I don't get some of you folks. As conumers, we should embrace competition...not be afraid of it. Shouldn't you be excited about possible new options and features? Nobody will be forced to buy MS if it's really inferior. Why the misplaced loyalty...unless you are shareholders of Apple, why react so negatively?
I've patiently waited for Apple to come out with new MP3 players all year. I've purchased four previously as family gifts and I was ready to buy a couple of more. With all the delays, most people will now be in a position to at least look at the new MS product before purchasing another iPod. This was something Apple has done to themselves.
Hedge your bets...buy some MS stock as well and let the best product...and the consumer...win.
hehe. The consumer knows what they want. Yeh that is why marketing doesn't do anything but waist money. I mean really consumers understand what they are buying and using so it stands to reason that they can make educated decisions about what product is better for them. This is why consumers have not even bothered with the iPod, because they know that it ties them down to a propriety system of music control rather than giving them real choice about the software and the tool they use to access music. I mean really how many iPods have sold any ways. Its not as if they have a market leading share (tic) because people understand that there are better options out there for less money.
Hehe. Consumer knows best. If it is all the same to you I will put my money on who ever markets their product better.
hehe. The consumer knows what they want. Yeh that is why marketing doesn't do anything but waist money. I mean really consumers understand what they are buying and using so it stands to reason that they can make educated decisions about what product is better for them. This is why consumers have not even bothered with the iPod, because they know that it ties them down to a propriety system of music control rather than giving them real choice about the software and the tool they use to access music. I mean really how many iPods have sold any ways. Its not as if they have a market leading share (tic) because people understand that there are better options out there for less money.
Hehe. Consumer knows best. If it is all the same to you I will put my money on who ever markets their product better.
is that the same way as TV networks CON us into buying closed system TVs?
is that the same way as TV networks CON us into buying closed system TVs?
i do hope you were being sarcastic
You bet I was sarcastic. I live in Australia so don't know anything about closed system TVs. But it sounds bad. I would like to think that consumers actually think before they buy or use a product or service. The reality is that marketing feeds into our desire to believe that we are worth something more. That we deserve more than what we have already.
Don't get me wrong I like gadgets and stuff as much as the next person, but I realise now more and more that I have a roof over my head, food on the plat and clothes on my back and that is enough. I also realise that the biggest thing in my life and the thing that give me the most joy in life and does not need something new about it each day is my family... Still... I do look forward to a video iPod... even though my PDA phone does this already. Go figure. Can preach it, but still working on living it.
One thing is for sure. Microsoft adds will play on our consumer focused belief that we are being ripped off by Apple and the iTunes/iPod product and services, and that Microsoft will do better by us. History tells me that Microsoft is all puff when it comes to delivering freedom and choice. It also tells me that the consumer will bite at it and be caught hook link and sinker.
by closed TV systems i was implying that you can ONLY watch video on them... not use them to mow the lawn or take a bath in.
t'was a joke.
M$ can burn in hell as far as im concerned. although i think they already are.... which i find more comforting than most things.
lol. I demand to take a bath in my TV... or at least turn it into a fish bowl. Not too sure if a business without a soul can actually burn in Hell, and I am fairly sure that there would be some people in MS that are worth saving... maybe even Bill
This is why consumers have not even bothered with the iPod, because they know that it ties them down to a propriety system of music control rather than giving them real choice about the software and the tool they use to access music.
Don't get me wrong, but actually i don't get the argument
regarding propriety system of music control. All Music
download services are seemingly tied to *something* else.
But in the end it is pretty easy to cancel all restriction mechs.
And i guess, it is happening knowingly...
I have to frown, when people claim that
Music that is bought through iTMS is hooked to iPods only.
Burn, recompile, move...
Quote:
...
Hehe. Consumer knows best. If it is all the same to you I will put my money on who ever markets their product better.
Don't get me wrong, but actually i don't get the argument
regarding propriety system of music control. All Music
download services are seemingly tied to *something* else.
