I have the right to rip all my CD's and share with everyone on my network. It's my network. It's a private network. All the computers on my network are mine. It's with in my fair use rights to share my music with myself. And even if it wasn't legal, without haking into my network it would be illegal for anyone to even now I was doing it.
He didn't say he could tell the difference. I myself don't hear many differences when using high quality vorbis or wma 9, so I would assume AAC would yield similar results. However, if you have the uncompressed version, you are free to convert it to any other format with only a one time loss of compression. If i want to store all my songs in ogg vorbis, I can do that... if I decide later that I'd rather keep them in MP3 or MP4, I'm free to re-encode. With AAC, I can't do that without invoking a second generation of loss. That is what I am opposed to.
Pretty much every soda will taste different due to regional bottling plants. They're still allowed to use different combinations of sugar and/or corn syrup. The best soda's are the original coke classic (can you get this anymore) that had beet sugar. And the original Dr. Pepper that had cane sugar (only bottled in waco tx).
no it means you can record it once, but you can not make subsequent copies... they have to allow this thanks to MPAA vs. Sony. We have the right to timeshift.
And what praytell are you going to record it with? There isn't alot of consumer grade equipment out there that can record that... especially the uncompressed DVI stream.
Anyone have any idea how to remove this service? Both it and the iTunesHelper.exe are loaded at startup now. I know I don't need the former, because I don't have an iPod. I have no idea what the iTunesHelper does, so I probably don't need it either. No information in the help, and as far as I can find no options to disable them.
Well, since this is only referring to making hi-def copies, you're tivo should continue to work just fine. VCR's and Analog Tivo's will continue to work. Now if you had a HD Tivo (which doesn't exist) connected to the DVI port of your TV, you would not be able to record a show if it was set a certain way. This would allow them to say record once, record multiple, record at reduced resolution, record freely. Most everyone will give you the option of recording once.
Read the fucking article. It won't affect you if you are recording things via a VCR or TiVo through the analog inputs. This only concerns making hi-def copies.
It also gives me severe migrane headaches and causes my mom to loose conciousness... scarey stuff... I'll stick to sugar thank you very much! But most soda only offers high fructose corn syrup. Now that I'm away from Texas I can't get the real sugar Dr. Pepper. So I try to stick to the whole foods brand soda.
Actually if you read the terms of their agreement closely, I think you'll find that it is illegal to do whatever you want with that CD. For instance rip mp3's from the CD created from the bought AAC's.
Master -> AAC -> MP3 is two generations of loss, but all we've ever been talking about is AAC -> CD -> MP3.
You are an idiot. If master -> AAC -> MP3 is two generations of loss, then by definition master -> AAC must be one generation and AAC -> MP3 must be one generation. So that means that AAC -> CD -> MP3 also equals one generation as it is really just AAC -> MP3. However, where the fuck did you get this AAC file? It came Master -> AAC or CD -> AAC. Both of which have one generation of loss. So it is impossible to turn an AAC into an MP3 without having two generations of loss.
I'm sorry that I can't spell... obviously you understood what I was trying to say.
Re:i.e. after Apple supports it a while
on
Is Bluetooth Dead?
·
· Score: 1
funny... both my old pentium II and pentium mmx had USB. I don't remember USB becoming widespread until microsoft released windows 98. So i would say microsoft led to the adoption of USB.
I still believe that there are small differences between cables... most likely it has to do with the connectors on the cables, but I also think they cheaper cables pick up crosstalk from eachother and the power cords.
So you contend their are no RF or other effects that affect audio? Does that mean you are willing to compare a $50 DVD player hooked up through the RCA's that it came with to a $200 CD player with a Toslink cable? Is there a doubt which one will sound better? Quality affects audio... there just reaches a point where throwing more money at the problem doesn't improve the audio enough to be worth it. That point is different for everyone.
