Re:Better A/D conversion? Not terribly relevant.
on
New Sony Minidisc Players
·
· Score: 2, Informative
Optical line in doesn't mean a thing when you're recording from a analog microphone.
Those analog signals must be sampled to digital somehow, and the quality of the Analog->Digital convertor matters. Especially when it comes to recording off of microphones.
I use my Sony Net-MD player with a condenser mic to make field recordings. The only problem with Sony and it's "Copyright Protection" is that it doesn't allow you to transfer audio over the USB connect FROM the MD player TO the computer.
So basically, any recordings you make need to be transfered analog into your computer's sound card.
There have been petitions in the past from the MD users community demanding Sony allow bi-directional USB transfers, but because Sony has it's music label/tech world schizophrenia, it's never going to happen.
Right now, the only thing that is reasonably priced and does do this is the Nomad 3 from Creative, but I want something with better A/D conversion than what it has.
You're referring to CD-TEXT, a standard of sorts introduced by Sony where Artist, Album name, and track titles are encoded onto an audio CD in the subcodes.
It's true, not every commercial pressed CD out there has this feature, and believe it or not, not every CD-ROM (particularly older ones) can read the subcodes to extract the CD-TEXT info.
Sony Music includes CD-TEXT on all the CDs in it's catalog (to complement the CD-TEXT display features on most of it's car CD players.) I don't know about the other major labels.
My own experience with small labels tends to indicate they're not large users of CD-TEXT, but you can find the odd release which does have it.
I love Expose, it may not help you out, but it really helps me out because of the nature of the applications that I work in.
One of these is Logic Audio. While working through a project in it, it's certainly possible to have open 10 or more "sub" windows - Sample editors, Matrix editors, the track mixer, plug-in windows, MIDI list editors. Alt-Tab or clicking on the Logic Audio icon in the dock won't help me find the window that's 3 layers deep under the main app window.
So I just mouse over to one of my screen's corners, and all the Logic Audio windows move aside and shows me who is where, and *click* I'm there without having to get fustrated minimizing >5 windows just to find the one I want.
Yeah, it should be that simple, right? I'm in that "almost there" situation. I bring my 15" PowerBook to work and use it almost exclusively except for one thing - I need to keep my WinXP desktop around solely for the purpose of using Outlook to see my work's Exchange servers. Yeah, I could use Entourage to do that, but I don't like running it and Mail.app at the same time. Just like I don't like running Explorer and Safari at the same time.
Luckily, though, Panther's Mail.app has Exchange support, so all I need to do is hang tight for a few more days.
Yeah. The IIe's performance when compared to the rest of the II line depends on the application. It's the essentially the same core, but with less cache (256k vs. 2 and 4MB in "server-level" II's.)
Might I add to my own post that it's less cache,.18 micron process, and has on-board PCI and memory controllers. This is what makes it different than the others in the II line.
Yeah. The IIe's performance when compared to the rest of the II line depends on the application. It's the essentially the same core, but with less cache (256k vs. 2 and 4MB in "server-level" II's.)
But I'd say it's certainly as fast if not faster than a 300Mhz USII with 2MB of cache.
As for using II's in the Blade 1000... that is realistic.. I mean... its like trying to put a PPro in a Pentium 2 machine... they're just different.
This is not the same CPU that's in the Ultra 5/10. The Ultra5/10 uses the UltraSPARC IIi processor in 270Mhz-440MHz speeds, and varying cache sizes from 256k to 2MB.
The US2e has a built-in memory controller for PC133 EDEC DIMMs.
This isnt a open/closed source issue. This is a issue of compatabilitiy and regression, which, believe it or not, transcends open/closed source issues in alot of cases. It doenst take a glibc coder to realize that. Responding with "Well it serves them right because they're not open-source, nyeh!" is a cop-out and trite. Look at the big picture, because it's not only closed-source products that can run into this same problem.
There's a problem with releasing products in binary form that are statically linked. Consider the following scenario:
Let's say that Oracle releases it's database which is statically linked against glibc 2.1.3. A few days/weeks/months later, a security/performance bug was found, perhaps even in a function that the staticly-linked Oracle binary uses... a bug severe enough to warrant everyone with 2.1.3 systems to consider upgrading ASAP. As I'm sure you're aware, under a dynamic environment, all one would need to do is upgrade the glibc so's to 2.1.4, reboot, and be done. All programs that were affected by the bug in 2.1.3 now link against 2.1.4 when they start and all is well.
Except for our Oracle binary. It is then up to Oracle to re-release their product, but built against glibc 2.1.4 now... incresing the amount of time the problem hangs around, increasing downtime for the user (instead of rebooting once, they now need to shut down Oracle again to upgrade), and basically keeping a release hell for vendor and user.
Misleading? I was comparing size. The E220/420 use the same chassis. That chassis IS smaller than both the 250 (by 2U) and the 450 (by alot).
Even so, the 450 is still a waste of space. A 420R configured with 2 external D1000 units takes up less verticle space and affords you more hard drive slots than the 450, and can carry the same amount of CPUs and RAM. One might argue that this kind of set up is more redundant in some ways.
