Technics Are Stopping Production On 1200'S And 1210'S
| Good [+1]Toggle ReplyLink» cutterhead replied on Thu Dec 3, 2009 @ 2:39pm |
 Coolness: 131715 | Originally Posted By NEOFORM
no, this test is conducted on music, not amplitude modulation. You guys were claiming you can hear the sound difference in a 320kbps mp3.. when the hell do you ever listen to anything other than tracks in mp3 form? MODULATION WHAT THE FUCK I NEVER TALKED ABOUT MODULATION , im shure you dont even know what modulation is or what causes it. and im not talking about a mxpx at all AMPLITUDE : LEVEL OF SIGNAL FREQUENCY : LEVEL OF RESONNANCE ian for fuck sake , this escape you knowlege completely , go back to your helpdesk work , in hopes that you have better knowlege in that, than what you displayed here. .WAV type all the time .MOD type all the time also raw audio program format (NOT COMPRESSED , and yep its night and day compared to the vbr mp3) i also listen analog audio type all the time , but ill stop there cause you dont seem to get anything but what you think your geting. |
| I'm feeling tarfu right now.. | |
| Good [+1]Toggle ReplyLink» neoform replied on Thu Dec 3, 2009 @ 3:07pm |
 Coolness: 339785 | Hahahahhahahahahaahhahahahahahahahaha.
Hahahahhahaa. You get so outraged over the simplest of things, it's amazing. |
| I'm feeling almighty right now.. | |
| Good [+1]Toggle ReplyLink» cutterhead replied on Thu Dec 3, 2009 @ 3:08pm |
| Coolness: 131715 | keep trolling elderly ears |
| I'm feeling tarfu right now.. | |
| Good [+1]Toggle ReplyLink» neoform replied on Thu Dec 3, 2009 @ 3:12pm |
| Coolness: 339785 | Keep deluding yourself retard. |
| I'm feeling almighty right now.. | |
| Good [+1]Toggle ReplyLink» cutterhead replied on Thu Dec 3, 2009 @ 3:39pm |
| Coolness: 131715 | Originally Posted By NEOFORM
Keep deluding yourself retard. keep pouring your shitstorm. that doesnt change the fact you cant hear above 17khz , my rotary phone has better quality that what you enum. for an "erudite" your more rude than educated ... what's your professionnal experience over that matter btw ? you have diplomas , years of experiences and annual reports that coin you as a pro in that field ? or have you taken that title just because one of your friend owns [ rave.ca ] and you know him for a while. you asked for an answer , you taunted , and even when 2 ppl tossing learned and tested facts at you, you keep dismissing our answers... one thing out of many jumps to my mind when i think of you : 
but your boring for a stupe |
| I'm feeling tarfu right now.. | |
| Good [+1]Toggle ReplyLink» Kishmay_Pinas replied on Thu Dec 3, 2009 @ 4:01pm |
 Coolness: 103375 | From what I understand he simply wants to doa controlled test using the equipment that most normal everyday people use to listen to wavs and mp3. No need for fancy words and devices it's a control test for the lay person
And if your ear is as attuned as you say it is than his simple control test on an everyday home sound system should be no problem. Take the bet it's most likely an easy 100$ for you. Me I don't make the claim, and honestly doubt that I could really tell the difference under normal listenting conditions. |
| I'm feeling suck my cock right now.. | |
| Good [+1]Toggle ReplyLink» Zimmermau5 replied on Thu Dec 3, 2009 @ 4:10pm |
 Coolness: 77480 | Neoform in answer to your Itunes/Flac question, not you have to convert them with winamp first
and to Masa, VLC plays Flac. :) |
| I'm feeling lost the game right now.. | |
| Good [+1]Toggle ReplyLink» cutterhead replied on Thu Dec 3, 2009 @ 4:18pm |
| Coolness: 131715 | to you too kishma : i hear the difference no matter the system , if the system is defective in anyways to reproduce it i will even pinpoint the location on board where developement was cheaply done
dont take statistical textbook as hard fact , a statistic is only a statistic, i wouldnt advance with such claim if i didnt work with scopes and audiometers (or anymeters for that matter) and made a reaserch of my own over that same again said matter. what you think each time i repair shit i only change the part that burned ? each item i repair something i learn it to the point i can build it. read back what i said , instead of jumping on wiki and go " wiki said it stops at 21khz so it must be true ". first off kill all the noisy electrical and isolate your worklab /bench or studio (whatever u call it) , but until you have a cleanroom and make test with more than one application you are only reading back what a old 1960s failed test result back to me. |
