Someone please walk me through this. A few months ago, MS was trying hard to rape-buy Yahoo who debated itself like a virgin Catholic schoolgirl. Now Yahoo is getting on its knees and MS doesn't want it anymore? What on Earth happened to the both of them in the meantime?
Riiiight, as if Obama was stupid enough to give the job to a guy who'd have too many conflicts of interest and has a bad record of anti-competition tricks.
How does the next president dare rely on Washington politicians to work with him in Washington! I'm so disappointed in Obama, I thought he would have picked the members of his administration out of Washington. I had Loompaland in mind.
Damn Obama for not having a grudge against most of the governing political world. There goes my dream of the first anti-Washington government..
That is all very true! And yes, unfortunately in the real world speakers are hardly ever calibrated (that is their frequency response is compensated for so that it's flat) and even if they were their environment plays a big part, as well as where the listener is in that environment.
So basically it's not so much the speaker itself the problem, but calibrating it (and you'll have a hard time to find any automated process to do it) and using the calibration data. I looked into it a couple of years ago and implemented some stuff but it's not simple. Because a microphone isn't calibrated either, in order to get the frequency response for your speakers in the setup you want from the position you want you basically need to do a bunch of recording using the microphone, your speakers to calibrate and something else that in a recording acts like the microphone and in another acts like a speaker. Then do some frequency domain equation based on the recordings, and then you get an impulse response that you should theoretically deconvolve your sounds to be played through your speakers with, how is the question;). A sad thing that the reality of the necessity of calibrating speakers is so unknown and hard to achieve..
So like I said calibrating speakers depend on too many different things, however theoretically you could have headphones that are already calibrated, because the environment there (your head/ears mainly) varies little, but I don't think any such thing exists. If I wanted to find out if it does I'd ask in relevant USENET forums like rec.audio.* or comp.dsp. I know more about theoretical aspects than about what's out there to be honest. If you find anything interesting let me know;).
Wow, you really don't get it do you. Non-blind tests (i.e. yourself listening and looking for what you want) are worthless. Besides even if you did a real blind test it would be worthless, because it would prove that what you're talking about is an inherent limitations to speakers. I'm sure that you hear what you say you hear, the problem is that you can't explain it, and resort to blaming it on the nature of speakers, which is baseless and not even an explanation.
My comparison was about decision making, not monopoly or whatever, i.e. you need someone to make decisions, it has nothing to do with telling you what to do.
Triple cretin with an extra slice of blithering twit.
Like I said, psychoperceptive bullshit. "Listening to it" is not an answer, because you can hear whatever you want. That's why there's a difference between blind tests and what people claim for their own observations. And there's nothing about sound that isn't mathematical, invoking GÃdel is completely out of place.
What makes one instrument sound different than another?
Very generally and basically, harmonics, envelope, or when there is noise then frequency profile (or "colour") of the noise. Pretending that speakers affect these in any other way than by bringing in their frequency response (which can be alleviated by calibrating the speaker), noise or non-linear distortions (which are negligible on good quality speakers provided you stay within specs) is utter audiophile bullcrap. You sir must be a kook, but don't worry, so are all your colleagues.
Like I said I'm a software engineer. Only phenomenons that can be described mathematically interest me, I'll dismiss anything else as psychoperceptive bullshit. You can swear you can hear what you're talking about as hard as other audiophiles swear that putting an audio CD in the freezer gives the music a softer sound or that they can hear the difference with DVD audios, that's not going to convince me.
But if you can't explain what you're talking about any better and have to resort to boasting your credentials instead... The thing you said about "conventional speakers [having] huge difficulty dealing with subtle differences in volume" is bs, and you won't get anything much better than the best speakers you can get now, no matter what. If there's anything wrong that's not the speakers.
Utter bullcrap, regarding quantisation, as the noise it brings is -96 dB (for linear 16-bit sampling). There's more noise brought it at any other point between the CD and your brain. And anyone who says they can hear the difference between a DVD audio and a CD audio lies, is a fool, or a bat.
I was actually complaining about the lack of dynamic sensitivity.
What on Earth is 'dynamic sensitivity'? Sounds like a BS term to me.
If you pay attention, a lot of dynamic subtlety is lost in recording.
Again, a BS term. What you seem to be talking about regarding the bass solo is a poor mastering, i.e. a poor equalisation or a poor capture of the bass solo to begin with. Anything else you complain about can be blamed on a poor mastering. It has nothing to do with speakers, unless you have shitty ones.
Huh... aren't you basically just complaining about a lack of dynamic range which you can blame on the fact that you don't actually play CDs at 110 dB as in concerts? Excuse my ignorance, I'm not an audiophile, just a software engineer specialised in sound processing.
Oh of course you're voting for Obama, Marx Mrvelous, you pinko! Allow me to dismiss your otherwise very sensible points on ideological grounds by labelling you a baby-eating socialist. You're welcome.
Oh of course, their biased, which probably means that their "bias" isn't aligned well with yours. I've got news for you, reality is biased, it doesn't care about both sides of the issue, only about pesky facts.
Slashdot Mirror
Someone please walk me through this. A few months ago, MS was trying hard to rape-buy Yahoo who debated itself like a virgin Catholic schoolgirl. Now Yahoo is getting on its knees and MS doesn't want it anymore? What on Earth happened to the both of them in the meantime?
Can you picture that guy in a suit? It would look a bit off, unless he changed his hair 'style', then he'd look like a new man.
Riiiight, as if Obama was stupid enough to give the job to a guy who'd have too many conflicts of interest and has a bad record of anti-competition tricks.
We already have a CEO (Chief Executive Officer), we just voted him in ;-)
Yay! I say we need more ideological nuts in the White House!
