The city on California's southern coast would evolve dramatically over the course of four centuries, from the home of Chumash people to a Spanish settlement and mission, to an oceanfront jewel whose architecture and lifestyle have become the epitome of the California Dream.
Jane Pauley takes a walk through the history of the "American Riviera."
Built in the 1930s, high above the Santa Barbara coast, the mansion known as Bellosguardo was the summer home of reclusive heiress Huguette Clark, who instructed her staff to never change a thing – and they didn't. Jane Pauley pays a visit to a fabled home constructed from a Gilded Age fortune (made famous from the bestseller "Empty Mansions"), which will open its doors to public tours for the first time later this year.
Built in 1906 in the Montecito Hills above Santa Barbara, Calif., El Fureidis, the Mediterranean-inspired home of real estate tycoon James Waldron Gillespie, is an oasis of tranquility and class, in a lush 10-acre property. Jane Pauley takes us inside.
There’s no need to have your finger constantly hovering over the volume buttons. Popular Science Whitson Gordon
I love big movie explosions as much as anyone, but I have a bone to pick with movie studios: It feels like every time I watch an action movie, I have to turn the volume way up just to hear the characters speak, then quickly turn it down every time something explodes. And when I’m not quick enough on the draw, my sleeping wife gets very angry.
Why do movies do this? It all has to do with dynamic range - undtrack. The wider the range, the larger the dramatic impact, explains Scott Wilkinson, audiovisual technology journalist and consultant (and the “Home Theater Geek” on TWiT.tv).
In other words, they mix it that way so when that explosion finally
happens, it kicks you in the gut and rocks your world.
The problem is, sometimes you don’t want your world rocked. Sometimes you just want to relax while watching superheroes punch each other in the face, without waking the neighbors through your paper-thin walls - and that dynamic range becomes a lot less desirable. “This is generally not a problem in commercial cinemas, which have high-quality sound systems and good acoustics,” Wilkinson says. “So you can hear and understand quiet dialogue in one scene without lessening the impact of loud explosions in another scene.” Even if these movies get remastered for home viewing, most people are using weak TV speakers in a less-than-ideal room with the air conditioner running in the background. It’s a recipe for unintelligible dialogue and constant volume tweaking. If you don’t have the cash to improve the acoustics of your room and create your own soundproof home theater (what am I, made of money?), you have other options.
Turn on “night mode” You might not realize it, but there may already be a setting built into your TV, sound system, or streaming box designed to deal with this: it’s called “night mode,” and it does exactly what it sounds like. “This compresses the dynamic range, reducing the difference between the loudest and softest parts of the soundtrack,” says Wilkinson. “Unfortunately, it’s not always easy to find this setting in the device’s menu system, though some devices have a dedicated ‘night mode’ button on their remote.” Dig through the settings of your TV, speaker system (if you have one), and streaming box - this useful mode may also be called “dynamic compression” or something similar.
Use a good sound bar or set of speakers Even with night mode on, you may find that your TV speakers are not up to the task of making dialogue intelligible at low volumes. You may not have the room to build a huge, powerful surround sound system, but even small upgrades can go a long way.
Wilkinson recommends an outboard sound system, such as a sound bar or
AV receiver with multiple speakers. Ideally, you’d have a sound bar or
set of speakers with at least 3.1 channels - one left, one right, and one
center (with a subwoofer for good bass). Most of the dialogue will
come out of the center channel, and having a separate speaker dedicated
to the task can make it easier to understand. So when you shop, keep
an eye out for that “3.1” label - 5.1 if you’re going for surround sound.
I think Vizio’s 3.1 sound bar is a great place to start, if you’re low on space.
Turn up your center channel A speaker system with a center channel will be a big step up from your TV speakers, but you can further decrease the dynamic range with in-menu volume adjustments. On many sound bars and receivers, you can increase the volume of the dialogue-focused center channel alone, without increasing the level of the other channels, Wilkinson says. This isn’t usually an option for two-channel systems, but it never hurts to look in your sound bar or receiver’s settings. Once you find the center channel volume level, crank it up a few notches and see where that gets you. (You may have to do a little experimentation to find the right balance - I always use The Matrix as a test case, as it’s a great example of a movie with high dynamic range.