| I'm feeling tarfu right now.. | |
| Good [+1]Toggle ReplyLink» Screwhead replied on Thu Dec 3, 2009 @ 4:19pm |
 Coolness: 685710 | Originally Posted By KISHMAY_PINAS
And if your ear is as attuned as you say it is than his simple control test on an everyday home sound system should be no problem. Take the bet it's most likely an easy 100$ for you. Me I don't make the claim, and honestly doubt that I could really tell the difference under normal listenting conditions. Normal listening conditions vary from person to person; I'm using a pair of KRK Rokit 6 monitors through a Tascam sound card for 95% of my listening.. If we were to go ask my father, his "normal listening" gear consists of: CD player - Arcam FMJ 33: [ www.stereophile.com ] speakers - Triangle Celius 202: [ www.tnt-audio.com ] I don't remember the brand, but the amp he's got is this: 
(not the thing in the middle, that's the CD player; it's the monoblocks to the left and right) And as much as the gear I posted is what I'm listening on now, I was raised on audiophile-level soundsystems like this. |
| I'm feeling like a drama magnet right now.. | |
| Good [+1]Toggle ReplyLink» neoform replied on Thu Dec 3, 2009 @ 4:22pm |
| Coolness: 339785 | Originally Posted By CUTTERHEAD
keep pouring your shitstorm. that doesnt change the fact you cant hear above 17khz , my rotary phone has better quality that what you enum. That must be some telephone given that a rotary phone only has a frequency response of 300-3400Hz .. I was doing the test of my iphone earphones plugged into my crappy internal dell soundcard, so quit stroking your ego that i didn't hear the 18kHz sound... Zimmermau5, yeah, that's pretty useless. I hate decoding/recoding audio files. Once something has been encoded, I don't want to touch it for fear of loss of quality. |
| I'm feeling almighty right now.. | |
| Good [+1]Toggle ReplyLink» Zimmermau5 replied on Thu Dec 3, 2009 @ 4:24pm |
| Coolness: 77480 | Totally hear ya on that one neoform, It sucks balls. |
| I'm feeling lost the game right now.. | |
| Good [+1]Toggle ReplyLink» Screwhead replied on Thu Dec 3, 2009 @ 4:26pm |
| Coolness: 685710 | Originally Posted By NEOFORM
Zimmermau5, yeah, that's pretty useless. I hate decoding/recoding audio files. Once something has been encoded, I don't want to touch it for fear of loss of quality. Shouldn't be a problem if you're doing it with FLAC [ flac.sourceforge.net ] FLAC doesn't compress audio frequencies or strip out anything, it's essentially a data-compression algorythm tailored to compress audio files; essentially, your FLAC is a ZIP/RAR'd WAV file, as opposed to MP3, OGG or WMV that actually compresses the audio and removes 'inaudible' frequencies. |
| I'm feeling like a drama magnet right now.. | |
| Good [+1]Toggle ReplyLink» neoform replied on Thu Dec 3, 2009 @ 4:26pm |
| Coolness: 339785 | Beh, I'd still rather just play the files directly.. |
| I'm feeling almighty right now.. | |
| Good [+1]Toggle ReplyLink» cutterhead replied on Thu Dec 3, 2009 @ 4:28pm |
| Coolness: 131715 | yea , and like , if you cannot hear the difference between noisy party power amps and hi-fi studio gear. then your are in the wrong buiznatch
everybody can train themselves to hear it, the only thing required is attention and and conduct more than a hundred test to cover everything that could have escaped your judgement, because corps dont what to push new technology, but they will sell you something that work as much as the old , but that look newers and will do everything to sell it to you. unless their r&d team is their priority over quality and not fucking the customer over. im up to compare rotary phone quality with a 192khz mp3 and a 320khz vbr and a raw wav , anygiven day even playedback on a 22 khz or 44 khz or 96 khz system. or even remotly tru a phone for that matter. |
| I'm feeling tarfu right now.. | |
| Good [+1]Toggle ReplyLink» Bad_Chemistry replied on Thu Dec 3, 2009 @ 5:08pm |
 Coolness: 73205 | I'll go with cutter and say that if you train yourself to hear the difference it is by all means possible. To say that you can get it 100% of the time on any system is bullshit though. I've heard a fair many systems that cut-off at like 16khz.
