Right, so they hired Holman just for the hell of it? Apple can't sort out where the shortcomings in audio quality are? Holman doesn't know software?
THX certification is on any number of consumer audio and video devices, it's not just "equipment" but rather a set of standards and specs (including, yes, software). If Holman does nothing but apply THX type standards to Apple's audio efforts there will be a huge increase in quality across the board.
I'm not even sure what you think you're arguing. Holman is a sound engineer, and a very good one. His hiring means that Apple intends for him to work improving sound. Again, he's not going to just stand their scratching his head because Apple isn't making cinema sound systems.
Just as a point of interest, "THX" derives from "Tom Holman Crossover", that being the crossover he originally designed for Lucas to enable better theater sound.
Dude, not every post here is a rhetorical question. Yeah, I actually asked for information. Or do we need an emoticon for that? Sheesh.
In any case, the "deficiencies" that ipods have are irrelevant to 99% of the population. I am willing to see what comes of it, but audio quality up until now hasn't been anything apple cared about.
Just as a point of interest, "THX" derives from "Tom Holman Crossover", that being the crossover he originally designed for Lucas to enable better theater sound.
I didn't know that. Another bit of trivia learned today for when Alex Trebek invites me to play Jeopardy.
Dude, not every post here is a rhetorical question. Yeah, I actually asked for information. Or do we need an emoticon for that? Sheesh.
In any case, the "deficiencies" that ipods have are irrelevant to 99% of the population. I am willing to see what comes of it, but audio quality up until now hasn't been anything apple cared about.
Which I agree with and why I'm excited by this hire-- it suggests that Apple intents to take sound more seriously.
When competition zigs, Apple zags. While others are trying to figure out how to compete in touch screen interface space, Apple has left the building and goes back to audio where it all started with the iPod and ITMS. God, I'm glad I'm not the CEO of one of Apple's competitors. Must be supremely frustrating.
If that is the case, why not sue all the people who currently use ogg/vorbis like
Epic
Activision
Wikipedia
Blizzard
Sandisk
Google (who is already being looked at with webm)
and others who currently use FLAC in 24 bit to sell music.
Vorbis is already BSD and has been around for 10+ years, and even predates aac in the early development stages, back all they way to 1993.
The reason why at this point Apple won't use it is just because they are apple. Microsoft never touched it because it didn't make WMA look good.
Because, as you know, sometimes these lawsuits take a decade or more to come to fruition. Not a single one of these companies wouldn't give up FLAC if it came down to it. In fact, the owners of a couple of the patents that are in dispute, are working on a possible new standard, which will likely use their patents, among others in a consortium, the way we see with H.264, and others. It's possible they are waiting to see what happens in negotiations.
One of the biggest sellers of online 24 bit music is Chesky. I spoke to David a couple of months ago, and he stated that he was concerned about this, but for now, it seems ok. He would prefer to license Apple's Lossless Compression software if Apple would do that. He's spoken to them, and he thinks that there is just a glimmer that it may happen at some point, but that we shouldn't hold our breaths.
If Apple does indeed go to 24/96 downloads, they may use it themselves. If so, then all the music companies will be using it as well. Chesky might sell their catalog over iTunes as well.
People have been asking the question for years: what does THX stand for? And this is was exactly Jim Kessler's marketing intent: keep 'em asking question after question, and they're taking about you!" [...] "It's gotta sound cool, high-tech, and I wanted a way to credit Tom Holman, the inventor," said Kessler. Doodling around, "I just wrote the initials for Tom Holman Crossover on my desk one day."
To be fair, I've heard several versions of the THX provenance myself, including that it means nothing at all and the "Tom Holman" was retconned from THX1138. The Lucas people seem to take some perverse delight in changing it up (I guess ala the "keep 'em guessing" strategy above).
But the story does seem to have settled on crossover, something I've heard from people at Skywalker Ranch.
You don't know what you're talking about, and you bring things into the post that have nothing to do with anything. What does apple not producing THX equipment have to do with anything? Nothing! So why did you bring it up?
And your opinion about Cowan, is just that, your opinion. I don't have to put anything up. You do, as it's YOUR assertion.
To be fair, I've heard several versions of the THX provenance myself, including that it means nothing at all and the "Tom Holman" was retconned from THX1138. The Lucas people seem to take some perverse delight in changing it up (I guess ala the "keep 'em guessing" strategy above).