When all else fails, use headphones But if you just can’t avoid waking your sleeping kids downstairs - and I know this isn’t the solution you want to hear - you may have to resort to using headphones. “By isolating yourself from any ambient noise and acoustic defects in the room, you can listen at lower volume and still understand the dialogue without being blown out by loud sounds,” says Wilkinson.
You probably already have headphones that’ll do the trick, but I’d
recommend against using Bluetooth, since there’s an inherent delay
that’ll cause sound to be out of sync with the screen. Instead, connect
your headphones to the TV or sound bar with a long 3.5-millimeter extension cable, or use a pair of radio frequency (RF)-based wireless home theater headphones like the Sennheiser RS 175. Some streaming boxes, like the Roku,
may even allow you to plug your headphones into the remote - or your
phone, using the remote app - to listen to music “wirelessly.” It may not
be ideal, but at least you’ll get your superhero-punching fix without
disturbing the neighborhood.
Tracking your health data through wearable devices
Experts say devices like smartwatches that continually monitor your health data can also give you early warnings about medical problems before a doctor might.
Correspondent David Pogue looks at how self-tracking data may one day help detect conditions like infectious diseases, type II diabetes, heart conditions or even cancer.
🗣️ The Apple Watch has been a lifesaver for many people, particularly those with heart conditions. Being able to share with the Dr what the heart is doing is a true blessing.
🗣️ Snyder at 5:30 has lost touch with reality! $50?!? What smart watch that does everything they say is $50? My Apple Watch was $400, I run and use it for music so I can rationalize it. Most Americans won’t use half of what it can do and definitely cannot afford $400+, Michael get a clue sir!
🗣️ In March I was feeling not so great, but nothing was wrong. Next day I wake to my Apple watch telling me I had arterial fibrillation over night and my pulse was still elevated. Called 911, Seattle FD medics confirmed this and off to the ER. After some time in ICU, and a shock, I was stabilized. Thank you Apple engineers and future thinking medical researchers.
🗣️ Many doctors have created YT videos explaining that Apple Watch’ ECG and AFIB monitoring is useless, while other metrics are more relevant. Doctors also fear that people may rely on their watch to avoid going to the doctor for monitoring because the watch provides false reassurances.
🗣️ Best real-time health-monitoring apps: 24-hour-a-day checkup Healthy living starts with the right tools. The latest in tech makes staying healthy, reaching your goals and taking control of your wellness easier than ever. Here's where you'll find our best health advice and recommendations.
🎼From 2013, Bob Simon reports on the New York Metropolitan Opera and how its general manager, Peter Gelb, has reinvigorated the centuries-old art form by making it more accessible and modernized.
After this song became a hit single, Bette Davis - then 73 - wrote letters to Kim Carnes and the songwriters to say she was a fan of the song and thank them for making her “a part of modern times,”
One of the reasons she loved the song was that her granddaughter thought her grandmother was "cool" for having a hit song written about her and that her grandson now looked up to her.
After it won Grammys, Davis sent them roses as well.
Kim Carnes
👀 Bette Davis Eyes (1981) HQ
👇 ♪ 📺 ♪ 👇
"Bette Davis Eyes" is a song written and composed by Donna Weiss and Jackie DeShannon, and made popular by American singer Kim Carnes. DeShannon recorded it in 1974; Carnes's 1981 version spent nine weeks at #1 on the Billboard Hot 100 and was Billboard's biggest hit of 1981. The Carnes version spent nine non-consecutive weeks on top of the US Billboard Hot 100 (interrupted for one week by the "Stars on 45 Medley") and was Billboard's biggest hit of the year for 1981. The single also reached #5 on Billboard's Top Tracks charts and #26 on the Dance charts. The song won the Grammy Awards for Song of the Year and Record of the Year. The song was also a #1 hit in 21 countries and peaked at #10 in the United Kingdom, her only Top 40 hit there to date. It also reached number two in Canada for twelve consecutive weeks, and was the #2 hit of 1981 in the country. Actress Bette Davis, then 73 years old, wrote letters to Carnes, Weiss, and DeShannon to thank all three of them for making her "a part of modern times," and said her grandson now looked up to her. After their Grammy wins, Davis sent them roses as well.
