move of ten is out on bleep | xltronic messageboard
 
You are not logged in!

F.A.Q
Log in

Register
  
 
  
 
(nobody)
...and 323 guests

Last 5 registered
Oplandisks
nothingstar
N_loop
yipe
foxtrotromeo

Browse members...
  
 
Members 8025
Messages 2613462
Today 0
Topics 127501
  
 
Messageboard index
move of ten is out on bleep
 

offline sadist from the dark side of the moon on 2010-06-15 17:33 [#02384269]
Points: 8670 Status: Lurker | Followup to Taxidermist: #02384268



i will definitely watch it to the end it just seems to me
you are trying to make a fool out of me.


 

offline elusive from detroit (United States) on 2010-06-15 17:36 [#02384270]
Points: 18367 Status: Regular | Show recordbag



Terence Hill, what is this about monster cables?

you think because someone cares about room treatments and
acoustics that they buy stupid shit like monster cables?

do you have some bent up aggression in your head and you
need to make false assumptions about others in order to
justify your attacks?

go rub it out



 

offline Taxidermist from Black Grass on 2010-06-15 17:36 [#02384271]
Points: 9958 Status: Lurker | Followup to sadist: #02384269



No, not trying to make a fool out of anyone.


 

offline Terence Hill from Germany on 2010-06-15 17:36 [#02384272]
Points: 2070 Status: Lurker | Followup to sadist: #02384267



he explains how to properly do double blind tests. Also
there's tests he prepared for you at his website. do it, be
prepared to shit bricks.


 

offline Terence Hill from Germany on 2010-06-15 17:40 [#02384273]
Points: 2070 Status: Lurker | Followup to elusive: #02384270



lol Duder, you said that i'm having fundamental gear
issues. I'm just making fun of "lossless acid squelches are
better than mp3 acid squelches", because it's wrong.


 

offline sadist from the dark side of the moon on 2010-06-15 17:43 [#02384274]
Points: 8670 Status: Lurker | Followup to Terence Hill: #02384273



that't the whole point - it isn't. it's true that low-end
audio cables acid squelch vs monster-cable acid squelch is
bullshit. but not compressed vs not compressed ones.

it's like saying that a bmp is the same as a jpg.


 

offline elusive from detroit (United States) on 2010-06-15 17:45 [#02384275]
Points: 18367 Status: Regular | Show recordbag



Taxidermist ,

funny you should post that video. ethan wiener is the guy
that does all the room treatment/acoustic shit on all the
links/papers i've been referencing to on this forum.

ironic much?

bandwidth and disk space is cheap. absolutely no reason you
should be subjecting yourself to anything but lossless files
- at least for archiving. you can always dump to mp3 or
convert to any other format for your hand held player some
other time.

just because you can't hear the difference in small sections
between lossless and 320k doesn't mean there aren't
differences in other parts of the song - or that you should
even have to CONSIDER whether there are artifacts vs the
original recording. i listen to lossless. i dont have to
worry in the back of my head if that little blip i heard was
an artifact or if it was part of the recording. one less
thing my brain/conscience forces myself to think about when
listening to music.

how the fuck you guys go off on tangents discussing audio
cables is beyond me.

terence hill basically takes on some sort of jealously or
other weird unidentified emotion and suddenly needs to lash
out irrationally and go off on a tangent pretending that
those who like lossless files are automatically audiophiles
and automatically spend thousands of dollars on such trivial
drivel as speaker cables.

clearly, terence... you aren't publishing many scientific
papers in your career with that sort of assumptive
attitude.



 

offline elusive from detroit (United States) on 2010-06-15 17:47 [#02384276]
Points: 18367 Status: Regular | Show recordbag



terence,
i didn't say you had fundamental "gear" issues.

i said "setup" issues.

which could be your room characteristics or speaker
response. there's lots of variables you probably aren't
taking into consideration regarding your ABX testing.

or, if headphones, there's almost even more variables to
worry about...hell, all the room treatment shit is cakewalk
for me...even people anal about minor things...but as soon
as i step foot into a headphone forum, im like "holy shit -
these guys are nuts!"


 

offline elusive from detroit (United States) on 2010-06-15 17:49 [#02384277]
Points: 18367 Status: Regular | Show recordbag



terence,

instead of you not knowing every in/out of the song and how
it's supposed to sound (since you didnt design/create it)
... why dont you take it from the experts (the people who
made the track) and see what their take is.

they, more than anyone, should know how it "should" sound
... and therefore their opinion on whether lossless vs lossy
holds any water when applied to their music/sound.

i hear shit in autechre and i dont know if it's supposed to
sound like that or not .. so i cant give a clear definition
on whether it sounds better lossless or not. ... am i
communicating that thought clearly? bit difficult to
describe.


