|
Tsaven Nava posted:I dunno if any of you guys saw this on Slashdot, but apparently 1/3rd of people can't tell the difference between 48k and 160k encoding, even on very high-end audio equipment. Excuse me, but that's comparing 2 entirely different encoders. AAC+ is designed to sound good at very low bitrates, and is used in applications like terrestrial digital radio broadcasting. OGG Vorbis has no such optimization. I can't see how you couldn't tell 56k from 26k, assuming you were referring to MP3. Most people have trouble tellign the difference between 128k and higher bitrate MP3s on average cheap hardware, but 56k sounds like total poo poo no matter what it's on, except for purely spoken word content.
|
#
¿
Oct 19, 2009 21:55
|
|
|
|
| # ¿ Apr 28, 2024 07:01 |
|
|
TheMadMilkman posted:The home theater guys tend to be much more grounded in reality, mostly because the focus is on video, and video has objective standards that you can match -- standards that were created to assure that the produced picture matches the original intent. You don't really have the same thing for audio, especially 2-channel. There are objective standards for audio - do a simple double blind test or hook up an oscilloscope or something and check against a reference signal - audiophiles just absolutely refuse to use them.
|
|
#
¿
Oct 20, 2009 16:50
|
|
|
qirex posted:No oscilloscope can possibly as accurate as their magic ears. AUDIOPHILE FLOWCHART: Scratched and warped 78 rpm record -> $12,300 needle -> $92,830 turntable (with $1299 power cord) -> $85,000 RCA cable -> $89,200 receiver -> $2000 speaker cable -> $210,000 speakers -> Medicare Discount hearing aid
|
|
#
¿
Oct 20, 2009 17:59
|
|
|
McPhearson posted:A buddy of mine is doing some research at his university comparing the emotional response to music containing infrabass and music without it. He actually got the uni to give him tons of money to do this; he's got some major engineering and physics professors to design the room and system, has someone from the psychology department who specializes in spatial sound, and has full access to the uni's experimental acoustic research studio for all testing. You can feel infrabass though, same reason why deaf people can still somewhat enjoy music with really loud bass - ya can't hear it but you feel it.
|
|
#
¿
Oct 20, 2009 18:38
|
|
.
|
Spoondrift posted:Huh, I guess because I don't have an electrical engineer's knowledge of how digital audio works but am not intellectually incurious enough to be satisfied with an explanation of "IT'S DIGITAL!!!" I'm a crazy audiophile. You pretty much are, being you were claiming that a digital signal would be substantially changed by minor interference to the analog signal conveying it.
|
|
#
¿
Nov 22, 2009 22:07
|
|
|
Spoondrift posted:No, I didn't. I claimed that variations in the digital signal could be propagated to the analog signal after coversion, and this is indeed the case for something like a http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Resistor_ladder DAC, as we've already seen. Then you don't know what you were talking about because you brought it up for when digital signals are transferred between two devices over an analog carrier. And by the way if a digital signal doesn't vary it's carrying either all 1s or all 0s.
|
|
#
¿
Nov 22, 2009 22:42
|
|
|
Spoondrift posted:Dude, really? Do I have to spell out what I mean by "variations in a digital signal" so you don't egregiously misinterpret me? And any device you buy that's legitimate is designed to handle minor variations, and (almost) all digital signaling systems involve some form of error-correction. It is very difficult for a digital signal to spontaneously become a valid, different, signal, instead you just have drop outs in video/audio or somewhat degraded quality for a few milliseconds. Furthermore it'd be extremely difficult to build a DAC that only accepted a precise voltage for 0 and a precise one for 1 - most of the reason we have tolerances in DACs is because adapting them to only accept say 0 v and 1 v ONLY would require a shitload more components.
|
|
#
¿
Nov 22, 2009 23:41
|
|
|
Monster makes gold-tipped iPod sync and charge cables man. http://www.amazon.com/Monster-Cable-iCharger-Charger-Firewire/dp/B0000918U2 * Exclusive Smart Digital Charger technology ensures fast, accurate charges and maximizes battery life * Unique, innovative flush-mount design for a compact appearance * 3-stage LED charge indicator light lets you know charging stage status * 24k gold contracts for optimum power transfer and corrosion resistance * Includes convenient 10-foot cord $46
|
|
#
¿
Dec 22, 2009 03:16
|
|
|
eddiewalker posted:That's not a terrible price for an accessory for an Apple product that's almost 10 years old. Yes it is. They were still selling iPods that charged by firewire in 2005, and the Apple price was $25 for the cable.