Bette Davis Eyes 👀 Jackie DeShannon
According to DeShannon, she got the idea for the song after watching the 1942 Bette Davis movie Now Voyager.
Bette Davis** sent thank-you letters to singer Kim Carnes and to the authors (Donna Weiss and Jackie DeShannon) for making her “a part of modern times and history”. The elderly movie star also claimed that she
loved the oeuvre especially because her grandchildren (who only paid lip service to her considerable body of work in films) suddenly viewed their septuagenarian granny as “super cool” and “trendy” for having been the subject of a top song. A first-rate ego-booster…
♥️ 🌷 👀 ♥️🌻🌹🌼
🌷
👀 ♪ 👀 ♪ 👀 ♪ 👀👀 ♪ 👀 ♪ 👀 ♪ 👀
KIM CARNES LIFTS 'BETTE DAVIS' TO THE TOP By John Rockwell July 26, 1981
There is much talk these days about how the popular-record business is changing. But then something comes along to reaffirm the old ways of doing things. Take Kim Carnes, whose single, ''Bette Davis Eyes,'' has ridden serenely on the top of the charts for weeks and has propelled the album that contains it, ''Mistaken Identity,'' to the top of the album charts, as well. Miss Carnes is a throwback in many ways. First, she has been around a long time, cranking out five previous albums with a shifting assortment of co-writers, producers and Los Angeles folk-rock session men in the time-honored way. She had had her successes, most notably a duet with Kenny Rogers on his ''Gideon'' LP and a cover version of Smokey Robinson's ''More Love'' last year. But then, suddenly, she hits it rich with one song. Although she has yet to appear here live since her breakthrough, she has promoted the song ''live'' in another, more modern way - through video. To this taste, the video promotional vignette for ''Bette Davis Eyes'' is cluttered and uninteresting. But it has commanded a good deal of attention, and has apparently served the cause of concert and television promotion for the song in a way that live appearances used to do. Whether she sustains that success remains to be seen; chances are she won't. But glorious one-shots are another pop tradition. The song itself is a winner, even with some risibly clumsy rhymes (''precocious'' and ''pro blush,'' above all). It is also several years old, having been written by Donna Weiss and another bit of pop's past, Jackie De Shannon. Yet it has been outfitted with a trendy, electro-pop arrangement, presumably by Miss Carnes's latest producer, Val Garay. Mr. Garay also has his roots in the past; before he became a producer he was one of Los Angeles's best-known engineers, having worked closely with Peter Asher, above all, on all the recent Linda Ronstadt and James Taylor albums. Miss Carnes's voice conforms to tradition, as well. It sounds eerily like Rod Stewart's frayed tenor, so much so that Robert Christgau waspishly remarked that ''Bette Davis Eyes'' is Mr. Stewart's best work since ''Maggie May.'' Another comparison to Miss Carnes's voice would be Bonnie Tyler, the British singer who enjoyed a worldwide one-shot hit three years back with ''It's a Heartache.'' That kind of voice, raspy, soulful and uncontrolled, triggers powerful evocations in people; the sound is, for many, inherently passionate and emotional. Yet it is also a limited sound, in that many kinds of music are unsuited for it for technical or stylistic reasons. Furthermore, in her past albums, Miss Carnes has not evinced a very focused view of herself or what she wanted to say with her music, and she may continue to have such problems with her follow-up albums. Even the rest of ''Mistaken Identity,'' while pleasing enough, doesn't command attention in the way her hit single does. But that is not to take anything away from her version of ''Bette Davis Eyes.'' With its erotic implications, mysterious imagery, arresting instrumental and yearning vocal, this is the pop-single phenomenon of the year.
This is a digitized version of an article from The
Times’s print archive, before the start of online publication in 1996. To preserve these articles as they originally appeared, The Times does not alter, edit or update them. Occasionally the digitization process introduces transcription errors or other problems; we are continuing to work to improve these archived versions.