 

offline Taxidermist from Black Grass on 2010-06-15 18:00 [#02384278]
Points: 9958 Status: Lurker



The way I see it; do what you like so long as you don't
criticize others when they do what they like. Thats all I
got to say about that.


 

offline goDel from ɐpʎǝx (Seychelles) on 2010-06-15 18:16 [#02384280]
Points: 10225 Status: Lurker | Followup to sadist: #02384274



the beautiful thing about the hydrogen audio forum is that
there is a religious rule that any claim made about sound
quality has to be backed up by an ABX test output.

Eat your haert out:
Blind listening tests
Frequently Asked Questions


 

offline elusive from detroit (United States) on 2010-06-15 18:20 [#02384281]
Points: 18367 Status: Regular | Show recordbag



right on - tax.

i dont know why terence had to go off on a tangent somehow
relating lossless audio files with speaker cable nonsense.

it is funny how everyone rips on room treatment, then post a
video by the very guy who is one of the most well known for
room treatments.... lol


 

offline AMPI MAX from United Kingdom on 2010-06-15 18:29 [#02384282]
Points: 10789 Status: Regular



absolutely no reason you should be subjecting yourself to
anything but lossless files


 

offline AMPI MAX from United Kingdom on 2010-06-15 18:31 [#02384283]
Points: 10789 Status: Regular



princess and the pea


 

offline Terence Hill from Germany on 2010-06-15 18:41 [#02384284]
Points: 2070 Status: Lurker



lol man. that speaker cable post was an attempt at humor,
you sock. i'm sorry if that wasn't clear.
i'm sorry that i called you a sock just now.

i still don't think you could reliably identify a 24-bit wav
file of y7 over a 320kbps mp3 file doing proper ABX, on your
setup, in your room.



 

offline Gwely Mernans from 23rd century entertainment (Canada) on 2010-06-15 19:24 [#02384286]
Points: 9856 Status: Lurker



It's funny that y7 seems to be such a big topic for
discussion and quality. The track fucking sucks.


 

offline elusive from detroit (United States) on 2010-06-15 19:24 [#02384287]
Points: 18367 Status: Regular | Show recordbag



i agree. i may and i may not. and it may take so much
conscience attention to actually hear the differences that
im technically no longer listening to the music as i should
be. which defeats the purpose. no sense in leaving it up
to chance. id rather have everything as close as possible to
the original recording/as the artist intended.

so what is your reasoning for *not* owning lossless?

320k are fairly large in themselves...why not just go the
extra step with lossless? what are you losing by ripping
your music lossless vs mp3? where is the disadvantage?

also with the lossless, you can convert to any other format
at a future time based on design requirements (e.g. 256k
mp3 for your ipod).

disk space is dirt cheap (1TB for $50) and bandwidth is
equally cheap.

and i still stand by sadist - let's do some ABX with r.ikeda
and watch mp3 fall.

this acceptance of mediocrity / half-assing it is
descriptive of the world around me on a plethora of other
topics.



 

offline elusive from detroit (United States) on 2010-06-15 19:42 [#02384289]
Points: 18367 Status: Regular | Show recordbag



it honestly doesn't make any fucking sense.
why argue about it?

why would you not want to eliminate every possible variable
out of the equation that could have an influence on
quality?

it doesn't matter if i can't tell a difference in this track
or this section of a song (320 vs flac) ... there is audio
data loss there PERIOD. why not completely eliminate it
from the equation so you dont even have to wonder whether
you are experiencing compression-quality-loss or not?

fuck. where i come from, we take out the low-hanging fruit
first. using lossless instead of compressed audio files is
effortless. where is the disadvantage?

hey - why not run lower res video files as well.

"but your chair is 10ft away from the tv ! so you cant see
the pixelation anyways! what's the point in running high res
video when you sit so far away ?!"

fucking mediocrity



 

offline Terence Hill from Germany on 2010-06-15 20:07 [#02384291]
Points: 2070 Status: Lurker



i have lossless files. for pretty much the reasons you are
pointing out. It's becoming more and more feasible to encode
lossless with increasing storage capacities nowadays for
archiving etc etc.

yet lossy compression certainly makes sense in practical
applications, i.e. i want my files to transfer quick rather
than wait ten times as long, especially when i won't even be
able to notice a difference.

compression tech is pretty good nowadays innit, you can
instantly watch youtube videos that blow our grandparents'
DVDs out of the water bla blah.

i didn't mean to start a huge argument over this. i
regret having posted the initial post that started all this
shit.