But in the end it is pretty easy to cancel all restriction mechs.
And i guess, it is happening knowingly...
I have to frown, when people claim that
Music that is bought through iTMS is hooked to iPods only.
Burn, recompile, move...
Really?
Why burn then rip when you can use iMovie, add video, save, open in Quicktime, save audio only. hey presto no copy protection and no quality loss. And since ACC has already got quality loss why would you want more.
Why burn then rip when you can use iMovie, add video, save, open in Quicktime, save audio only. hey presto no copy protection and no quality loss. And since ACC has already got quality loss why would you want more.
Except doing that creates uncompressed audio. So, to reasonably store it inside iTunes, you'd want to re-compress it, losing? Quality.
Heck, i didn't say it is the most elegant way to cancel iTunes copy protection.
But the argument iTunes/iPod combo is a propriety system of music
control is questionable - at least.
To add to the humor here ... Dare I say analog? If you own a 'Hi-Fi System' (you know those old fashioned things with tape decks and turntables baby boomers probably still own - heck I do) the iPod is just another CD player and the tape record anything just fine. What tape hiss? now I am 54 I can't hear it
As a side bar / Ironically I dug my old Hi Fi out of the garage this last weekend to start making iPod versions of all my LPs. I was quite shocked to hear how much better the LPs (Spin Doctor reports DVD quality 48 KHz) sound than CDs. Glad I taped all mine the day I bought and then put them away. I now have about six months work recording them to iTunes and on to iPod.
To add to the humor here ... Dare I say analog? If you own a 'Hi-Fi System' (you know those old fashioned things with tape decks and turntables baby boomers probably still own - heck I do) the iPod is just another CD player and the tape record anything just fine. What tape hiss? now I am 54 I can't hear it
As a side bar / Ironically I dug my old Hi Fi out of the garage this last weekend to start making iPod versions of all my LPs. I was quite shocked to hear how much better the LPs (Spin Doctor reports DVD quality 48 KHz) sound than CDs. Glad I taped all mine the day I bought and then put them away. I now have about six months work recording them to iTunes and on to iPod.
But once you digitize your LPs, they won't sound better than CDs anymore - just keep listening to LPs (they will really sound better if you get a modern LP player like a Nottingham). Both the CD and LP were made from the same master tape most likely, and tape->digital should sound better than tape->LP->digital.
But once you digitize your LPs, they won't sound better than CDs anymore - just keep listening to LPs (they will really sound better if you get a modern LP player like a Nottingham). Both the CD and LP were made from the same master tape most likely, and tape->digital should sound better than tape->LP->digital.
If I digitize at 48 KHz and a high bit rate and save as lossless files won't they retain a higher quality than CDs?
If I digitize at 48 KHz and a high bit rate and save as lossless files won't they retain a higher quality than CDs?
Maybe 96KHz or 192KHz/24bit. I digitized a bunch of stuff from reel-to-reel tape, and even with no clipping there was a harshness in the upper treble, and 48KHz isn't that much different from 44.1 KHz of CDs.
The problem is supposedly the brick-wall filter at the cutoff frequency - it adds distortion way down into the audible spectrum when you encode at 44.1 KHz or 48KHz.
Maybe 96KHz or 192KHz/24bit. I digitized a bunch of stuff from reel-to-reel tape, and even with no clipping there was a harshness in the upper treble, and 48KHz isn't that much different from 44.1 KHz of CDs.
The problem is supposedly the brick-wall filter at the cutoff frequency - it adds distortion way down into the audible spectrum when you encode at 44.1 KHz or 48KHz.
Interesting problem. My M-Audio USB analog to digital converter is limited to 96K and 24 bit. Spin Doctor can go to this level.