👀 Comments 👀 “Bette Davis Eyes” was initially recorded by co-author Jackie DeShannon in 1974-1975, but it’s Kim Carnes’* cover version (1981) that became a major smash-hit. It earned the Grammy Awards for Song of the Year and Record of the year. Kim Carnes released several other crowd-pleasers before and after, but none on par - by far - with that womanly #1. 👀 ♪ 👀 ♪ 👀 ♪ 👀 Upon first listen, “Bette Davis Eyes” might be construed as a tribute, an ode to the iconic lady. Not untrue. However, there is more to it. Let’s say that the main theme is quite akin to those of “Easy Lover” by Phil Collins and “Maneater” by Hall & Oates. In essence, the lyrics are a sophisticated warning⚠️: beware, beware of those FEMME FATALE alluring yet deceitful EYES, fellows! 👀 ♪ 👀 ♪ 👀 ♪ 👀 Bette Davis** sent thank-you letters to singer Kim Carnes and to the authors (Donna Weiss and Jackie DeShannon) for making her “a part of modern times and history”. The elderly movie star also claimed that she loved the oeuvre especially because her grandchildren (who only paid lip service to her considerable body of work in films) suddenly viewed their septuagenarian granny as “super cool” and “trendy” for having been the subject of a top song. A first-rate ego-booster... ♥️ 👀 ♥️ 👀 ♪ 👀 ♪ 👀 ♪ 👀 Kim Carnes’ raspy voice led many to mistake her for Rod Stewart as the vocalist. 👀 ♪ 👀 ♪ 👀 ♪ 👀 A-list actress Ruth Elizabeth “Bette” Davis’ career spanned more than 50 years (1929-1989) and 100-odd credits. She was known for her forceful and intense style of acting. And for those distinctive deep blue eyes of hers, worthy of countless close-up shots. 👀 ♪ 👀 ♪ 👀 ♪ 👀 To me, this was the song that really introduced the world to the sound of the 1980s. By 1981, Disco was dead, and when this became a big hit in the Spring of that year, it was the first song to really introduce the synthesizer as the dominant instrument of the decade. Thank you to Mr. Bill Cuomo for kick-starting the greatest decade in music history.
13 Rare Photos of an Unforgettable Star
Posted on 11.04.14 by John Farr
She was born Ruth Elizabeth Davis in Lowell, Massachusetts in 1908, and was, by her own admission, a Yankee.
When her parents separated in 1915, the young “Betty” as she was then known, was shipped off to boarding school. At the age of thirteen, her mother moved to New York, taking Betty and her younger sister Bobby with her. It was there that Davis caught the acting bug, thanks to the films of Rudolph Valentino and Mary Pickford.
She also changed the spelling of her name to the now-legendary “Bette” after French novelist Honoré de Balzac’s powerfully unconventional heroine, Cousin Bette.
Work in small parts on Broadway attracted the attention of a talent scout for Universal Pictures, and in 1930, at the age of twenty-two, “Bette Davis” boarded a train for Hollywood. Screen tests and early roles were not major successes, and she came perilously close to losing her first contract at Universal.
Later in her life she said, “If Hollywood didn’t work out, I was prepared to be the best secretary in the world.” What saved her from the steno pool though, were her eyes. She always had Bette Davis eyes. A cinematographer felt they were “lovely” enough to make it worth keeping the actress who possessed them. A good call, if ever we saw one.
But her big break came when she went to work for Warner Brothers, and she was suddenly given roles that matched her spirit of individualism. Davis once said, “Hollywood wanted me to be pretty, but I always fought for realism.” This was a conflict that played out throughout her career, because Davis was pretty, very pretty, as her roles in films like “Jezebel” (1938) and “Dark Victory” (1939) attest.
The Davis that audiences often think of is the Davis of “All About Eve” (1950), and “Whatever Happened to Baby Jane”
(1962), the “bitch roles” that proved so popular, and the more ghoulish-looking Bette that became her lot with ill health and advancing
age.