In my opinion it's all about the point of diminishing returns. I buy 14 guage Acoustic Research speaker wire from Lowes by the foot. I sauter on my own gold plated banana plugs from radio shack. I probably end up paying about $15 for each cable. It does sound better than 20 guage zip cord (alot of this is probably just from having a reliable connection). I think the cost is justified in this case. Now if I were to double the cost of my cable and get a 50% increase in percieved sound quality I'd do it. But what if it was only 10%? Probably not. You soon reach a point where you are doubling your cost to gain 1% if any increase in quality. To me it's not worth it, but there are people out there who have the money and enjoy doing it and I'm not going to fault them.
Maybe they'll even sell me their used gear... I'm always in the market for a set of klipsch horns.
Well a high quality LP on a high quality turn table, with a high quality cartirdge, and high quality phon stage, into an amp will sound better than most CD players. The problem is, to get all that you've just spent $20,000.
I hear this kind of arguement all the time. I have a standard rebuttal. You will usually find no arguement that the Pioneer Elite HDTV looks better than the Sharp HDTV you get at wal-mart. Even thought they have the same resolution. The Pioneer Elite uses better electronics and you can visually confirm that it looks better (Whether or not it is superior enough to justify the cost is a different arguement).
Now hook up the pioneer elite TV with a shitty composite cable to your DVD player. Or use a shitty S-Video Cable. You can easily see the difference between a good component or S-Video cable and a composite cable.
Now that we've established that using better quality electronics and cablesmakes a difference in video, why is it a stretch to assume the same thing is true for audio? I'm the first to say that you quickly reach a point of diminishing returns and that $1000 interconnects aren't going to improve the sound that much. But replacing your zip cord speaker cable with 14gauge oxygen free stuff (you can get it at home depot or lowes) and replacing the chessy interconnects that came with your system with something more substatial will make a difference.
Slashdot Mirror
I have the right to rip all my CD's and share with everyone on my network. It's my network. It's a private network. All the computers on my network are mine. It's with in my fair use rights to share my music with myself. And even if it wasn't legal, without haking into my network it would be illegal for anyone to even now I was doing it.
I assume that was modded down by the apple zealots... the guy has a point, this is no difference than the one-click patent.
He didn't say he could tell the difference. I myself don't hear many differences when using high quality vorbis or wma 9, so I would assume AAC would yield similar results. However, if you have the uncompressed version, you are free to convert it to any other format with only a one time loss of compression. If i want to store all my songs in ogg vorbis, I can do that... if I decide later that I'd rather keep them in MP3 or MP4, I'm free to re-encode. With AAC, I can't do that without invoking a second generation of loss. That is what I am opposed to.
But this leaves you a song in lower quality than an mp3 or AAC file.
Pretty much every soda will taste different due to regional bottling plants. They're still allowed to use different combinations of sugar and/or corn syrup. The best soda's are the original coke classic (can you get this anymore) that had beet sugar. And the original Dr. Pepper that had cane sugar (only bottled in waco tx).
no it means you can record it once, but you can not make subsequent copies... they have to allow this thanks to MPAA vs. Sony. We have the right to timeshift.
And what praytell are you going to record it with? There isn't alot of consumer grade equipment out there that can record that... especially the uncompressed DVI stream.
Anyone have any idea how to remove this service? Both it and the iTunesHelper.exe are loaded at startup now. I know I don't need the former, because I don't have an iPod. I have no idea what the iTunesHelper does, so I probably don't need it either. No information in the help, and as far as I can find no options to disable them.
Well, since this is only referring to making hi-def copies, you're tivo should continue to work just fine. VCR's and Analog Tivo's will continue to work. Now if you had a HD Tivo (which doesn't exist) connected to the DVI port of your TV, you would not be able to record a show if it was set a certain way. This would allow them to say record once, record multiple, record at reduced resolution, record freely. Most everyone will give you the option of recording once.
Read the fucking article. It won't affect you if you are recording things via a VCR or TiVo through the analog inputs. This only concerns making hi-def copies.