|
|
#
¿
Dec 22, 2009 06:49
|
|
|
There's also that some older electronics would commonly use one metal and regular cables used another, and if there was any ambient humidity, those two metals + electricity meant they'd start corroding each other once plugged in. Forget what the two metals were, but the gold tip thing mostly started out of people wanting a cable that wouldn't corrode half the stuff you plugged it to.
|
|
#
¿
Dec 23, 2009 15:29
|
|
|
The less thought of plausibility you put into it the better.
|
|
#
¿
Jan 18, 2010 23:13
|
|
|
If I could only find some way to combine audiophile bullshit with a cult I'd be the richest rear end in a top hat on earth.
fishmech fucked around with this message at 01:03 on Jan 20, 2010 |
|
#
¿
Jan 20, 2010 01:00
|
|
|
Mercrom posted:You are truly a master of audio Hogscraper. I bet you can successfully blind test FLAC vs 320 bit MP3 too. Dude he's talking about multichannel stuff, do they even have 5.1 channel mp3?
|
|
#
¿
Jul 15, 2010 21:03
|
|
|
Takes No Damage posted: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 There are quite a few codecs designed around minimizing file size/streaming bandwidth while seeking to maintain as much audio quality as possible. Generally they don't hold up well for most music, but can handle voice and sound effects quite well. All of our digital cell phones are capable of using multiple of them. Speex is one open source one. It's for speech, as the name implies, and it produces acceptable quality at 4 kilobits per second. You use a 16 kilobits per second version for "high quality". One that was popular in the late 90s and early 2000s was "truespeech", a format that was playable in Windows Media Player for a while. Initially developed for taking voice notes on old handheld pda type devices with limited processing power and even more limited storage, it ran at about 8.5 kilobits per second, and the common 16 MB of user storage on one of those devices could hold nearly 4 and a half hours of that audio!
|
|
#
¿
Nov 23, 2015 06:44
|
|
Open SourceTM
|
Endless Mike posted:Tell me more about these untruthful, incomplete bits.          Inside your computer are millions of little bits. Each one of those bits can be a one or a zero and as your computer runs programs each one of these bits changes its state, often thousands of times every second. Understandably, this puts a lot of pressure on your bits and, after a period of time, some of your bits may start to wear out. At first your bits become a little bit cranky and don't change quite as quickly and after much use they may become worn out on the edges. The Bit Recycler is designed to reconstitute your bits, making sure that your bits are always in top shape. When you first run the Bit Recycler, the title screen will appear. The first thing to do is to select "Analyse Bits" from the Run Menu. The Bit Recycler will proceed to analyse your bits and determine their average state of health. When analysis has completed you will be presented with a report. If the report recommends bit recycling then choose "Recycle" from the Run menu. Bit Recycling has three stages. First, your worn out bits are ground up into a sort of bit 'mush'. The bit mush is then boiled and poured on to a conveyor belt where finally, brand new bits are stamped out. Bit Recycling is a maintainence operation which should be performed at least once a month. This will normally substitute for the old- fashioned way of recycling your bits. Somewhere inside your computer, usually tucked away beside the hard drive, there is a little container called the 'Bit Bucket'. Worn out bits usually accumulate in the Bit Bucket. For manual recycling, bring your computer to a trained Bit Recycling Technician. He will remove the Bit Bucket and pour the worn out bits into a little spout on the back of your computer where they will be reprocessed. * NOTE: Do not attempt manual bit recycling yourself. The above description of manual recycling is a simplified outline of an inherently complex and technical operation. Use the TOGGLE BOOLEANS Bit Recycler instead or consult a trained technician. TOGGLE BOOLEANS will not be responsible, in any way whatsoever, for any damage or data loss caused by the use of the Bit Recycler or following these intructions. Version 1.2 also add the ability to detect and execute subversive elements among your bits. Sometimes when bits are worked too hard they become revolutionary. If your Ones are being worked harder than your Zeros, the Ones begin to feel like they are being exploited and if there is strong leader among them, they can rampage through your computer trying to turn all of the Zeros they find into Ones. This can cause great havoc for the computer user, so it is important to ocassionally discipline or execute these subversive elements. To do so, select Execute Subversive Bits from the Run menu after Bit Analysis has completed. fishmech fucked around with this message at 03:57 on Dec 17, 2015 |
