Yeah. But that's not what we're talking about here.
We're talking about a kind of obsession with extreme precision.
That violin will sound like a violin with any decent stereo.. but with a $100,000 stereo, maybe it sounds even more like it would have sounded standing right there during recording.
That's where the audiphile obsession comes in.. it's not about good sound, but percieved accuracy.
Of course.... The fact that the audiophile's equipment is several times as expensive, and presumably more accurate, than the gear the audio engineers who recorded & mastered the album in the first place is overlooked.
And before you think you want gear with a frequency response over 20kHz.. consider that, before digitizing to Redbook CD (your standard CD audio), the audio is run through a lowpass filter at 20kHz (or damn close).
Please note. I'm not knocking audiophiles.. I believe in good audio gear and whatnot... I've go the bug myself... but there is a point where you have to really consider the benefit of what you are getting into.
Of course. It all depends on what *YOU* are after, and how you enjoy music.
Many "Audiophiles" enjoy listening to how accurately they percieve their setup to be reproducing the original sounds... that's why they don't like lossy compression. It's not because it doesn't sound good.. it's because they are chasing accuracy. This accuracy becomes as important to them as whether or not they like the tune in the first place.
There is so much fluff in the audiophile world it's hard to tell what really makes a difference and what doesn't. Really, like computer hobbyists, it's really about what makes you happy.
Many non-audiphiles like to listen to music because they like the tunes and lyrics, not because they want to super-analyze every insturment. In this respect, mp3 & ogg & whatnot are fantastic. If they suck, why are they so popular?
So.. you tried this CD player in the same audio setup you were used to using, to compare it side by side with another player you were used to with no other factors that change?
yes.. there are differences in CD players... mostly due to oversampling & better filters, and good quality output components. That, and good power supply circuits.
The difference between a cheap cd player and a $1000 cd player will be noticeable; the difference between a $1000 player and a Linn Sondek is more debatable.
what's decent equipment? The audiophiles out there will want to know. Also, what was the test material?
You can argue that 256 is the same.. and for your purposes, it probalby is. For most common equipment, it surely is.
Someone with a really well educated ear and really good equipment can probably hear the difference though. Because there IS a difference.
Another thing... with high bitrate mp3.. when comparing between an original and the compressed version in a blind test, someone will be able to tell you they are different, but not which one is the original... becasue both sound good.
Re:The God who plays with dices
on
Einstein Unveiled
·
· Score: 2, Insightful
Newton was not proven wrong. A new theory came around that could account for all of Newton's findings, as well as the results of experiments that Newton didn't/couldn't do.
Science is not about absolutes.. it is about observation. Newton was correct.
As anyone will tell you... future monetary decisions should not be made based on how much you have already spent.. but only on the business case for moving forwards.
So how did MS do this? What part of this new market do you see MS as responsible for, and how? They were a part of it, there is no denying that... a HUGE part of it.. but to imply they are responsible for it is another matter entirely.
public company, etcetera.... Larry Ellison does not do all the hiring.
Not having a degree WILL keep you frmo many corporate executive positions... there will be a point where you can go no further.. not because of what you know, but because of public perception... if they hire a VP with no degree, and he screws up, it's the fault of those who hired someone without even obvious credentials.
You seem to be saying that as employers don't offer you a guaranteed job, you don't offer them guaranteed service.
Absolutely.. however.. will you work for an employer who has a record of laying off his workers every 12 months or so? This is the same thing in reverse.
He's not asking for guarantees or contracts stating you will work for X years.. those would require compensation and other things.. he's just saying that, if your last 5 jobs were all a year or less, then something is probably up (obviously depending on what the jobs were).
If the work is obvious contract work, that's not what he is talking about.. he's talking about people (and I'm sure we all know people like this) who work for a job for around a year, and then look for the bigger, better deal. They jump ship for a couple more bucks, a fresh start, etcetera. As an employer, this is not an attractive characteristic. You would like to think that if you treat your employees fairly, they will stay.