The 220R is much different from the E250 (which, btw, is rackmountable). Yes, both support two CPUs. Yes, both support 2GB of RAM. Yes, both are PCI. But the 220R is 4U and holds two internal SCSI disks. The E250 is 6U and holds 6.
Ditto for the 420R/E450. The 420R is essentially the same as the 220R, except that it supports 4 CPUs and 4GB of RAM. The E450 is the same, except that it supports up to 20 internal SCSI disks.
As for the X1, it supports more than just one drive and 128MB of RAM. The base model just comes configured that way. The X1 would make a more-than-adquate web/name/mail server most businesses. Yes, what a suprise that you DON'T need a 800Mhz chip to run these services. Or even multiple chips.
The E$ problems that the 400/4 and (more so) the 400/8 US2 cpus are having have cannot occur in the US3 CPUs, since the US3 cache can detect AND correct, whereas the US2 can only detect a parity error and send a panic.
That serving web hits is a pretty lightweight thing to do. Any worthwhile OS on decent hardware can be a "good" web server. So Linux replaced Sun on a few web servers. Big deal. Being that the backends are E4500's, then I would guess that those are the DB servers for weather.com. Linux still has a way to go when it comes to supporting large-scale OLTP, so I would put away the party hats until Linux can/adequately/ support highly multi-threaded apps that use gobs of shared memory while providing a quick I/O subsystem. Linux as it stands now is pretty anemic when it comes to the first two, and okay at that last one.
Fscking Slowaris fscking fsck fsck fsck! I should *NOT* have to run that route command more than once per bootup!) Hi. You're an idiot. Put your default gateway IP in/etc/defaultrouter. Love, E-lad
Re:Linux "shooting self in foot"
on
Linux Failover?
·
· Score: 1
Uh, your knowledge has been shot in the foot. You dont need a 3rd party app for failover in Solaris. Sun offers Sun Cluster (current version is 2.2, 3.0 is going to be released next month for Solaris 8)
for 25k users, I'd go with a higher-class system to support the load that they'd generate.
I'd recommend running Sun SPARC-based systems running Solaris 2.7 and InterMail, with a fiber-channel storage solution like a A5000. The multi-threaded design of both Solaris and InterMail will do you much better than any Linux/*BSD solution.
Slashdot Mirror
Optical line in doesn't mean a thing when you're recording from a analog microphone.
Those analog signals must be sampled to digital somehow, and the quality of the Analog->Digital convertor matters. Especially when it comes to recording off of microphones.
I use my Sony Net-MD player with a condenser mic to make field recordings. The only problem with Sony and it's "Copyright Protection" is that it doesn't allow you to transfer audio over the USB connect FROM the MD player TO the computer.
So basically, any recordings you make need to be transfered analog into your computer's sound card.
There have been petitions in the past from the MD users community demanding Sony allow bi-directional USB transfers, but because Sony has it's music label/tech world schizophrenia, it's never going to happen.
Right now, the only thing that is reasonably priced and does do this is the Nomad 3 from Creative, but I want something with better A/D conversion than what it has.
[daleg@lithium]~>perl 2038.pl
Tue Jan 19 03:14:01 2038
Tue Jan 19 03:14:02 2038
Tue Jan 19 03:14:03 2038
Tue Jan 19 03:14:04 2038
Tue Jan 19 03:14:05 2038
Tue Jan 19 03:14:06 2038
Tue Jan 19 03:14:07 2038
Tue Jan 19 03:14:07 2038
Tue Jan 19 03:14:07 2038
Tue Jan 19 03:14:07 2038
[daleg@lithium]~>uname -rs
SunOS 5.8
Interesting, it stays at the limit rather than rolling over.
Read the following URL and my post below:
http://www.ncf.carleton.ca/~aa571/cdtext.htm
You're referring to CD-TEXT, a standard of sorts introduced by Sony where Artist, Album name, and track titles are encoded onto an audio CD in the subcodes.
It's true, not every commercial pressed CD out there has this feature, and believe it or not, not every CD-ROM (particularly older ones) can read the subcodes to extract the CD-TEXT info.
Sony Music includes CD-TEXT on all the CDs in it's catalog (to complement the CD-TEXT display features on most of it's car CD players.) I don't know about the other major labels.
My own experience with small labels tends to indicate they're not large users of CD-TEXT, but you can find the odd release which does have it.
I love Expose, it may not help you out, but it really helps me out because of the nature of the applications that I work in.
One of these is Logic Audio. While working through a project in it, it's certainly possible to have open 10 or more "sub" windows - Sample editors, Matrix editors, the track mixer, plug-in windows, MIDI list editors. Alt-Tab or clicking on the Logic Audio icon in the dock won't help me find the window that's 3 layers deep under the main app window.
So I just mouse over to one of my screen's corners, and all the Logic Audio windows move aside and shows me who is where, and *click* I'm there without having to get fustrated minimizing >5 windows just to find the one I want.