|
#
¿
Dec 17, 2015 03:19
|
|
|
synthetik posted:The bitrecycler is a real thing? That was sold? It's like memory doubler technology aimed at a niche market. It was a freeware release on shareware cds and BBSes. And it's a parody of under-educated user superstitions, and the various crappy freeware and shareware utilities of the day. Here's the rest of the readme: The Bit Recycler Version 1.2 is freeware. It may be copied and distributed freely under the following conditions: - No modifications are to be made to the Bit Recycler program or this documentation. - This file must be distributed with the Bit Recycler program. For more information about other TOGGLE BOOLEANS products, such as the Programmer's Shell, the Desktop Coffee Mug, Pop Charts, Mouse Warp, or the Elvis Detector write to: TOGGLE BOOLEANS P.O. Box 4202 Station E Ottawa, Ontario Canada, K1S 5B2
|
|
#
¿
Dec 18, 2015 01:49
|
|
|
Khablam posted:It's something like the first or second edition of the system, which still had the RCA outputs on the back. No, the "first model PS1s are great CD players" audiophile thing caught on before the PS2 was even available in Japan, let alone America. It came about in late 1999, which was a good bit after the last new PS1s with the standard RCA outputs were on shelves. Also the PS2 wasn't high end equivalent for DVD players. It was simply almost the cheapest way to get DVD playback. The PS3 on the other hand, was one of the best Blu-Ray players for a good number of years, because it had and continues to get updates to handle new discs where many of the early ones had trouble with the Java stuff or were lax on getting updated support for new Blu Ray key stuff.
|
|
#
¿
Dec 19, 2015 01:46
|
|
|
Certain forms of vacuum tube elements don't perform to full specifications until they've been on a certain time. For many of them, they get worse on this the longer they've been used. If you've ever had an old all vacuum tube radio or TV set, you'll be familiar with this. For instance one of my grandpas had a cheapy vacuum tube set from the 50s that never the less still worked, he kept it down in his office. That thing, when you'd just turned it on for the day, it could take up to 5 minutes to get to "normal" audio quality/tuning/volume. Over in TVs, it can result in things like colors being off for a while, having problems holding a frequency, etc.
|
|
#
¿
Dec 20, 2015 02:54
|
|
|
It's always worth mentioning that a lot of audiophiles are hooking $50,000 of equipment up to listen to a beat up record from the 1950s, or some well-played cassette tape, or a poorly mastered 80s CD.
|
|
#
¿
Dec 22, 2015 02:04
|
|
|
Woolie Wool posted:I wonder, what effect would the Kim regime falling have on tube prices? I'm certain there are millions of North Korean tubes and massive production capacity, dumping it all into the global audio market would be...interesting. I really doubt it. Pretty sure when their tube equipment breaks it just stays broken rather than them running a factory to churn out replacement parts.
|
|
#
¿
Dec 22, 2015 02:35
|
|
|
KozmoNaut posted:Ethan Winer has a massive hardon for room treatments (which he also happens to sell through his company Realtraps), but other than that, his head is on straight when it comes to audio. Isn't it obvious that CBR 128 kilobit is used because it's about the minimum quality most people will accept out of MP3s intended for full range music (as opposed to something all acapella or an audiobook)? Like yeah, if they tested it with V0 MP3 even fewer people would prefer hi-res to that mp3, probably, but that's not as damning as "we used the worst common MP3 bitrate and still 45% of people were ok with it".