To say that you can hear it through a phone is complete and total bullshit. I've been training my ears for a long fucking time, and I still have problems making out what people say sometimes via shitty rogers reception. |
| I'm feeling wtf charles? right now.. | |
| Good [+1]Toggle ReplyLink» cutterhead replied on Thu Dec 3, 2009 @ 5:19pm |
| Coolness: 131715 | lol , yea its hearable tru a phone , i just didnt stated the prerequisite of fix space from speaker to phone pickup.
and yes low fi will seems to disapear from the phone and will leave distinctive hi freq carrier. the better source of the system the more hints youll get on the other line. also phone used will greatly act on this test. an analog rotary will reproduce to +5khz while a cordless or cell will not achieve as much. i didnt said this test was easy i said its feasable. this one will be failed by most of the mass. but hearing diff in digital audio anybody can do you need to have a proper setup. Update » cutterhead wrote on Thu Dec 3, 2009 @ 5:24pm a trained classical signer will hear cents , but will not if you yell during the test. |
| I'm feeling tarfu right now.. | |
| Good [+1]Toggle ReplyLink» Screwhead replied on Thu Dec 3, 2009 @ 5:21pm |
| Coolness: 685710 | One of my favorites to listen to on a good system is Dante's Prayer from Loreena McKennitt's album The Book of Secrets. They recorded the choir in a church; simple recording, two stereo mics in the room.
On a good system, if you close your eyes and are sitting in the sweet spot, you can hear the robes of the choir shifting, and you can hear the recording engineer sitting in a pew shifting his weight, to the point where you can tell when he's putting more weight on one ass-cheek than the other. The opening to the Roger Waters album, Amused to Death, though, is the "standard" test for me and my dad to test a sound system; exactly 11 seconds in you hear a dog barking to your left, and another answer it from the right, but you really only hear it if the system is well set up and you've got good gear. You don't hear it with headphones or most 'regular' sound systems, it's too faint. The imaging on the CD is so good that with only two front speakers, you hear in full surround.. On one track (I think track 8, Too Much Rope) you hear a horse-drawn sled come in from the right and go right around behind you and go off, so clearly that you can hear the snow crunching under the hoofs and you can tell how long the sled is by the noise it's making.. In terms of quality of recording and level of detail, it's the single greatest album ever.. I actually went and got a 24k gold copy of the CD, it's just so fucking worth it. Update » Screwhead wrote on Thu Dec 3, 2009 @ 5:24pm ok holy fuck I wish I'd taken better care of the case and the cardboard sleeve that the case came in, this thing is going for 500$ on some auction sites!!! |
| I'm feeling like a drama magnet right now.. | |
| Good [+1]Toggle ReplyLink» Bad_Chemistry replied on Thu Dec 3, 2009 @ 5:26pm |
| Coolness: 73205 | ^ two stereo mics for that great of a recording? If you could find me an article or something about that it would be great, but to really get that full surround type sound I'm pretty sure you'd need a pretty crazy mic setup to pick up the ambiance and natural reverb of the church. Update » Bad_Chemistry wrote on Thu Dec 3, 2009 @ 5:28pm It's probably a secret technique or series of mics that I'm sure the recording engineer at the time would have wanted to keep secret. |
| I'm feeling wtf charles? right now.. | |
| Good [+1]Toggle ReplyLink» Screwhead replied on Thu Dec 3, 2009 @ 5:32pm |
| Coolness: 685710 | Originally Posted By DMTIO
^ two stereo mics for that great of a recording? If you could find me an article or something about that it would be great, but to really get that full surround type sound I'm pretty sure you'd need a pretty crazy mic setup to pick up the ambiance and natural reverb of the church. I think it was in the liner notes; it came with practically a small book that had all sorts of info on the recording and the songs themselves.. either that or it was in a Stereophile Magazine review, I'm not sure.. I'm leaning towards the liner notes, but I've got a nagging feeling it was from a review/interview with the engineer. |
| I'm feeling like a drama magnet right now.. | |
| Good [+1]Toggle ReplyLink» Bad_Chemistry replied on Thu Dec 3, 2009 @ 5:53pm |
| Coolness: 73205 | I just actually checked out the recording (mp3 but let's not revive that) and i have to agree the recording is beautiful. I did actually hear the wood creaking slightly in the pew (Mackie HR824).
Ugh there's just something about large natural church reverbs that no VST can emulate. |
| I'm feeling wtf charles? right now.. | |
Technics Are Stopping Production On 1200'S And 1210'S
[ Cumbre de Página ] |
Post A Reply |
You must be logged in to post a reply.
[ Cumbre de Página ] |