Now I think about it I have a digital out on my audio amp I have never thought of using that directly into the G5 via optical connecter, I have no idea if this will work or what the sampling rates are... something to try on a rainy Sunday afternoon. If I can get a better quality then maybe Soundtrack Pro is the best app to record with then making an audio DVD might be worth trying too.
I have to digitize the Albums as they are taking up way too much room
At the end of the day it seems a lot of work but once that quality is lost it's lost so perhaps worth the effort.
But once you digitize your LPs, they won't sound better than CDs anymore
To the extent that LPs sound "better" than CDs to some people, I'd say that effect can be attributed almost entirely to "euphonic distortion" -- inaccuracies in sound reproduction which nevertheless have a pleasing quality, and which may contribute, for some listeners, to an illusion of greater audio realism.
You should be able to digitize the distortion of LPs and retain it, hence have a digital recording which sounds, for all practical intents and purposes, exactly like an LP. I sincerely doubt that in a proper double-blind test many, if any, vinyl afficionados could consistently distinguish direct analog LP playback from LP playback passed through A/D then D/A, using 16-bit 48 kHz linear sampling and good, mostly digital, high frequency cut-off filtering. I consider it highly unlikely that properly done digital sound has any "sonic signature" of its own, some pecular distortion or lack of transparency which would somehow kill off the "analog magic" of LP sound.
Comments
Originally posted by Planet1960
I don't get some of you folks. As conumers, we should embrace competition...not be afraid of it. Shouldn't you be excited about possible new options and features? Nobody will be forced to buy MS if it's really inferior. Why the misplaced loyalty...unless you are shareholders of Apple, why react so negatively?
I've patiently waited for Apple to come out with new MP3 players all year. I've purchased four previously as family gifts and I was ready to buy a couple of more. With all the delays, most people will now be in a position to at least look at the new MS product before purchasing another iPod. This was something Apple has done to themselves.
Hedge your bets...buy some MS stock as well and let the best product...and the consumer...win.
hehe. The consumer knows what they want. Yeh that is why marketing doesn't do anything but waist money. I mean really consumers understand what they are buying and using so it stands to reason that they can make educated decisions about what product is better for them. This is why consumers have not even bothered with the iPod, because they know that it ties them down to a propriety system of music control rather than giving them real choice about the software and the tool they use to access music. I mean really how many iPods have sold any ways. Its not as if they have a market leading share (tic) because people understand that there are better options out there for less money.
Hehe. Consumer knows best. If it is all the same to you I will put my money on who ever markets their product better.
Originally posted by Planet1960
Make "that" consumers...and I'll take a remedial typing course.
Maybe that should be connedsumers
Originally posted by ReCompile
...this 200 lb. Gorilla ...
It's 400 lb Gorilla...but otherwise, I like your style.
Originally posted by ALPICH
hehe. The consumer knows what they want. Yeh that is why marketing doesn't do anything but waist money. I mean really consumers understand what they are buying and using so it stands to reason that they can make educated decisions about what product is better for them. This is why consumers have not even bothered with the iPod, because they know that it ties them down to a propriety system of music control rather than giving them real choice about the software and the tool they use to access music. I mean really how many iPods have sold any ways. Its not as if they have a market leading share (tic) because people understand that there are better options out there for less money.
Hehe. Consumer knows best. If it is all the same to you I will put my money on who ever markets their product better.
is that the same way as TV networks CON us into buying closed system TVs?
i do hope you were being sarcastic
Originally posted by Trendannoyer
is that the same way as TV networks CON us into buying closed system TVs?
i do hope you were being sarcastic
You bet I was sarcastic. I live in Australia so don't know anything about closed system TVs. But it sounds bad. I would like to think that consumers actually think before they buy or use a product or service. The reality is that marketing feeds into our desire to believe that we are worth something more. That we deserve more than what we have already.