Why did you leave your last job? You will be asked this in an interview. If your main reasons seem to be "more money" then it's obvious that as soon as someone comes along offering a bit more cash, you will flee.
No, I don't see your point. NBC has a deal with CNN, that's how they operate at that level. That TOTALLY changes things. CNN agrees it's not a dilution of their trademark, and an obvious parody of their work, and probably good advertising for them, so they don't sue.
If it was ANOTHER news or TV station calling itslef CNN or stylizing it's logo very closely on CNNs, CNN *WOULD* have to defend themselves.. or lose their rights to the mark. If 20 other stations all had almost identical logos to CNN, CNN could not wait 10 years then go after ONE or TWO of them for infringement; they would only have to point out that the style is in common use, and obviously not specific to CNN.(That's not me guessing, that's how trademarks work)
Take a trademark like, say, Goretex. Those nice winter jackets of old. If 10 other companies start manufacturing materials and calling them goretex, then the trademark holder MUST take action; he can't let a bunch of other people use his mark, then pick ONE a decade later and sue them for infringing. By not acting, they basically permit their mark to become meaningless.
There have been products called "Windows something" for YEARS now.. probably 10 years at least. They cannot NOW come in and try to assert trademark law.. trademarks have to be aggressively protected. I repeate.. products named "Windows *" and "Win*" have been around for a decade.. and microsoft didn't care. Therefore, there is no mark to defend; you can't be selective about trademark.
I recall the courts ruled years ago that, as the word "windows" was extremely generic to begin with, only a direct violation (another operating system, perhaps) would be applicable.
Yes.. but that is not a trademark issue. All those products made by third parties than are called "Windows something" that work in MS Windows are NOT using a microsoft trademark; no trademark symbol, no license form microsoft. The fact that someone uses the word for software that doesn't run on windows is not relevant. Microsoft does not get to pick and choose. It's a generic word, the courts have said so before, and microsoft can't stop them from using it, whether it works in Windows or not.
More like they just decided to start marketing "KFC" because it was trendier, and had more of a ring to it, especially overseas where the concept of Kentucky is, well, foreign.
If you look on their literature they are STILL "Kentucky Fried Chicken"
Even by any stretch of trademark.. Microsoft has allowed companies to sell Windows this and Windows that and Windows blah for a decade now. To try to assert trademark NOW is absurd... there is no way they can claim dilution now.
I have servers running 2.2... they do what they do well, they are real servers.. so at the moment there is absolutely no reason to risk the uncertainty that comes with doing a major upgrade.
Can't you just hit a couple keys and flip to a user-specified stylesheet to undo bad formatting?
Oh wait! That's Opera.
Seriously useful feature that, for de-uglifying sites. Some sites get a bit harder to navigate (because the layout gets weird).. but it brings in an nice common denominator.
I think you will find that most video rental outlets pay up one way or the other.. they *have* to.. they are prime targets.
Do you have some kind of evidence that says everyone but blockbuster is breaking the law?
Re:Why the RIAA's P2P vendetta is crazy
on
Cringely on P2P
·
· Score: 1
Really? Could have fooled me. Most "radio" sucks becaues of the receiver, not the transmitted signal. FM Radio sounds *better* than 128Kbps mp3.. they degrade in completely different ways.
Unless you are one of those guys who still thinks 128kbps is the mother of all music and really is "cd quality"
Yes, they can. Absolutely. And when they do, they will be doing so without a license, as the GPL will not be applicable, because they are refusing to re-distribute code, so the original copyright holders can demand compensation.
Slashdot Mirror
Yeah.
But that's not what we're talking about here.
We're talking about a kind of obsession with extreme precision.
That violin will sound like a violin with any decent stereo..
but with a $100,000 stereo, maybe it sounds even more like it would have sounded standing right there during recording.
That's where the audiphile obsession comes in.. it's not about good sound, but percieved accuracy.