|
|
#
¿
Jan 1, 2016 06:25
|
|
|
KozmoNaut posted:Every major breakthrough in audio technology (78s to microgroove LPs, LPs to CDs, cassette tape to literally everything else) has been completely obvious to anyone who has listened to both formats, but it just ain't happening with hi-res audio. We've had SACD since 1999 and DVD-audio since 2000, but both were miserable failures, and while hi-res audio downloads exist (HDTracks, Pono etc.), I think it's fair to call them a statistical anomaly at best. The other thing with SACD and DVD-Audio is that they're really hard for the average joe to get a player that plays them in full quality. Yeah some SACDs also have a side encoded in regular CD format, and many DVD-Audio discs have a fallback encode in regular DVD audio format so you can play them in anything, but their benefits absolutely don't exist in those lower encodings. So if you want to actually listen to anything done new, you still gotta spend a lot of money. And you can't, say, play back SACD on a computer (because they were worried about piracy) and it's really annoying to get a setup that will handle DVD-Audio on a PC. Even if they were amazing, the price and hassle is prohibitive for people. It'd be like if CD players stayed as expensive as at launch until like, 1998. Plus DVD-Audio's whole "story" isn't helped by the fact that a regular DVD with audio stored normally is already at supremely high quality - the standard DVD player specifications since like 1999 allow for up to 7.1 channels at really high bitrate and 7.1 surround with 48k sampling rate, or up to 5.1 with 96k sampling rate in a different codec. You're basically completely set with standard DVD player quality audio even if high sampling rates and higher sampling depths (24 bit per sample is supported) are "neccesary" to you.
|
|
#
¿
Jan 1, 2016 17:34
|
|
|
Boiled Water posted:B&O had their awful moment in the sun when their 100k DKK television turned out to have a very cheap samsung panel in it. We're talking a panel when put into a TV for normals having a price tag of around 2% of the B&O model. So that's like enough money to get 2 or 3 decent used cars, and they put a Wal-Mart special quality panel in it? Yikes!
|
|
#
¿
Jan 5, 2016 02:22
|
|
|
Zemyla posted:You may have misread it as "10k". 100k is enough to buy 2 or 3 decent new cars. 100,000 Danish Krone is currently almost US$15,000. $5000 to $7500 is a fairly decent used car these days, or $15,000 will get you a low end new car (like the Chevy Spark or Mitsubishi Mirage).
|
|
#
¿
Jan 5, 2016 04:01
|
|
|
grack posted:Does it improve the emotional response of the music? What about GRIP? Have you tried brilliant pebbles? AM is capable of sounding quite decent, with a strong signal and well-running radio. It's not gonna be as good as like a CD or FM of course.
|
|
#
¿
Jan 13, 2016 00:35
|
|
|
Panty Saluter posted:It's interesting to me that they opted for a 12" speaker. AM radio only does about what...4 kHz at the most? Reducing the bass goes a long way toward making it sound decent, and not quite so boomy and muffled. Seems like a smaller driver might have favored the mids a little more and made the balance better. Does it at least have a tone control? I don't recall seeing one. Considering the age, going big was probably a cheaper way to get loud sound with the other equipment and the type of driver. Tons of old radios had quite large speakers despite AM radio broadcast not ever being all that excellent for bass.
|
|
#
¿
Jan 13, 2016 05:00
|
|
|
To be fair, some valid AIFF and WAV files simply have worse sampling/bit depth. 
|
|
#
¿
Feb 6, 2016 01:45
|
|
|
There were tons of changes. The Sony PlayStation 1 had 28 distinct normal models and 14 distinct debugging models/models for the Net Yaroze home development system. Across these were three different revisions of the basic chipset, 4 different combinations of read laser/laser assembly material/laser assembly location (done because the earliest models had a laser that died quickly, and because there were overheating problems with the original laser assembly material and location), 13 BIOS revisions, and then there was changes in having S-Video out on a normal plug or not, having RCA composite and audio out on normal plugs or not, having the parallel port or not and having a serial port or not. For instance, with the SCPH-7000/7001/7002 models introduced in 1997 (the number at the end indicates Japan/North America/PAL) there was introduction of a brand new set of music visualizations with an audio CD inserted, there's only the proprietary AV port, you still have serial/parallel ports on the back, the laser assembly is moved to the right hand side and made of metal so it won't melt over time as the plastic one could, and you've got either the 4.0 or 4.1 BIOS depending on region. Basically the PS1 had an insane amount of variability!
|
|
#
¿
Mar 24, 2016 16:08
|
|
|
Is there an additional amount of range available when using a brand new record in one of those laser turntables?
|
|
#
¿
Mar 28, 2016 19:45
|
|
|
Collateral Damage posted:The sense of scale in that picture is all weird and it looks like the cable is a foot thick. That's because it pretty much is a foot thick, or close to it.
