Climate represents 'average' or perceived 'normal' weather conditions in a particular area or region over a specified period of time.
And you're claiming there's no difference between a signal and it's average ? The difference in climate and weather is simply visualized by putting a pan of cold water on a hot stove. I can predict that in a few minutes it will be boiling (climate), even though I have no idea exactly where the bubbles are going to be (weather). The details are chaotic, the average is not.
Around the 3:10-3:20 mark you can see both the LED on the blue case of the sampler indicating it is running at 44 kHz, and a moment later you can see it on his screen.
unless the equipment is literally "making up" parts of the curve on the fly.
In a way it is making it up, because it knows the signal is made from a combination of different sine waves between 0..22 kHz. Within that range, there is only one unique solution, and the machine knows how to find it.
Climate is not weather. The chaotic variations in weather tend to cancel out when measured over longer time frames, and wider area. There is no doubt that the total energy contained in the Earth's oceans and atmosphere is rising, even if we can't predict year to year exactly what's going to happen.
No, I'm implying that a no-growth model requires global oversight to ensure nobody tries to get more than the other, because naturally people will compete, and competition creates different growth rates. And the group with the highest growth rate will win.
And the culling will be necessary, because the current consumption is unsustainable as it is.
You click on the song, and listen. That's how complex it is. There's no need to understand the details of what's going on inside. Not many vinyl users understand RIAA preamp either.
No, you don't need more bits. The trick is to perform a digital conversion to a higher sampling rate, while filling in the intermediate points using digital filters, before converting the data to analog. This is called oversampling, and has been used for decades (although the amount of oversampling has been increased over the years). This allows a (near) perfect restoration of a 20 kHz sine wave, using only a 44.1 kHz sample rate.
Loudness/compression is just a side effect of people's taste in music, and the abilities of the processing software. There's no reason to assume modern vinyl records would be immune to the same effect. And neither is there a good reason why the loudness of digital media couldn't be reduced.
The little "steps" in digital audio are so small and so fast, that no one can hear them. Compared to that, the analog waves have much bigger errors compared to the original.
No need to spend $5000 on a DAC. The chips themselves are less than $5 a piece, and will get you 384 kHz, 32 bit stereo. Microelectronics has improved so much the last couple of decades, but if people are still willing to pay '70s prices for stuff, somebody will find a way to charge that amount.
Slashdot Mirror
Those details make up the average, chum
That doesn't mean you can extract the details from the average.
Climate represents 'average' or perceived 'normal' weather conditions in a particular area or region over a specified period of time.
And you're claiming there's no difference between a signal and it's average ? The difference in climate and weather is simply visualized by putting a pan of cold water on a hot stove. I can predict that in a few minutes it will be boiling (climate), even though I have no idea exactly where the bubbles are going to be (weather). The details are chaotic, the average is not.
Show me one person who can hear the difference between an original signal and one sampled at CD quality using a double blind test.
I was talking about the digital signal going into the final DAC. That still has steps, but they are very high frequency, and very small.
unless the equipment is literally "making up" parts of the curve on the fly.
In a way it is making it up, because it knows the signal is made from a combination of different sine waves between 0..22 kHz. Within that range, there is only one unique solution, and the machine knows how to find it.
There's settled science that claims to predict tornadoes.
Climate is not weather. The chaotic variations in weather tend to cancel out when measured over longer time frames, and wider area. There is no doubt that the total energy contained in the Earth's oceans and atmosphere is rising, even if we can't predict year to year exactly what's going to happen.
No, I'm implying that a no-growth model requires global oversight to ensure nobody tries to get more than the other, because naturally people will compete, and competition creates different growth rates. And the group with the highest growth rate will win. And the culling will be necessary, because the current consumption is unsustainable as it is.
I mean reducing during the mastering/recording process, not by the listener.
You click on the song, and listen. That's how complex it is. There's no need to understand the details of what's going on inside. Not many vinyl users understand RIAA preamp either.
No, you don't need more bits. The trick is to perform a digital conversion to a higher sampling rate, while filling in the intermediate points using digital filters, before converting the data to analog. This is called oversampling, and has been used for decades (although the amount of oversampling has been increased over the years). This allows a (near) perfect restoration of a 20 kHz sine wave, using only a 44.1 kHz sample rate.
Nothing new here. Everybody in the field (and most people outside it) know the limitations of weather forecasting.
What's wrong with a leisure society and guaranteed minimum livable conditions for all?
Sounds good. Who will oversee the global culling program to bring the world population to sustainable numbers ?
Sampling speed for CD is 44.1 kHz, allowing faithful reproduction up to 22.05 kHz.
You seem to have a preconceived opinion about scientists.
Wouldn't the countries with a lax oversight about toxins in food not also have a lax oversight in the accuracy of labelling 'organic' foods ?
We're talking about dynamic range compression, not data compression. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/L...
Loudness/compression is just a side effect of people's taste in music, and the abilities of the processing software. There's no reason to assume modern vinyl records would be immune to the same effect. And neither is there a good reason why the loudness of digital media couldn't be reduced.
The little "steps" in digital audio are so small and so fast, that no one can hear them. Compared to that, the analog waves have much bigger errors compared to the original.
The vinyl you buy in middle school will be still playable in middle age
Except for the fact that it will be worn down.
Did you do a blind test ?
It's perfectly possible to distribute music that's not overcompressed using a digital format.
No need to spend $5000 on a DAC. The chips themselves are less than $5 a piece, and will get you 384 kHz, 32 bit stereo. Microelectronics has improved so much the last couple of decades, but if people are still willing to pay '70s prices for stuff, somebody will find a way to charge that amount.
Vinyl is the only consumer playback format we have that's fully analog and fully lossless
The article itself gives plenty of examples why vinyl isn't lossless, and it's easy to name a few more.
As long as the leakage persist, methane concentrations will stay high. And when shale gas runs out, it will again be replaced by burning coal.