 

offline cx from Norway on 2010-06-15 20:12 [#02384293]
Points: 4537 Status: Regular



My entire music collection is 700 GB, and I can back that up
once with my storage.
If I had all those mp3's in flac, it would take between 2-3
TB, and if I wanted to have a safe backup I would need a
total of 6 TB JUST for music.
Personally, I have all my movies in xvid, all music in mp3,
etc.. I can have far more and the quality isn't bad enough
for me to make a deal out of it.


 

offline elusive from detroit (United States) on 2010-06-15 20:18 [#02384294]
Points: 18367 Status: Regular | Show recordbag



so doing ABX tests is irrelevant in this scope. as is the
rest of the discussion/argument.

the benefit of having lossless files is made well apparent
.. even if you may not be able to tell the audio quality
difference between that and a 320k mp3..other factors are
present which have equal weight in the decision process.

"i want my files to transfer quick rather
than wait ten times as long, especially when i won't even
be
able to notice a difference. "


320k <--> flac file size delta is not a factor of ten ...



 

offline elusive from detroit (United States) on 2010-06-15 20:26 [#02384295]
Points: 18367 Status: Regular | Show recordbag



good for you, cx.

you have design constraints and mp3 satisfies your
requirements.

my favorite music i like to have lossless
my favorite movies, i like to have as high-res/uncompressed
as possible.

i know it was an assumption, but i dont think anyone was
claiming all of the music should be lossless - i think we're
all on the same page here talking about music that is dear
to us ... our favorite albums, songs, etc ...



 

offline elusive from detroit (United States) on 2010-06-15 20:27 [#02384296]
Points: 18367 Status: Regular | Show recordbag



"If I had all those mp3's in flac, it would take between
2-3
TB, and if I wanted to have a safe backup I would need a
total of 6 TB JUST for music. "


maybe you hoard too much music and need spring cleaning with
stuff you dont find yourself listening to

:P


 

offline cx from Norway on 2010-06-15 21:01 [#02384298]
Points: 4537 Status: Regular



Well I won't lie.. I do have a few movies in blu-ray
quality, and I have some stuff in FLAC, but on the whole I
decided that I would go for V0 rips in MP3 and xvid for
movies..

Also, I have been collecting MP3 since the 90s, and have
copied from HDD to HDD ever since then to keep the
collection safe.. I have discographies of every artist I
like, which is a good 500TB on its own, but also random
albums and things and all of these mean something to me. I
may not listen to them everyday, but I am a collector at
heart and all these albums mean something to me.


 

offline cx from Norway on 2010-06-15 21:02 [#02384299]
Points: 4537 Status: Regular | Followup to cx: #02384298



500GB rather


 

offline larn from PLANET E (United Kingdom) on 2010-06-15 21:02 [#02384300]
Points: 5473 Status: Regular | Show recordbag





if you're walking in the street with an mp3 player and
little earphones, mp3 is fine

at home on a decent sound system, you wan't to here the
music without any 3rd party compression. same as if you make
me a coffee i want full cream mother fucker


 

offline taking_the_piz on 2010-06-15 21:07 [#02384301]
Points: 795 Status: Lurker



so, ehm, yeah rew1 is the shit.


 

offline elusive from detroit (United States) on 2010-06-15 21:43 [#02384303]
Points: 18367 Status: Regular | Show recordbag



oversteps gets better after mot
that, or the time factor is making oversteps better.

ilanders is still an unstoppable monster, though.



 

offline Guybrush from the white room on 2010-06-15 22:03 [#02384304]
Points: 2556 Status: Lurker | Show recordbag



NERRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRDDDDDDDSSSSSS


 

offline cx from Norway on 2010-06-15 22:17 [#02384306]
Points: 4537 Status: Regular | Followup to Guybrush: #02384304



I feel your frustration man.. All these fucking people
CARING ABOUT THINGS and DISCUSSING THINGS, ahh FUCK THEM!
Why don't they all realize all this is shit and nothing is
worth anything!


 

offline rad smiles on 2010-06-15 22:59 [#02384312]
Points: 5608 Status: Lurker



THANKS FOR GAYING UP THE THREAD GUYS


 

offline Zephyr Twin from ΔΔΔ on 2010-06-15 23:02 [#02384314]
Points: 16982 Status: Regular | Show recordbag



Meanwhile, Sean and Rob are wondering what people think of
Move of Ten.


