Variable Density B&W Film for Monaural Music Only. No Movies, No Stories. Just Audio.

Discussion in '35mm Cameras' started by Radium, Apr 29, 2007.

  1. Radium

    Radium Guest

    Hi:

    I like using variable-density analog B&W monaural negative [no
    positive and no "reversal"; just the negatives] film optical tracks
    for audio. The audio characteristics of the film make my mouth-water.
    Yes, for some weird reason, the film's audio makes me hungry. To add
    to the delicious audio quality, I would like to coat the film with bad
    butter* and tiny traces of bituminous and anthracite coals [as well
    the smoke of those coals] before recording. After recording, I would
    like to clean it in a dark environment and then develop the clean
    film.

    *Here is the link which describes how my "bad butter" is made:

    http://groups.google.com/group/uk.food+drink.indian/msg/4d1bb17fa111377c?hl=en&

    Why didn't they make an audio-only equivalent of this for music [i.e.
    an optical audio tape]?

    Why not replace *Analog Magnetic Audio Tapes* with *Analog Optical
    Audio Tapes*??

    Analog optical audio is used in films and sound better than analog
    magnetic audio.

    Magnetic tape contains static, humming, and other electromagnetic
    disruptions whereas optical tape does not.

    Optical tape is resistant to bar magnets whereas magnetic tape is not.

    Analog optical audio records and plays in the same manner as film
    does.

    The difference for me, is, I'd like to use only the negative film and
    no positive.

    Any chance of my "Variable Density B&W Film for monaural audio"
    fantasy turning real?

    Audio signal, in the form of light changing its intensity in an
    analogous manner to the sound, is shined onto a negative film. The
    film is developed and playback is accomplished by shining light of a
    constant intensity onto the developed film. As the light goes through
    the film, the patterns on the film will change the intensity of the
    light that is received by a photoelectric cell. The change in light
    intensity results in a changing electric current which is sent into an
    amplifier and then to a loudspeaker.

    http://www.mtsu.edu/~smpte/twenties.html

    "The Tri Ergon Process uses a technology known as variable density,
    which differed from a later process known as variable area. The Tri
    Ergon process had a patented flywheel mechanism on a sprocket which
    prevented variations in film speed. This flywheel helped prevent
    distortion of the audio. Tri Ergon relied on the use of a photo-
    electric cell to transduce mechanical sound vibrations into electrical
    waveforms and then convert the electrical waveforms into light waves.
    These light waves could then be optically recorded onto the edge of
    the film through a photographic process. Another photo-electric cell
    could then be used to transduce the waveform on the film into an
    electrical waveform during projection. This waveform could then be
    amplified and played to the audience in the Theater. The Fox Film
    Corporation acquired the rights to the Tri Ergon technology in 1927."

    The ERPI system, Fox-Case's Movietone, and De Forest's Phonofilm use
    variable-density recording film audio.

    I think mono and VD are better in quality. I don't like stereo or VA.
    But then, "quality" is highly subjective. One's worst enemy can be
    another's best friend.

    Oh, and equally important. The source of light should be from the
    flames of burning anthracite, ignited bituminous coals, and bad butter
    that has caught fire -- instead of electric lights.

    I would like to record my favorite songs into a variable-density
    analog B&W monaural negative film track. I want to listen to these
    songs after they are "filmed".

    Last, but not least, the intensity-varying light shined onto the film
    [during recording] is intentionally [by my choice] too dim. So the
    signal is "amplified" within the film by using a stronger
    concentration of film-developing chemicals.


    Regards,

    Radium
     
    Radium, Apr 29, 2007
    #1
    1. Advertisements

  2. Here is the sentence that I do not believe/understand:
    "the new bacteria then flee the milk case."

    Tell me.....How do they do that?
     
    William Graham, Apr 29, 2007
    #2
    1. Advertisements

  3. Radium

    Radium Guest

    Magic!
     
    Radium, Apr 29, 2007
    #3
  4. Radium

    m II Guest

    I'm still wondering how the former, now dead bacteria can send out
    invitations.

    =====================================
    Then these bacteria die [for some mysterious reason] and invite more
    anaerobic bacteria into the milk.
    =====================================
     
    m II, Apr 29, 2007
    #4
  5. Radium

    Bill Penrose Guest

    Be aware that photo film has about 10-15 dB dynamic range, much less
    than a good magnetic or digital recorder.

    On the other hand, the butter idea sounds great. Do you toast it
    first?

    Dangerous Bill
     
    Bill Penrose, Apr 29, 2007
    #5
  6. Radium

    Radium Guest

    The butter is raw and uncooked and it stinks like stale swiss cheese
    thats been left in an anaerobic, warm, humid environment for at least
    30 years.
     
    Radium, Apr 29, 2007
    #6
  7. Radium

    Radium Guest

    I apologize profusely. The stuff in the link is outdated. Here is a
    more palatable version of my bad butter:

    Raw, uncooked, organic, un-homogenized, un-pasteurized cow's milk is
    used. Purely-anaerobic, non-pathogenic bacteria are what indirectly
    turn the milk into butter. Throughout the process, the butter is
    mysteriously protected completely against any degradation or
    abnormality [e.g. rancidity] other than bacterial decay.

