|
^^^Your dad sounds pretty badass.MrBling posted:Does anyone happen to know what the general audiophile consensus is regarding the laser turntable? Holy poo poo. I swear I had this idea back when I was in high school or something. I used to think it would be really cool if you could like take some super ultra dpi scan of a record's surface and reproduce the sound from that. Could'a been rich 
|
#
¿
Nov 12, 2009 09:32
|
|
|
|
| # ¿ Apr 28, 2024 03:24 |
|
|
Even ignoring the engrish this is absolutely mental.Feng-Shui master posted:The top of the rack where the television set is sitting on has a 1cm width grove along the edge. I chose two identical marble balls and placed them at the rear corner sitting firmly in the groove. Immediately the soundstage extended much further back and there were much more layering. Feng-Shui master posted:I told Martin the weak point of his whole system is his power amplifier; just place the [small jade] ring on top of the power amplifier, right at the center. Bingo! This is like icing on the cake; the jade ring brought out the musicality and finer details of the system and made the whole system sounded even more elegant and full of life.
|
|
#
¿
Nov 30, 2009 08:26
|
|
|
The best analogy I've heard discrediting the benefits of super-high sample rates is to imagine the same thing for visuals. Imagine if Samsung started putting out flatscreens touting infrared and ultraviolet capabilities. More info = better quality amirite? This article talks about sampling/bit rates, sites lots of references and makes sense to me, so at least the odds are reduced that it's crazy bullshit. It's interesting to me that people are so ready to accept the bounds of their perception visually but not aurally, I think it speaks to how much influence our brains can have over the data our senses feed us. Check out the McGurk Effect and watch your ears literally lie to you: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=G-lN8vWm3m0 shortspecialbus posted:Network Jacks? Pfft. I use RFC1149 for airier highs and more dynamic drops. I just got the joke, airier highs and dynamic drops  edit: Speaking of bass drops, I was just reminded of one of my favorite quick youtube speaker vids. This man is clearly a true musical connoisseur who transcends the feeble goals of most audiophiles... https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=P9bk_QLvc_c Takes No Damage fucked around with this message at 01:35 on Dec 12, 2014 |
|
#
¿
Dec 11, 2014 23:50
|
|
|
Does anyone have some more good bass song recommendations? Not those dumb bass CDs they sell at car shops but actual music? I recently messed around with the EQ in Windows and turned the bass way up for fun, actually still sounds pretty nice for most things. For years now I've been using this old Foobar EQ preset called Punch & Sparkle as a base for any EQ adjustments and it seems like a decent place to start most of the time. So far from earlier in the thread I got: Mario Paint BGM3 (holy poo poo this is sick, the left side of my spectrum visualization in Foobar just holds different patterns throughout the whole song). Jamiroquai - Butterfly Trentemoller - Evil Dub + another song I have written down at home Oh and I went and ripped the OST off my old Quake CD, now I should have some nice clean FLACs to mess about with stupid low frequency stuff.
|
|
#
¿
Dec 16, 2014 01:37
|
|
|
Panty Saluter posted:Also, I think you'd have to feed it from a reel-to-reel deck for Maximum Realness™ Reel-to-Reel Makes It Sound Real™  I'm about to move into a new apartment and my current plan is to just make a 2x4 frame that fills up my biggest shared wall and wrap it in moving blankets, then stack all my bookshelves in front of it. That should give me reasonable sound isolation and echo cancelling right? I know I can't blast Inception at 1am or anything, I'm just looking for a good combination of cheap/easy/effective.
|
|
#
¿
Oct 6, 2015 22:36
|
|
|
Hooooooooooly poo poo guys, I've been trying to find this one webcomic that is perfect for this thread for literally years. All I could remember was it had a blonde guy and his wife/girlfriend as the straight man. Trouble is, that describes about 50% of all webcomics. For a long time I thought it was in some poker-themed one called '+EV', I even browsed through that entire comic a few times convinced it was in there somewhere. But then, in some other thread somebody posted a comic from Bigger Than Cheeses and I thought I recognized the characters, so I just spent 2 days absentmindedly hitting 'Next' through the archives, and on the seven hundredth and third one, I finally found it. It's even vaguely on-topic for subchat  /!\ AUDIOPHILES /!\  So this post isn't completely masturbatory, I picked up a Rythmik LV12R subwoofer for $650 or so through Ascend Acoustics a while back and I've been pretty happy with it (even if the box does say "Articulate Bass for the Discerning Audiophile" on it  ). It's a pretty huge box and can rattle any room I'm likely to ever put it in. If you're in the market for an entry-level standalone sub I recommend checking this one out.vvv Maybe they mean the overall dimensions? The LV12R is a 12" speaker but the box is something like 22x24x19 inches. "Hey, it's compact for us..." Takes No Damage fucked around with this message at 17:14 on Oct 28, 2015 |
|
#
¿
Oct 28, 2015 06:51
|
|
|
KozmoNaut posted:128kbit MP3 is actually a lot better today than it was back then, due to massive advances in encoder quality. I recently found some old CDRs full of mp3s that I burned back in my freshman year 1999. I used to actually get mad when people used higher than 128kbps because the files were bigger and took longer to download on my 28.8  Anyway, even listening to these on the actual stereo I used back then (I'm moving so my receiver isn't here now) and some old cabinet speakers I brought home literally from the side of the road, holy poo poo these files sound like hot garbage. Loud pop stuff like 311 and AC/DC is super obviously compressed to  levels and all cymbals have been replaced with static. I seriously doubt my ears have actually gotten better these last 15 years so I must just have been too dumb to notice back then...
|
|
#
¿
Nov 22, 2015 11:56
|
|
|
I've always used Vorbis for low bitrate encodes where getting a small filesize is a concern. I don't remember what I did for research but I probably read something somewhere that Vorbis was superior because it was  Open SourceTM and therefore superior to mean old Apple's closed off AAC. Did we ever figure out if one format really has a benefit over any other for minimizing file sizes?vvv I guess I'm asking specifically for music, speech can be knocked down way more and as long as it's intelligible it can be said to be 'lossless'. I want to know the best format/bitrate to cram as much music as I can onto my old 4GB iPod and still have it sound 'good' 
Takes No Damage fucked around with this message at 07:13 on Nov 23, 2015 |
|
#
¿
Nov 23, 2015 06:07
|
|
|
|
| # ¿ Apr 28, 2024 03:24 |
|
|
Khablam posted:AAC-HE is effectively your best (only?) option for ultralow bitrates and most AAC encoders are about the same, so you may as well let iTunes do it. That's if your 4Gb iPod supports it, which it may not. What is the actual model? I think it's a 2nd gen Nano? Bought it in '07 or thereabouts. I've never actually used iTunes, the first thing I did with my Nano was load some app on it that gave me a custom interface so I could just drag files over to it like a USB stick. When I decided Vorbis was the file format for me I moved over to RockBox and it's been running that for the last 5 years or so. There must be a way for foobar to encode AAC, I'll experiment with that and see if I can find a sweet spot where the sound quality is relatively transparent over crappy earbuds.
|
|
#
¿
Dec 15, 2015 18:45
|
|