 

offline larn from PLANET E (United Kingdom) on 2010-06-15 23:03 [#02384315]
Points: 5473 Status: Regular | Show recordbag



AUDIO TECHNOLOGY RESEARCH


 

offline Guybrush from the white room on 2010-06-15 23:07 [#02384317]
Points: 2556 Status: Lurker | Followup to cx: #02384306 | Show recordbag



but you have such dreadful taste, how can i ever take you
seriously?


 

offline larn from PLANET E (United Kingdom) on 2010-06-15 23:08 [#02384319]
Points: 5473 Status: Regular | Show recordbag



anyway, back to the topic of discussion , is it just me or
can i hear allot of the samples used in their current live
set?


 

offline Wolfslice from Bay Area, CA (United States) on 2010-06-16 02:38 [#02384348]
Points: 4884 Status: Regular



Day 2:

Cep puiqMX keeps me coming back the most.

Can't seem to get into rew(1) or Iris was a pupil.

pce freeze gets pretty boring after maybe the 10th (non
consecutive) listen.

nth dafuseder sounds better today.

I'd probably like Ethogon better without the "melody."
Violent beat makes up for it though.


 

offline jnasato from 777gogogo (Japan) on 2010-06-16 03:04 [#02384352]
Points: 3393 Status: Regular | Show recordbag



If we just passed a joint around in this thread, all the
posts would be smiles and chillaxin'. . .

Someone e-mail me when internet-weed goes live.


 

offline Taxidermist from Black Grass on 2010-06-16 04:23 [#02384360]
Points: 9958 Status: Lurker | Followup to jnasato: #02384352



Maybe for you. Some people suffer from anxiety when they
smoke weed.


 

offline cx from Norway on 2010-06-16 04:56 [#02384361]
Points: 4537 Status: Regular | Followup to Guybrush: #02384317



my taste is the best in the world.


 

offline PS on 2010-06-16 09:04 [#02384372]
Points: 1876 Status: Lurker



Elusive, if I may, I'd like to draw your attention to a song
of great interest to me and, hopefully!, you. I'm talking
bout "Be My Baby," of course; and though it has nothing to
do with your little argument, I think you'll find it to be
one hell of a great tune. Just erase all the ads and movies
you've heard it in, then..

Boom, bom-boom, clap! Boom, bom-boom, clap!


 

offline PS on 2010-06-16 09:07 [#02384373]
Points: 1876 Status: Lurker



And then "Then He Kissed Me" comes on. I say I just can't
get enough!


 

offline jnasato from 777gogogo (Japan) on 2010-06-16 09:14 [#02384374]
Points: 3393 Status: Regular | Followup to Taxidermist: #02384360 | Show recordbag



"Some people suffer from anxiety when they smoke weed."

Anxiety and paranoia from weed is mostly a high-THC,
sativa-dominant trait. Indica-dominant strains with higher
percentages of CBD and CBN take the edge off and are
actually anxiety-relieving.


 

offline jnasato from 777gogogo (Japan) on 2010-06-16 09:16 [#02384375]
Points: 3393 Status: Regular | Show recordbag



Granted, "everyone's different", and there's always that one
dude who gets absolutely smashed on 2 beers, etc.

But I was definitely referring to chillaxin' couch-lock weed
to pass around, not the rushy sativa stuff (which is awesome
on a totally different level, though).


 

offline Taxidermist from Black Grass on 2010-06-16 09:16 [#02384376]
Points: 9958 Status: Lurker | Followup to jnasato: #02384374



Or I could just not smoke weed at all.


 

offline jnasato from 777gogogo (Japan) on 2010-06-16 09:26 [#02384377]
Points: 3393 Status: Regular | Followup to Taxidermist: #02384376 | Show recordbag



Yah, that's great, too!


 

offline PS on 2010-06-16 10:55 [#02384397]
Points: 1876 Status: Lurker



Move of Ten is mostly fire. Need I say more? No. You've
only heard it twice, don't want to make a fool out of
yourself.


 

offline PS on 2010-06-16 11:09 [#02384398]
Points: 1876 Status: Lurker



In the immortal words of Big Boi, Etchogon-S make it sound
like aluminum cans in the back. y7 is chock full of worms
n' nth Dafuseder.b is practically pop music; so easy to
enjoy.


 

offline PS on 2010-06-16 11:17 [#02384402]
Points: 1876 Status: Lurker | Followup to PS: #02384398



Maybe iris was studying to become see on see, it wouldn't
surprise me one bit.


 

offline PS on 2010-06-16 11:20 [#02384403]
Points: 1876 Status: Lurker



Or maybe it would!


 

offline horsefactory from 💠 (United Kingdom) on 2010-06-16 13:31 [#02384425]
Points: 14867 Status: Regular



this is awesome


 


Messageboard index