Don't get me wrong I like gadgets and stuff as much as the next person, but I realise now more and more that I have a roof over my head, food on the plat and clothes on my back and that is enough. I also realise that the biggest thing in my life and the thing that give me the most joy in life and does not need something new about it each day is my family... Still... I do look forward to a video iPod... even though my PDA phone does this already. Go figure. Can preach it, but still working on living it.
One thing is for sure. Microsoft adds will play on our consumer focused belief that we are being ripped off by Apple and the iTunes/iPod product and services, and that Microsoft will do better by us. History tells me that Microsoft is all puff when it comes to delivering freedom and choice. It also tells me that the consumer will bite at it and be caught hook link and sinker.
by closed TV systems i was implying that you can ONLY watch video on them... not use them to mow the lawn or take a bath in.
t'was a joke.
M$ can burn in hell as far as im concerned. although i think they already are.... which i find more comforting than most things.
Originally posted by Trendannoyer
my sarcastic
by closed TV systems i was implying that you can ONLY watch video on them... not use them to mow the lawn or take a bath in.
t'was a joke.
M$ can burn in hell as far as im concerned. although i think they already are.... which i find more comforting than most things.
lol. I demand to take a bath in my TV... or at least turn it into a fish bowl. Not too sure if a business without a soul can actually burn in Hell, and I am fairly sure that there would be some people in MS that are worth saving... maybe even Bill
Originally posted by ALPICH
...
This is why consumers have not even bothered with the iPod, because they know that it ties them down to a propriety system of music control rather than giving them real choice about the software and the tool they use to access music.
Don't get me wrong, but actually i don't get the argument
regarding propriety system of music control. All Music
download services are seemingly tied to *something* else.
But in the end it is pretty easy to cancel all restriction mechs.
And i guess, it is happening knowingly...
I have to frown, when people claim that
Music that is bought through iTMS is hooked to iPods only.
Burn, recompile, move...
...
Hehe. Consumer knows best. If it is all the same to you I will put my money on who ever markets their product better.
Really?
Originally posted by Vox Barbara
Don't get me wrong, but actually i don't get the argument
regarding propriety system of music control. All Music
download services are seemingly tied to *something* else.
But in the end it is pretty easy to cancel all restriction mechs.
And i guess, it is happening knowingly...
I have to frown, when people claim that
Music that is bought through iTMS is hooked to iPods only.
Burn, recompile, move...
Really?
Why burn then rip when you can use iMovie, add video, save, open in Quicktime, save audio only. hey presto no copy protection and no quality loss. And since ACC has already got quality loss why would you want more.
Originally posted by ALPICH
Why burn then rip when you can use iMovie, add video, save, open in Quicktime, save audio only. hey presto no copy protection and no quality loss.
Heck, i didn't say it is the most elegant way to cancel iTunes copy protection.
But the argument iTunes/iPod combo is a propriety system of music
control is questionable - at least.
Originally posted by ALPICH
Why burn then rip when you can use iMovie, add video, save, open in Quicktime, save audio only. hey presto no copy protection and no quality loss. And since ACC has already got quality loss why would you want more.
Except doing that creates uncompressed audio. So, to reasonably store it inside iTunes, you'd want to re-compress it, losing? Quality.
Originally posted by Vox Barbara
Heck, i didn't say it is the most elegant way to cancel iTunes copy protection.
But the argument iTunes/iPod combo is a propriety system of music
control is questionable - at least.
True.
Originally posted by Vox Barbara
Heck, i didn't say it is the most elegant way to cancel iTunes copy protection.
But the argument iTunes/iPod combo is a propriety system of music
control is questionable - at least.
To add to the humor here ... Dare I say analog? If you own a 'Hi-Fi System' (you know those old fashioned things with tape decks and turntables baby boomers probably still own - heck I do) the iPod is just another CD player and the tape record anything just fine. What tape hiss? now I am 54 I can't hear it
As a side bar / Ironically I dug my old Hi Fi out of the garage this last weekend to start making iPod versions of all my LPs. I was quite shocked to hear how much better the LPs (Spin Doctor reports DVD quality 48 KHz) sound than CDs. Glad I taped all mine the day I bought and then put them away. I now have about six months work recording them to iTunes and on to iPod.