Right.
Of course....
The fact that the audiophile's equipment is several times as expensive, and presumably more accurate, than the gear the audio engineers who recorded & mastered the album in the first place is overlooked.
And before you think you want gear with a frequency response over 20kHz.. consider that, before digitizing to Redbook CD (your standard CD audio), the audio is run through a lowpass filter at 20kHz (or damn close).
Please note. I'm not knocking audiophiles.. I believe in good audio gear and whatnot... I've go the bug myself... but there is a point where you have to really consider the benefit of what you are getting into.
Of course. It all depends on what *YOU* are after, and how you enjoy music.
Many "Audiophiles" enjoy listening to how accurately they percieve their setup to be reproducing the original sounds... that's why they don't like lossy compression. It's not because it doesn't sound good.. it's because they are chasing accuracy. This accuracy becomes as important to them as whether or not they like the tune in the first place.
but what you just said has nothing to do with whether a 128kbps Ogg sounds like a 256kbps mp3.
It's commonly observed that oggs of lower bitrate compare to mp3 at higher bitrates.
There is so much fluff in the audiophile world it's hard to tell what really makes a difference and what doesn't. Really, like computer hobbyists, it's really about what makes you happy.
Many non-audiphiles like to listen to music because they like the tunes and lyrics, not because they want to super-analyze every insturment. In this respect, mp3 & ogg & whatnot are fantastic. If they suck, why are they so popular?
So.. you tried this CD player in the same audio setup you were used to using, to compare it side by side with another player you were used to with no other factors that change?
yes.. there are differences in CD players... mostly due to oversampling & better filters, and good quality output components. That, and good power supply circuits.
The difference between a cheap cd player and a $1000 cd player will be noticeable; the difference between a $1000 player and a Linn Sondek is more debatable.
what's decent equipment? The audiophiles out there will want to know. Also, what was the test material?
You can argue that 256 is the same.. and for your purposes, it probalby is. For most common equipment, it surely is.
Someone with a really well educated ear and really good equipment can probably hear the difference though. Because there IS a difference.
Another thing... with high bitrate mp3.. when comparing between an original and the compressed version in a blind test, someone will be able to tell you they are different, but not which one is the original... becasue both sound good.
Newton was not proven wrong. A new theory came around that could account for all of Newton's findings, as well as the results of experiments that Newton didn't/couldn't do.
Science is not about absolutes.. it is about observation. Newton was correct.
I'm curious as to where you got the idea that mozilla was everyone's favorite web browser.
It seems most of the world uses IE, or netscape, or opera.. before mozilla.
then please, go hop jobs all you want.
As anyone will tell you... future monetary decisions should not be made based on how much you have already spent.. but only on the business case for moving forwards.
So how did MS do this? What part of this new market do you see MS as responsible for, and how?
They were a part of it, there is no denying that... a HUGE part of it.. but to imply they are responsible for it is another matter entirely.
public company, etcetera.... Larry Ellison does not do all the hiring.
Not having a degree WILL keep you frmo many corporate executive positions... there will be a point where you can go no further.. not because of what you know, but because of public perception... if they hire a VP with no degree, and he screws up, it's the fault of those who hired someone without even obvious credentials.
You seem to be saying that as employers don't offer you a guaranteed job, you don't offer them guaranteed service.
Absolutely.. however.. will you work for an employer who has a record of laying off his workers every 12 months or so? This is the same thing in reverse.
He's not asking for guarantees or contracts stating you will work for X years.. those would require compensation and other things.. he's just saying that, if your last 5 jobs were all a year or less, then something is probably up (obviously depending on what the jobs were).
If the work is obvious contract work, that's not what he is talking about.. he's talking about people (and I'm sure we all know people like this) who work for a job for around a year, and then look for the bigger, better deal. They jump ship for a couple more bucks, a fresh start, etcetera. As an employer, this is not an attractive characteristic. You would like to think that if you treat your employees fairly, they will stay.
