...that was not speculative and insightful, or at the very least long winded and pretentious.
If it wasn't for the fact I'd just finished my beer, you'd owe me for a new monitor!
Risking hyperbole, that has to be one of the funniest things i've read in ages.
Re:Great for paranoid nuts, useless for real peopl
on
RF-Blocking Wallpaper
·
· Score: 5, Insightful
Sounds good if you're doing a makeover of, say, a secure military area. Obviously you can still pipe stuff through wires. (you know, those plastic/rubber coated strings of metal? remember them?)
Actually, in the case of a shotgun certificate, the onus is on the police to prove that you are not suitable to possess one. The reverse is true of firearms certs, however.
It's all very well being given a producer, but how on earth will they be able to verify who you are, in order to make sure you do turn up and produce your card?
I don't think they've quite thought this one through!
True, but it's a *TV* license, not a BBC license - you still have to pay it even if you're happy watching only other channels (and you possibly have to pay it even if you only use a TV for games consoles). It's not comparable to money you might pay to a private company for a service, so the difference between "tax" and "license" isn't really relevant here (I presume the difference is just that a license is paid periodically for the right to own or do something, but a tax is one off payments linked to a certain action).
Not half! The licence fee covers the use of 'television recieving apparatus' which covers anything with a tv tuner in it. (With exceptions, because it wouldn't be government without it.)
You don't have to watch it, you just have to own it.
As an aside, the majority of club dj's (at least in the uk) work in clubs where a subscription is made to agencies that collect on behalf of the music publishers. by that token, your mp3 collecting dj is acting quite legitmately simply because the artist is (in theory) being compensated for his work...
Less, I think, a question of 'cool' (which is vastly underrated!) but more a question of realism. Certainly in theater work you'll find this method will come up a lot simply because it allows the sound to follow the actor around the stage with more realism which is vital for the 'transparency' of the sound reinforcment system.
When doing live music on the other hand, you can afford to be more creative/imaginative- I've got a sony DSP box in my rack which can give some rather astonishing panning effects, not to mention the ones that make you want to hide in a small, dark room until they've stopped!
Of course, it's all a matter of using the most appropriate tool for the job. (Bringing the post screechingly back on topic!) I think with this surround sound in a box doodad a combination of both level and delay will but I feel that it's most likely to be achieved with delay- simply because of the mention of psychoacoustics!
What do I know, I'm a frustrated lampy;)
I suspect they are using something along the lines of the 'Haas Effect', also known as the principle of Precedence.
(ripped straight from my surprisingly to hand course notes....)
'Haas demonstrated that a listener seated in front of (and centrally between) two loudspeakers both set to the same level will hear a center image. If the sound to one of the loudspeakers is delayed by 0.5-1ms, then the image will shift towards the undelayed speaker.'
It would not surprise me in the slightest if this is the system in use, especially if they are using some very directional speakers in order to pack it all into one box. As far as I can make out, panning achieved through this method is far more realistic than physically changing the volume for each side...
I concur with folks expressing the opinion that legislating Open Source alternatives into government budgets is incorrect, because it is on principle - at no time should we ever, as a society, legislate any single thing as the "right way". Only GM for cars? Only Apple for music? Only MS-terminals for voting? We'd all revolt against this.
I feel that legislation of Open Source is no bad thing. Whilst there is no specification of GPL only, Microsoft can still compete by simply opening it's source. It may not trickle down to the end user, but it will ensure that the IS departments will be in a position to deal with incombatibilities in such things as file formats etc.
Slashdot Mirror
If it wasn't for the fact I'd just finished my beer, you'd owe me for a new monitor!
Risking hyperbole, that has to be one of the funniest things i've read in ages.
The call was probably along the lines of "get off our lawn and take your damned pants with you" ;)
What would you consider a slow web search engine?
This...
Sounds good if you're doing a makeover of, say, a secure military area.
Obviously you can still pipe stuff through wires. (you know, those plastic/rubber coated strings of metal? remember them?)
wicked! :-)
Would be even better if I hadn't mispelt my email- should be richr@multijoy.co.uk
My typing skills go to pot whenever it counts most
richr@multjoy.co.uk
ta!
I've just downloaded this and it looks like just the thing I need! If only I had mod points...
Nah, they're more interested in frolicking norwegians.
mmmm... frolicking...
Actually, in the case of a shotgun certificate, the onus is on the police to prove that you are not suitable to possess one. The reverse is true of firearms certs, however.
Actually, the Lupo may well be better than you think...
I'm a fan of www.novatech.co.uk myself.
It's all very well being given a producer, but how on earth will they be able to verify who you are, in order to make sure you do turn up and produce your card?
I don't think they've quite thought this one through!
SPL = Sound Pressure Level
must... resist... soviet... joke...
Not half! The licence fee covers the use of 'television recieving apparatus' which covers anything with a tv tuner in it. (With exceptions, because it wouldn't be government without it.)
You don't have to watch it, you just have to own it.
Like reading /. ?
Where, oh where, are my mod points! +1 coffee/monitor interaction....
As an aside, the majority of club dj's (at least in the uk) work in clubs where a subscription is made to agencies that collect on behalf of the music publishers. by that token, your mp3 collecting dj is acting quite legitmately simply because the artist is (in theory) being compensated for his work...
The Blackhawk helicopter hovering over Buckingham Palace whilst el pres was in residence was vetoed on the grounds of being too noisy, IIRC!
When doing live music on the other hand, you can afford to be more creative/imaginative- I've got a sony DSP box in my rack which can give some rather astonishing panning effects, not to mention the ones that make you want to hide in a small, dark room until they've stopped!
Of course, it's all a matter of using the most appropriate tool for the job. (Bringing the post screechingly back on topic!) I think with this surround sound in a box doodad a combination of both level and delay will but I feel that it's most likely to be achieved with delay- simply because of the mention of psychoacoustics! ;)
What do I know, I'm a frustrated lampy
(ripped straight from my surprisingly to hand course notes....)
'Haas demonstrated that a listener seated in front of (and centrally between) two loudspeakers both set to the same level will hear a center image. If the sound to one of the loudspeakers is delayed by 0.5-1ms, then the image will shift towards the undelayed speaker.'
It would not surprise me in the slightest if this is the system in use, especially if they are using some very directional speakers in order to pack it all into one box. As far as I can make out, panning achieved through this method is far more realistic than physically changing the volume for each side...
Relying, as always, on the fact that enough lemon soaked paper napkins were loaded...
Would that be before or after the pointless but very invasive cavity search?
My list of people not to piss off if I can possibly help it...
1. Anyone who can order a cavity search.
2. The person doing said cavity search.
I feel that legislation of Open Source is no bad thing. Whilst there is no specification of GPL only, Microsoft can still compete by simply opening it's source. It may not trickle down to the end user, but it will ensure that the IS departments will be in a position to deal with incombatibilities in such things as file formats etc.
FaxYourMP.com
Let your MP know what you think without leaving your computer...