Yeah, it should be that simple, right? I'm in that "almost there" situation. I bring my 15" PowerBook to work and use it almost exclusively except for one thing - I need to keep my WinXP desktop around solely for the purpose of using Outlook to see my work's Exchange servers. Yeah, I could use Entourage to do that, but I don't like running it and Mail.app at the same time. Just like I don't like running Explorer and Safari at the same time.
Luckily, though, Panther's Mail.app has Exchange support, so all I need to do is hang tight for a few more days.
can't open more than 253 files? It's not fopen()'s fault that you dont know what the ulimit command is.
Might I add to my own post that it's less cache, .18 micron process, and has on-board PCI and memory controllers. This is what makes it different than the others in the II line.
But I'd say it's certainly as fast if not faster than a 300Mhz USII with 2MB of cache.
As for using II's in the Blade 1000... that is realistic.. I mean... its like trying to put a PPro in a Pentium 2 machine... they're just different.
The US2e has a built-in memory controller for PC133 EDEC DIMMs.
This isnt a open/closed source issue. This is a issue of compatabilitiy and regression, which, believe it or not, transcends open/closed source issues in alot of cases. It doenst take a glibc coder to realize that. Responding with "Well it serves them right because they're not open-source, nyeh!" is a cop-out and trite. Look at the big picture, because it's not only closed-source products that can run into this same problem.
Let's say that Oracle releases it's database which is statically linked against glibc 2.1.3. A few days/weeks/months later, a security/performance bug was found, perhaps even in a function that the staticly-linked Oracle binary uses... a bug severe enough to warrant everyone with 2.1.3 systems to consider upgrading ASAP. As I'm sure you're aware, under a dynamic environment, all one would need to do is upgrade the glibc so's to 2.1.4, reboot, and be done. All programs that were affected by the bug in 2.1.3 now link against 2.1.4 when they start and all is well.
Except for our Oracle binary. It is then up to Oracle to re-release their product, but built against glibc 2.1.4 now... incresing the amount of time the problem hangs around, increasing downtime for the user (instead of rebooting once, they now need to shut down Oracle again to upgrade), and basically keeping a release hell for vendor and user.
Yeah. The Netra 112x and 140x use the SUNW,Ultra-60 and SUNW,Ultra-80 boards respectively as well.
Unfortunately, some of our customer complain to us, thinking that we're running their server on a "workstation" and not a "server". sigh :)
Misleading? I was comparing size. The E220/420 use the same chassis. That chassis IS smaller than both the 250 (by 2U) and the 450 (by alot).
Even so, the 450 is still a waste of space. A 420R configured with 2 external D1000 units takes up less verticle space and affords you more hard drive slots than the 450, and can carry the same amount of CPUs and RAM. One might argue that this kind of set up is more redundant in some ways.
The 220R is much different from the E250 (which, btw, is rackmountable). Yes, both support two CPUs. Yes, both support 2GB of RAM. Yes, both are PCI. But the 220R is 4U and holds two internal SCSI disks. The E250 is 6U and holds 6.
Ditto for the 420R/E450. The 420R is essentially the same as the 220R, except that it supports 4 CPUs and 4GB of RAM. The E450 is the same, except that it supports up to 20 internal SCSI disks.
As for the X1, it supports more than just one drive and 128MB of RAM. The base model just comes configured that way. The X1 would make a more-than-adquate web/name/mail server most businesses. Yes, what a suprise that you DON'T need a 800Mhz chip to run these services. Or even multiple chips.
The E$ problems that the 400/4 and (more so) the 400/8 US2 cpus are having have cannot occur in the US3 CPUs, since the US3 cache can detect AND correct, whereas the US2 can only detect a parity error and send a panic.
That serving web hits is a pretty lightweight thing to do. Any worthwhile OS on decent hardware can be a "good" web server. So Linux replaced Sun on a few web servers. Big deal. Being that the backends are E4500's, then I would guess that those are the DB servers for weather.com. Linux still has a way to go when it comes to supporting large-scale OLTP, so I would put away the party hats until Linux can /adequately/ support highly multi-threaded apps that use gobs of shared memory while providing a quick I/O subsystem. Linux as it stands now is pretty anemic when it comes to the first two, and okay at that last one.
Fscking Slowaris fscking fsck fsck fsck! I should *NOT* have to run that route command more than once per bootup!) Hi. You're an idiot. Put your default gateway IP in /etc/defaultrouter. Love, E-lad
Uh, your knowledge has been shot in the foot. You dont need a 3rd party app for failover in Solaris. Sun offers Sun Cluster (current version is 2.2, 3.0 is going to be released next month for Solaris 8)
There is also Veritas First Watch.
I concur....
for 25k users, I'd go with a higher-class system to support the load that they'd generate.
I'd recommend running Sun SPARC-based systems running Solaris 2.7 and InterMail, with a fiber-channel storage solution like a A5000. The multi-threaded design of both Solaris and InterMail will do you much better than any Linux/*BSD solution.