How does the next president dare rely on Washington politicians to work with him in Washington! I'm so disappointed in Obama, I thought he would have picked the members of his administration out of Washington. I had Loompaland in mind.
Damn Obama for not having a grudge against most of the governing political world. There goes my dream of the first anti-Washington government..
That is all very true! And yes, unfortunately in the real world speakers are hardly ever calibrated (that is their frequency response is compensated for so that it's flat) and even if they were their environment plays a big part, as well as where the listener is in that environment.
So basically it's not so much the speaker itself the problem, but calibrating it (and you'll have a hard time to find any automated process to do it) and using the calibration data. I looked into it a couple of years ago and implemented some stuff but it's not simple. Because a microphone isn't calibrated either, in order to get the frequency response for your speakers in the setup you want from the position you want you basically need to do a bunch of recording using the microphone, your speakers to calibrate and something else that in a recording acts like the microphone and in another acts like a speaker. Then do some frequency domain equation based on the recordings, and then you get an impulse response that you should theoretically deconvolve your sounds to be played through your speakers with, how is the question ;). A sad thing that the reality of the necessity of calibrating speakers is so unknown and hard to achieve..
So like I said calibrating speakers depend on too many different things, however theoretically you could have headphones that are already calibrated, because the environment there (your head/ears mainly) varies little, but I don't think any such thing exists. If I wanted to find out if it does I'd ask in relevant USENET forums like rec.audio.* or comp.dsp. I know more about theoretical aspects than about what's out there to be honest. If you find anything interesting let me know ;).
doesn't vim have the ability to convert between the different kinds of line breaks?
Pfft. I'll be plugging it to a handheld console and project Asteroids or Pac-Man.
Antiquated classic fun video games + the bleeding edge of portable technology = teh win.
Wow, you really don't get it do you. Non-blind tests (i.e. yourself listening and looking for what you want) are worthless. Besides even if you did a real blind test it would be worthless, because it would prove that what you're talking about is an inherent limitations to speakers. I'm sure that you hear what you say you hear, the problem is that you can't explain it, and resort to blaming it on the nature of speakers, which is baseless and not even an explanation.
My comparison was about decision making, not monopoly or whatever, i.e. you need someone to make decisions, it has nothing to do with telling you what to do.
Triple cretin with an extra slice of blithering twit.
Mediocre minds think alike. Great minds are unique.
My thoughts exactly.
We don't need a national CTO. We can make our own technology decisions without the government telling us what to do.
We don't need a Secretary of the Treasury. We can make our own monetary decisions without the government telling us what to do.
Imbecile.
Like I said, psychoperceptive bullshit. "Listening to it" is not an answer, because you can hear whatever you want. That's why there's a difference between blind tests and what people claim for their own observations. And there's nothing about sound that isn't mathematical, invoking GÃdel is completely out of place.
What makes one instrument sound different than another?
Very generally and basically, harmonics, envelope, or when there is noise then frequency profile (or "colour") of the noise. Pretending that speakers affect these in any other way than by bringing in their frequency response (which can be alleviated by calibrating the speaker), noise or non-linear distortions (which are negligible on good quality speakers provided you stay within specs) is utter audiophile bullcrap. You sir must be a kook, but don't worry, so are all your colleagues.
Like I said I'm a software engineer. Only phenomenons that can be described mathematically interest me, I'll dismiss anything else as psychoperceptive bullshit. You can swear you can hear what you're talking about as hard as other audiophiles swear that putting an audio CD in the freezer gives the music a softer sound or that they can hear the difference with DVD audios, that's not going to convince me.
But if you can't explain what you're talking about any better and have to resort to boasting your credentials instead... The thing you said about "conventional speakers [having] huge difficulty dealing with subtle differences in volume" is bs, and you won't get anything much better than the best speakers you can get now, no matter what. If there's anything wrong that's not the speakers.
Utter bullcrap, regarding quantisation, as the noise it brings is -96 dB (for linear 16-bit sampling). There's more noise brought it at any other point between the CD and your brain. And anyone who says they can hear the difference between a DVD audio and a CD audio lies, is a fool, or a bat.
I was actually complaining about the lack of dynamic sensitivity.
What on Earth is 'dynamic sensitivity'? Sounds like a BS term to me.
If you pay attention, a lot of dynamic subtlety is lost in recording.
Again, a BS term. What you seem to be talking about regarding the bass solo is a poor mastering, i.e. a poor equalisation or a poor capture of the bass solo to begin with. Anything else you complain about can be blamed on a poor mastering. It has nothing to do with speakers, unless you have shitty ones.
I didn't even pay attention to that detail. YouTube has the worst sound ever, i.e. an awful automatic gain, plus bad compression.
Huh... aren't you basically just complaining about a lack of dynamic range which you can blame on the fact that you don't actually play CDs at 110 dB as in concerts? Excuse my ignorance, I'm not an audiophile, just a software engineer specialised in sound processing.
Oh of course you're voting for Obama, Marx Mrvelous, you pinko! Allow me to dismiss your otherwise very sensible points on ideological grounds by labelling you a baby-eating socialist. You're welcome.
Sincerely,
Joe the Witch-Hunter.
For Obama of course. Who wants to bet?
That was a really dumb link.
It wasn't the link that was dumb but what it pointed to.
How about you just read the whole wikipedia article rather than blithering senseless conspiracy theories?
Crap, I meant to say "they're". Clicked submit by accident :(.
Oh of course, their biased, which probably means that their "bias" isn't aligned well with yours. I've got news for you, reality is biased, it doesn't care about both sides of the issue, only about pesky facts.