, but there are plenty of dealers out there..

cheers, Dan  
Logged

John Ivan

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 3028
Re: recording on tape, transfer to digital useless?
« Reply #44 on: March 26, 2006, 04:27:32 pm »

Dan,You lucky Bastard!! That's a "Machine room"!!

Yikes!  Very Happy  Very Happy  Very Happy  Very Happy
Logged
"Transformation is no easy trick: It's what art promises and usually doesn't deliver." Garrison Keillor

 
Pages: 1 2 [3] 4   Go Up