|
|
#
¿
Apr 4, 2016 16:57
|
|
|
Bigger cable = better sound, therefore making your cable as thick as an elephant dick = best sound.
|
|
#
¿
Apr 4, 2016 17:43
|
|
|
I thought the big deal with Atmos was supposed to be that it could scale surround sound information gracefully to wildly different physical speaker layouts that theaters already have? Not so much that it sounded particularly better on its own, just that it could mean a theater chain sends out one digital movie to all its theaters rather than multiple formats encoded to match up to the speaker layouts in each physical theater better.
|
|
#
¿
Jul 12, 2016 15:18
|
|
|
I really like the packaging design they chose for it. And let's face it, that's all anyone really cares about when it comes to buying physical media these days. It's nice that the actual music content is plain unprotected FLAC though, so it's also pretty versatile.
|
|
#
¿
Dec 19, 2016 17:22
|
|
|
The article mentions upscaling from 8 bit audio inputs - where would you even find that in anything recent?
|
|
#
¿
Dec 28, 2016 22:12
|
|
|
Ehh, I don't known that DAT could have really gone anywhere on its own, as a consumer format, even if the record companies had been fully behind it. The only aspect it had that was really useful to consumers was that it could store a whole 2 hours of music (well, it could go to 3 hours using thinner tape, but that was more likely to snap) versus the 74-80 minute commercial CD release. But in exchange, there were a lot more moving parts so the players were less reliable, and it still had the problem that you couldn't near-instantly skip tracks like you could on CD. On top of that, the physical media was going to remain far more expensive to mass produce than plain CDs were. The smaller size compared to regular cassettes, as he mentioned, could have eventually been decent for portable devices. But the extra complexity means those were going to be nowhere near as robust as regular cassette portables until they had a lot more time to perfect them. And that would be a big issue, especially since proper MP3 player type devices were going to show up at the end of the century no matter what. Of course they do sound great, and there's absolutely no question that they were excellent for people in the business of making their own audio content, or who needed to archive existing audio content off of other formats. I just question their practicality for the consumer even if the RIAA hadn't literally poo poo themselves over the idea of it.
|
|
#
¿
Jan 9, 2017 04:09
|
|
|
JFairfax posted:there were definitely affordable burners in the late 1990s because that's when everoyne got their PlayStation's chipped and buying pirated games You really needed to have a lot of money in the late 90s to go around burning piles of games for the PSX etc. You needed a decent internet connection, a computer with a fairly sizable hard drive, the burner and media of course, and it needed to be fast enough to not gently caress up during a burn. Plus the mod chips themselves could be pretty pricey, depending on where you were. Fast forward a couple years to the early 2000s though, and practically any computer you could get would be fast enough, a burner barely cost more than a read-only drive, and you went from a few bucks per disc to several discs for a dollar. It was a major change.
|
|
#
¿
Jan 9, 2017 19:23
|
|
|
JFairfax posted:Vinyl also funnily now looks like the only technology that isn't going to be obsolete for physical media. That's because it's already obsolete, so it can't go obsolete again.
|
|
#
¿
Jan 16, 2017 18:20
|
|
|
JFairfax posted:the other good thing about vinyl is the amount of stuff that's available on it, going back almost a century.* *So long as you have like 6 different kinds of needles and the ability to use at least 5 different turntable speeds
|
|
#
¿
Jan 18, 2017 02:08
|
|
|
JFairfax posted:https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=eN7e5R96fwU But it is on YouTube, for free even. Jerry Cotton posted:Don't forget size. You're right, I'd forgotten about things like how you had 16-18 inch transcription disks and classical music releases, and how the European record industry sold half-meter diameter discs up to the 30s. A lotta regular record players aren't going to fit those.
|
|
#
¿
Jan 18, 2017 17:39
|
|
|
|
| # ¿ Apr 28, 2024 07:01 |
|
|
evobatman posted:There was this one audiophile parody website that I think has come up in this thread a couple of times where they listed fake products such as speaker cable fluid and demagnetizing your living room over the phone, and people kept putting in orders. That's MACHINA DYNAMICA - provider of Advanced Audio Concepts. And all the initial "products" were various cheap products the guy had around the house.
|
|
#
¿
Feb 18, 2017 20:20
|
|