Originally posted by digitalclips
To add to the humor here ... Dare I say analog? If you own a 'Hi-Fi System' (you know those old fashioned things with tape decks and turntables baby boomers probably still own - heck I do) the iPod is just another CD player and the tape record anything just fine. What tape hiss? now I am 54 I can't hear it
As a side bar / Ironically I dug my old Hi Fi out of the garage this last weekend to start making iPod versions of all my LPs. I was quite shocked to hear how much better the LPs (Spin Doctor reports DVD quality 48 KHz) sound than CDs. Glad I taped all mine the day I bought and then put them away. I now have about six months work recording them to iTunes and on to iPod.
But once you digitize your LPs, they won't sound better than CDs anymore - just keep listening to LPs (they will really sound better if you get a modern LP player like a Nottingham). Both the CD and LP were made from the same master tape most likely, and tape->digital should sound better than tape->LP->digital.
Originally posted by e1618978
But once you digitize your LPs, they won't sound better than CDs anymore - just keep listening to LPs (they will really sound better if you get a modern LP player like a Nottingham). Both the CD and LP were made from the same master tape most likely, and tape->digital should sound better than tape->LP->digital.
If I digitize at 48 KHz and a high bit rate and save as lossless files won't they retain a higher quality than CDs?
Originally posted by digitalclips
If I digitize at 48 KHz and a high bit rate and save as lossless files won't they retain a higher quality than CDs?
Maybe 96KHz or 192KHz/24bit. I digitized a bunch of stuff from reel-to-reel tape, and even with no clipping there was a harshness in the upper treble, and 48KHz isn't that much different from 44.1 KHz of CDs.
The problem is supposedly the brick-wall filter at the cutoff frequency - it adds distortion way down into the audible spectrum when you encode at 44.1 KHz or 48KHz.
Originally posted by e1618978
Maybe 96KHz or 192KHz/24bit. I digitized a bunch of stuff from reel-to-reel tape, and even with no clipping there was a harshness in the upper treble, and 48KHz isn't that much different from 44.1 KHz of CDs.
The problem is supposedly the brick-wall filter at the cutoff frequency - it adds distortion way down into the audible spectrum when you encode at 44.1 KHz or 48KHz.
Interesting problem. My M-Audio USB analog to digital converter is limited to 96K and 24 bit. Spin Doctor can go to this level.
Now I think about it I have a digital out on my audio amp I have never thought of using that directly into the G5 via optical connecter, I have no idea if this will work or what the sampling rates are... something to try on a rainy Sunday afternoon. If I can get a better quality then maybe Soundtrack Pro is the best app to record with then making an audio DVD might be worth trying too.
I have to digitize the Albums as they are taking up way too much room
At the end of the day it seems a lot of work but once that quality is lost it's lost so perhaps worth the effort.
Originally posted by e1618978
But once you digitize your LPs, they won't sound better than CDs anymore
To the extent that LPs sound "better" than CDs to some people, I'd say that effect can be attributed almost entirely to "euphonic distortion" -- inaccuracies in sound reproduction which nevertheless have a pleasing quality, and which may contribute, for some listeners, to an illusion of greater audio realism.
You should be able to digitize the distortion of LPs and retain it, hence have a digital recording which sounds, for all practical intents and purposes, exactly like an LP. I sincerely doubt that in a proper double-blind test many, if any, vinyl afficionados could consistently distinguish direct analog LP playback from LP playback passed through A/D then D/A, using 16-bit 48 kHz linear sampling and good, mostly digital, high frequency cut-off filtering. I consider it highly unlikely that properly done digital sound has any "sonic signature" of its own, some pecular distortion or lack of transparency which would somehow kill off the "analog magic" of LP sound.