ones and zeros

  On 2/24/2010 at 1:40 AM, Greg Reason said:

You guy are tards. You don't make music at CD quality, you make it well above and then dither it down when it's mastered. Vinyl can better handle the extended frequency range than a CD/mp3. Unless ae make music in 16/44.1 then the vinyl will be better.

Unless you don't like surface noise, distortion and degradation.

This is pretty much always the world's most tiresome and unproductive conversation ever, every time it has ever come up on the internets. How about you enjoy what you like, thank the artist for providing it in the format you love, and stop being a cuntfart about it?

Fuckers should just do what Trent Reznor's been doing: issue it as 24/96 wav. Then no one can complain. Almost as wide as vinyl but without the chance of technicalities arising from not having good styli and taking proper care of the record.

It's released as a 24/44.1 wav. Eat my cack, because it sounds great.

Edit: B&B said somewhere that the download version of Quarsitice was the "actual product," so I would imagine they feel similarly about the wav file. In any case, they aren't hating on the digits.

  On 2/24/2010 at 1:40 AM, Greg Reason said:

You guy are tards. You don't make music at CD quality, you make it well above and then dither it down when it's mastered. Vinyl can better handle the extended frequency range than a CD/mp3. Unless ae make music in 16/44.1 then the vinyl will be better.

vinyl = 68 dB of dynamic range

16 bit = 96 dB

24 bit = 144 dB

So you could hear a difference between vinyl pressed with 16 bit file and same one with 24 bit file? Wow!!!

''warmth'' = muddy bass

''richer sound'' = rolled-off highs

  On 2/24/2010 at 2:43 AM, xox said:

  On 2/24/2010 at 1:40 AM, Greg Reason said:

You guy are tards. You don't make music at CD quality, you make it well above and then dither it down when it's mastered. Vinyl can better handle the extended frequency range than a CD/mp3. Unless ae make music in 16/44.1 then the vinyl will be better.

 

vinyl = 68 dB of dynamic range

 

16 bit = 96 dB

24 bit = 144 dB

 

 

So you could hear a difference between vinyl pressed with 16 bit file and same one with 24 bit file? Wow!!!

That's all well and good but I am talking about frequency range. This is the modern era, feel free to use Google. http://www.channld.com/vinylanalysis1.html

  On 2/24/2010 at 2:54 AM, Greg Reason said:

  On 2/24/2010 at 2:43 AM, xox said:

  On 2/24/2010 at 1:40 AM, Greg Reason said:

You guy are tards. You don't make music at CD quality, you make it well above and then dither it down when it's mastered. Vinyl can better handle the extended frequency range than a CD/mp3. Unless ae make music in 16/44.1 then the vinyl will be better.

 

vinyl = 68 dB of dynamic range

 

16 bit = 96 dB

24 bit = 144 dB

 

 

So you could hear a difference between vinyl pressed with 16 bit file and same one with 24 bit file? Wow!!!

 

That's all well and good but I am talking about frequency range. This is the modern era, feel free to use Google. http://www.channld.com/vinylanalysis1.html

Heheh...Oh man... but human hearing range is from 20 Hz to 20000 Hz (if you are 10 years old) and CD can reproduce up to 22000 Hz.

Batman likes vinyl...

there are ones. and there are zeros.

  On 2/24/2010 at 3:07 AM, phling said:

there are ones. and there are zeros.

there are zeros. and there are zeros.

  On 2/24/2010 at 3:01 AM, xox said:

Heheh...Oh man... but human hearing range is from 20 Hz to 20000 Hz (if you are 10 years old) and CD can reproduce up to 22000 Hz.

 

Batman likes vinyl...

Oh! No problems! Well let's not worry about all that extra recorded information then! In fact, I can't see air either, we may as well not stress about soiling it with pollution!

  On 2/24/2010 at 3:12 AM, Greg Reason said:

  On 2/24/2010 at 3:01 AM, xox said:

Heheh...Oh man... but human hearing range is from 20 Hz to 20000 Hz (if you are 10 years old) and CD can reproduce up to 22000 Hz.

 

Batman likes vinyl...

 

Oh! No problems! Well let's not worry about all that extra recorded information then! In fact, I can't see air either, we may as well not stress about soiling it with pollution!

Best argument ever!!! Very appropriate.

...extra recorded information??? Information that we can't hear?

Nice sidestep.

i can sell you a painting that contains colors your rods and cones cant process. its really expensive but its worth it because it has invisible colors.

  On 2/24/2010 at 3:12 AM, Greg Reason said:

I can't see air either, we may as well not stress about soiling it with pollution!

Yes because the whole purpose of air is to look at it isn't it

pwn

let's discuss 720p vs 1080p on 32inch television sets!

this thread delivers some good lols

this thread made me give my analord collection a spin again.

  On 2/24/2010 at 1:40 AM, Greg Reason said:

Vinyl can better handle the extended frequency range than a CD/mp3.

No it can't. Not in the real world. If you're going to call people retards , its best to make sure you actually know what you're talking about. Otherwise you look like a retard. You fucking retard. You stupid ignorant little cunt. You maggot cocked faggoty mummy's boy. Prick.

lol

here's me, chiming in to mention that the human ear's perception tops out around 20,000hz. that is to say, our ear drums and the related, microscopic components of our ears can't detect signals at a rate any higher than 20,000hz (give or take). so there's the matter of that, though that doesn't mean we couldn't benefit from the added resolution (taking interference of waves into account, you can get some funky stuff) -- but let's be honest with ourselves. so even the most highly tuned, masturbatory audiophiles who keep their heads in some special chamber to protect it from danger are going to be sampling at a lower rate than our lousy cd's (the nyquist frequency of 44.1kHz audio is 22.05kHz, conveniently well above 20kHz). my guess is what comes into play is the way in which we dither/downsample, though i doubt max/msp and whatever else they were using is sampling at a rate higher than 44.1khz (though i may eat my words on this one). our brains do crazy interpolation with sounds (we lock into rhythms and are jarred when the rhythm changes, etc -- the same applies on a much smaller scale for individual sounds). as far as i can tell, cd's are pretty fucking good. that said, i like buying big releases on vinyl. it's for the collection! sound wise, i'm happy with some wav files and a good dac. something tells me i'm not missing a slew of crazy melodies being played in the 25kHz range.

also, regarding cd's being encoded: the cd-da standard mandates that the audio be encoded with the pcm standard -- wav files (with some special packing to get it in stereo, etc). the dac has the same role as the head on your turntable -- converting from one medium to another.

technology is awesome guys, don't shplooge your mooge over one method sounding better than the other. let's all be happy and listen to the medium we enjoy most, be it aesthetically or through some delusion of a significant sonic difference (one that's not distortion, mind you).

  On 2/24/2010 at 9:55 PM, bigs said:

let's all be happy and listen to the medium we enjoy most, be it aesthetically or through some delusion of a significant sonic difference (one that's not distortion, mind you).

+1

I always buy vinal because it has actual value. I cant really collect cds or mp3s.

Its also really nice to take it for a spin and just sit down and focus on the music.

i can't wait to have my oversteps vinyl just so i can have it for 10+ years and play the fuck out of it enough that the sound quality degrades to the point of it sounding like it was made in the 70s/80s.

  On 2/25/2010 at 2:52 AM, modey said:

i can't wait to have my oversteps vinyl just so i can have it for 10+ years and play the fuck out of it enough that the sound quality degrades to the point of it sounding like it was made in the 70s/80s.

its easier than that -- play it backwards and it will send your record back in time (then back again)