    No microbes other than purely-anaerobic, non-pathogenic bacteria enter
    the milk/butter or travel anywhere near the milk/butter or their
    containers.

    First, any and all minerals, metals, ions, and electrolytes are
    removed from the milk. Then the bacteria enter the milk. These
    bacteria initially feed on all substances in the milk *excluding* the
    following entities naturally present in the milk:

    Lipids [including non-greasy lipids]
    Greasy substances [including greasy substances not classified as
    lipids]
    Elastic substances
    Natural emulsifiers
    Creamy substances
    Slimy substances

    The bacteria produce odorous compounds - including but not limited to
    -- skatole, indole, acetoin, methyl ketones [such as diacetyl],
    amines, butyric acid, isobutryic acid, caproic acid, propionic acid,
    isovaleric acid, and valeric acid.

    After all the bacterial processes are finished, the water content in
    the concoction is decreased to 15% [about the same water as most high-
    quality butter].

    This butter smells bad like stinky cheese [including stale Swiss
    cheese that has been left in an anaerobic, warm, humid environment for
    at least 30 years], smelly feet, sweaty shirts, dirty socks, neck-
    sweat, back-sweat, filthy scalp and unwashed hair.

    You now have 1st-class butter!!!!

    Anyone want to try some of this delicious butter??

    Important note on bacteria: All bacteria used in the above process are
    not pathogenic. IOW - much like intestinal bacteria -- they do not
    cause any disease or infection. In addition, none of these bacteria
    use oxygen for any of their biochemical processes. Some of them can
    survive in oxygen, while others can't. However, none of them use
    oxygen. Acetic-acid bacteria are an example of bacteria that are not
    used in the butter-making processes because - while they maybe
    anaerobic - they still require oxygen to produce acetic acid.
     
    Radium, Apr 29, 2007
    #7
  8. Remember that "Radium" is posting from an alternate universe.
    The laws of physics, biology, etc that we take for granted don't
    apply in "Radium"s Troll-land.
     
    Richard Crowley, Apr 29, 2007
    #8
  9. Radium

    Mr.T Guest

    Use a SB/Creative FM synth :)

    MrT.
     
    Mr.T, Apr 30, 2007
    #9
  10. Radium

    Radium Guest

    OOOOOH!


    A "variable-density analog B&W monaural negative film" version of
    Creative Music Synth! How fun!

    Add some metal-free, oxide-free, mineral-free, ion-free, electrolyte-
    free volatiles of anthracite and bituminous coal in a base of this bad
    stinky butter http://groups.google.com/group/uk.food+drink.indian/msg/4d1bb17fa111377c?hl=
    to the film prior to recording. Record with light that is too dim.
    Wash off the butter and coal-volatiles. Then, develop with unusually
    strong concentration of chemicals to make up for the light that was
    too dim to encode with any efficiency. Wash off the chemicals. Then
    playback those delicious FM signals of Creative Music Synth.

    Just can't wait to listen to it.
     
    Radium, Apr 30, 2007
    #10
  11. Radium

    Ron Jones Guest

    An excellent use of the "kill-file" IMHO...

    --
    Ron Jones
    Process Safety & Development Specialist
    Don't repeat history, unreported chemical lab/plant near misses at
    http://www.crhf.org.uk
    Only two things are certain: The universe and human stupidity; and I'm not
    certain about the universe. ~ Albert Einstein
     
    Ron Jones, Apr 30, 2007
    #11
  12. Radium

    Bill Penrose Guest

    Mm. Gets better all the time. A little kim-chi on top, too?

    DB
     
    Bill Penrose, Apr 30, 2007
    #12
  13. Radium

    Jay Rose Guest

    Then audition in a special oxygen-free listening environment.
     
    Jay Rose, Apr 30, 2007
    #13
  14. Excellent suggestion! :)
     
    Richard Crowley, Apr 30, 2007
    #14
  15. Radium

    dpierce Guest

    Pretty much like everything you write.

    You're an idiot, and have put an exquisite amount of
    effort into demonstrating this beyond any notion of doubt.
     
    dpierce, Apr 30, 2007
    #15
  16. 1) you are an idiot
    2) have you figured out what GNR is yet?
    3) does it do binaural, or do I need optically coupled headphones
    4) you are still an idiot


    martin
     
    martin griffith, Apr 30, 2007
    #16
  17. Radium

    Radium Guest

    Radium, May 1, 2007
    #17
  18. Radium

    Radium Guest

    Generalized Noise Resonance
    Its monaural, so whether its optically-coupled or not, you'll still
    hear the same thing from both left and right.
     
    Radium, May 1, 2007
    #18
  19. not even close


    martin
     
    martin griffith, May 1, 2007
    #19
  20. Radium

    Radium Guest

    Okay. Then what is GNR?

    I did my own research and it came out to be Generalized Noise
    Resonance. From what you know, what is GNR?
     
    Radium, May 1, 2007
    #20
    1. Advertisements

Ask a Question

Want to reply to this thread or ask your own question?

You'll need to choose a username for the site, which only take a couple of moments (here). After that, you can post your question and our members will help you out.