Why did you leave your last job? You will be asked this in an interview. If your main reasons seem to be "more money" then it's obvious that as soon as someone comes along offering a bit more cash, you will flee.
No, I don't see your point. NBC has a deal with CNN, that's how they operate at that level. That TOTALLY changes things. CNN agrees it's not a dilution of their trademark, and an obvious parody of their work, and probably good advertising for them, so they don't sue.
If it was ANOTHER news or TV station calling itslef CNN or stylizing it's logo very closely on CNNs, CNN *WOULD* have to defend themselves.. or lose their rights to the mark. If 20 other stations all had almost identical logos to CNN, CNN could not wait 10 years then go after ONE or TWO of them for infringement; they would only have to point out that the style is in common use, and obviously not specific to CNN.(That's not me guessing, that's how trademarks work)
Take a trademark like, say, Goretex. Those nice winter jackets of old. If 10 other companies start manufacturing materials and calling them goretex, then the trademark holder MUST take action; he can't let a bunch of other people use his mark, then pick ONE a decade later and sue them for infringing. By not acting, they basically permit their mark to become meaningless.
It's actually impossible to make a "perfect" cube out of anything.
Really. I've made perfect cubes out of clay, glass, metal, plastecine, carved soapstone, uhh....
the list goes on. What are you saying?
It in no way implies microsoft endorsement.
Microsoft's trademark is for "microsoft windows", not "windows".
People have been calling software "Windows something" for a decade or more, WITHOUT any kind of permit from Microsoft.
You *cannot* selectively enforce trademark.
There have been products called "Windows something" for YEARS now.. probably 10 years at least. They cannot NOW come in and try to assert trademark law.. trademarks have to be aggressively protected.
I repeate.. products named "Windows *" and "Win*" have been around for a decade.. and microsoft didn't care. Therefore, there is no mark to defend; you can't be selective about trademark.
I recall the courts ruled years ago that, as the word "windows" was extremely generic to begin with, only a direct violation (another operating system, perhaps) would be applicable.
Yes.. but that is not a trademark issue. All those products made by third parties than are called "Windows something" that work in MS Windows are NOT using a microsoft trademark; no trademark symbol, no license form microsoft. The fact that someone uses the word for software that doesn't run on windows is not relevant. Microsoft does not get to pick and choose.
It's a generic word, the courts have said so before, and microsoft can't stop them from using it, whether it works in Windows or not.
More like they just decided to start marketing "KFC" because it was trendier, and had more of a ring to it, especially overseas where the concept of Kentucky is, well, foreign.
If you look on their literature they are STILL "Kentucky Fried Chicken"
Even by any stretch of trademark.. Microsoft has allowed companies to sell Windows this and Windows that and Windows blah for a decade now. To try to assert trademark NOW is absurd... there is no way they can claim dilution now.
I have servers running 2.2... they do what they do well, they are real servers.. so at the moment there is absolutely no reason to risk the uncertainty that comes with doing a major upgrade.
Can't you just hit a couple keys and flip to a user-specified stylesheet to undo bad formatting?
Oh wait! That's Opera.
Seriously useful feature that, for de-uglifying sites. Some sites get a bit harder to navigate (because the layout gets weird).. but it brings in an nice common denominator.
I think you will find that most video rental outlets pay up one way or the other.. they *have* to.. they are prime targets.
Do you have some kind of evidence that says everyone but blockbuster is breaking the law?
Really? Could have fooled me. Most "radio" sucks becaues of the receiver, not the transmitted signal. FM Radio sounds *better* than 128Kbps mp3.. they degrade in completely different ways.
Unless you are one of those guys who still thinks 128kbps is the mother of all music and really is "cd quality"
Yes, they can. Absolutely.
And when they do, they will be doing so without a license, as the GPL will not be applicable, because they are refusing to re-distribute code, so the original copyright holders can demand compensation.