I live in a jewish neighborhood and they have lots of it.
It also gives me severe migrane headaches and causes my mom to loose conciousness... scarey stuff... I'll stick to sugar thank you very much! But most soda only offers high fructose corn syrup. Now that I'm away from Texas I can't get the real sugar Dr. Pepper. So I try to stick to the whole foods brand soda.
Actually if you read the terms of their agreement closely, I think you'll find that it is illegal to do whatever you want with that CD. For instance rip mp3's from the CD created from the bought AAC's.
Master -> AAC -> MP3 is two generations of loss, but all we've ever been talking about is AAC -> CD -> MP3.
You are an idiot. If master -> AAC -> MP3 is two generations of loss, then by definition master -> AAC must be one generation and AAC -> MP3 must be one generation. So that means that AAC -> CD -> MP3 also equals one generation as it is really just AAC -> MP3. However, where the fuck did you get this AAC file? It came Master -> AAC or CD -> AAC. Both of which have one generation of loss. So it is impossible to turn an AAC into an MP3 without having two generations of loss.
I have a plugin for winamp that adds this feature.
iTunes can do this, yes, but not with the files you buy from the iTMS.
I'm sorry that I can't spell... obviously you understood what I was trying to say.
funny... both my old pentium II and pentium mmx had USB. I don't remember USB becoming widespread until microsoft released windows 98. So i would say microsoft led to the adoption of USB.
I still believe that there are small differences between cables... most likely it has to do with the connectors on the cables, but I also think they cheaper cables pick up crosstalk from eachother and the power cords.
So you do admit there are differences in quality between components.
So you contend their are no RF or other effects that affect audio? Does that mean you are willing to compare a $50 DVD player hooked up through the RCA's that it came with to a $200 CD player with a Toslink cable? Is there a doubt which one will sound better? Quality affects audio... there just reaches a point where throwing more money at the problem doesn't improve the audio enough to be worth it. That point is different for everyone.
In my opinion it's all about the point of diminishing returns. I buy 14 guage Acoustic Research speaker wire from Lowes by the foot. I sauter on my own gold plated banana plugs from radio shack. I probably end up paying about $15 for each cable. It does sound better than 20 guage zip cord (alot of this is probably just from having a reliable connection). I think the cost is justified in this case. Now if I were to double the cost of my cable and get a 50% increase in percieved sound quality I'd do it. But what if it was only 10%? Probably not. You soon reach a point where you are doubling your cost to gain 1% if any increase in quality. To me it's not worth it, but there are people out there who have the money and enjoy doing it and I'm not going to fault them.
Maybe they'll even sell me their used gear... I'm always in the market for a set of klipsch horns.
My iRiver came with Sennheisers. That was something that impressed the hell out of me.
Well a high quality LP on a high quality turn table, with a high quality cartirdge, and high quality phon stage, into an amp will sound better than most CD players. The problem is, to get all that you've just spent $20,000.
I hear this kind of arguement all the time. I have a standard rebuttal. You will usually find no arguement that the Pioneer Elite HDTV looks better than the Sharp HDTV you get at wal-mart. Even thought they have the same resolution. The Pioneer Elite uses better electronics and you can visually confirm that it looks better (Whether or not it is superior enough to justify the cost is a different arguement).
Now hook up the pioneer elite TV with a shitty composite cable to your DVD player. Or use a shitty S-Video Cable. You can easily see the difference between a good component or S-Video cable and a composite cable.
Now that we've established that using better quality electronics and cablesmakes a difference in video, why is it a stretch to assume the same thing is true for audio? I'm the first to say that you quickly reach a point of diminishing returns and that $1000 interconnects aren't going to improve the sound that much. But replacing your zip cord speaker cable with 14gauge oxygen free stuff (you can get it at home depot or lowes) and replacing the chessy interconnects that came with your system with something more substatial will make a difference.