But it is the young Bette to which we pay tribute with this album of
photos from the early period of her career. The realism that Davis fought for is there, most notably in her gritty performance as the shrewish Mildred in “Of Human Bondage” (1934), the role that launched her as a dramatic force. The steeliness that marks the Davis mien is also very much evident in one of her signature roles, as the
manipulative Regina Giddens in “The Little Foxes” (1941).
However, also present in the Davis before 1942, when the war began to
influence her life and the movies she made, was a softer side, a Bette
who could and did flutter her enormous, bountiful eyes. In close ups,
it's the eyes that dominate, and it is their sheer strength, confidence
and expressiveness that we're drawn to.
The young Bette has a delicacy to her, a nuanced manner of speech and
posture that evinces wisdom beyond her years, while still communicating
freshness and the spirit of youth. She’s sexy, glamorous, vulnerable
and playful.
Here is Bette Davis as you've never seen her before.
She could travel the spectrum from one extreme to the other. She could look and act as soft and beautiful on one end and look as equally hard and mean on the other end. Loved watching her act; great video presentation.
👇 ♪ 📺 ♪ 👇
A tribute to the legendary actress, Bette Davis.
Obviously the best song to use is Bette Davis Eyes by Kim Carnes.
Sources: The pictur:e at the end can easily be found on google images and most of the clips are from her most successful films like All About Eve, Baby Jane and Jezebel
There are plenty of things we hold onto for good
reason. Treasures from our travels, family heirlooms, sentimental
birthday cards—all justifiable keepsakes. Then there are the odds and
ends we accumulate just because we have the space to store them. You
know, the “But what if I need this one day?” items. It seems like a
rather harmless habit—until those nonessentials add up and turn your cabinets and closets into living nightmares. The chaos stops here. It’s time to repurpose, recycle, or kick ’em to the curb.
While
we aren’t here to push a hyper-minimalist agenda, we do believe every
object in your home should serve a distinct purpose or, at the very
least, brighten your day a little. We doubt your excessive tote bag
collection or rubber band–filled junk drawer is offering you much. Here are the 30 things you’ll be better off letting go:
🥗🥖🥕🔪🍳🥐🥑🛌🏻😴🛏️🧖♂️🪥🛁🚿🛀🧻🛋️🧹
Things in Your Kitchen
The ominous cloud of plastic bags under the sink
All those spices that are past their prime
Mismatched Tupperware taking over your cabinets - get containers that stack neatly instead
The microwave—the stove or oven does the job just as well (if not better) without hogging counter space
Extra knives, because all you really need are three good ones
Single-use accoutrements from your last takeout order (think: chopsticks, napkins, straws)
The logo-heavy cups and shot glasses from your college days
Specialized cleaning solutions (a single all-in-one concentrate will leave your house just as pristine)
Any subpar tote bag you snagged just because it was free
Stemmed wineglasses (simple drinking glasses work for water, juice, and vino)
🥗🥖🥕🔪🍳🥐🥑🛌🏻😴🛏️🧖♂️🪥🛁🚿🛀🧻🛋️🧹
Things in Your Bedroom
Wimpy hangers from the dry cleaner
The top sheet, unless you really love to bundle up
Beat-up shoeboxes and the accompanying protective bags (streamline your collection with a tiered rack or over-the-door hanger)
The shack of books you’re done reading (donate them to a used-book store—or pass along to a fellow bibliophile)
The obscene amount of decorative pillows you purchased during your boho phase
🥗🥖🥕🔪🍳🥐🥑🛌🏻😴🛏️🧖♂️🪥🛁🚿🛀🧻🛋️🧹
Things in Your Bathroom 🛀
Every hotel toiletry you’ve ever stolen
Sad towels with holes or makeup stains
That ugly shower caddy - invest in a teak stool or over-the-tub tray that won’t make you cringe every morning
Expired medications, makeup, and sunscreen (yes, they all have expiration dates!)
.gif)
.gif)
.gif)
Later in her life she said, “If Hollywood didn’t work out, I was prepared to be the best secretary in the world.” What saved her from the steno pool though, were her eyes. She always had Bette Davis eyes. A cinematographer felt they were “lovely” enough to make it worth keeping the actress who possessed them. A good call, if ever we saw one.
.gif)