But the story does seem to have settled on crossover, something I've heard from people at Skywalker Ranch.
Interesting. I've seen both definitions for what the X stands for so the "keep 'em guessing" strategy does indeed apply.
You don't know what you're talking about, and you bring things into the post that have nothing to do with anything. What does apple not producing THX equipment have to do with anything? Nothing! So why did you bring it up?
Perhaps if you can read better, I said THX doesn't sell any hardware, unless stated otherwise which already it has. The guy in question can improve stuff, but you don't hear THX improving Denon's hardware, right?
Quote:
And your opinion about Cowan, is just that, your opinion. I don't have to put anything up. You do, as it's YOUR assertion.
So, first off, you accuse me of knowing nothing, then make a complete ass of yourself by claiming that it's only my opinion that Cowon makes great sounding audio equipment?
You are such a hypocrite. You couldn't be bothered to first google Cowon and see they've been making iAudio products before the ipod came out, and that their reputation for great sounding PMPs is well known. You couldn't read sites like anythingbutipod that actually test products that picky audiophiles buy either.
Just goes to show everyone, you know so little. Please, shut up before I own you further.
Perhaps if you can read better, I said THX doesn't sell any hardware, unless stated otherwise which already it has. The guy in question can improve stuff, but you don't hear THX improving Denon's hardware, right?
Well then, your reading abilities aren't all that great, because he never said they did produce hardware. But they do a great deal of R&R in the area, and license the standards, as well as chack equipment. Your reply certainly did look as though you were referring to Apple.
Quote:
So, first off, you accuse me of knowing nothing, then make a complete ass of yourself by claiming that it's only my opinion that Cowon makes great sounding audio equipment?
You are such a hypocrite. You couldn't be bothered to first google Cowon and see they've been making iAudio products before the ipod came out, and that their reputation for great sounding PMPs is well known. You couldn't read sites like anythingbutipod that actually test products that picky audiophiles buy either.
Just goes to show everyone, you know so little. Please, shut up before I own you further.
Oh, please! What you don't understand about audio would overflow a landfill. If you did know anything about this, you would know that most all of the biggest names in audio, including high end audio make docks for Apple's products to interface with their, and other's equipment.
This has nothing to do with Cowon themselves, i know who they are, just your assertion as to how people who care about high quality sound buy their devices as opposed to Apple's. That's patently untrue. It's just your opinion. You know nothing about "picky audiophiles", because WE don't read that site. I guess you do. After you've designed as much professional audio equipment as I have, come back and argue with me. Until then, go away.
24 bit won't make MP3 or other lossy formats magically (ha) sound better, unless its also lossless (preferably FLAC, but probably never gonna happen). And also, I doubt comparatively low fidelity devices like iPods will be able to take advantage of the expanded range of 24 bit. Will mostly be marketing gimickery, IMO.
Oh, please! What you don't understand about audio would overflow a landfill. If you did know anything about this, you would know that most all of the biggest names in audio, including high end audio make docks for Apple's products to interface with their, and other's equipment.
There you go again, talking out of your ass. I've been recording audio from cd's and records to cassette since I was 4. I'ved used MD as a means of recording high quality audio which was the only easy medium at the time. I've done research into what makes DSD good and not so good vs. PCM.
Quote:
This has nothing to do with Cowon themselves, i know who they are, just your assertion as to how people who care about high quality sound buy their devices as opposed to Apple's. That's patently untrue. It's just your opinion.
Uh, no. People who ask for good sound quality recommend Cowon without hesitation or even the Sansa Clip. No one recommends apple for sound quality. This is universal on just about any site dedicated to audio.
Quote:
You know nothing about "picky audiophiles", because WE don't read that site.
What the fuck? I thought I told you to shut up before you make yourself look even worse. I know nothing because you or "we" don't follow hardware news and products? Yeah, great point there genius.
Why don't you post what sites you read? Seriously.
Quote:
After you've designed as much professional audio equipment as I have, come back and argue with me. Until then, go away.
Yes. A forum moderator who designs audio equipment. You are welcome to post your creations here as proof.
Otherwise, it's amazing how you magically know more the more I own you.
24 bit won't make MP3 or other lossy formats magically (ha) sound better, unless its also lossless (preferably FLAC, but probably never gonna happen). And also, I doubt comparatively low fidelity devices like iPods will be able to take advantage of the expanded range of 24 bit. Will mostly be marketing gimickery, IMO.
While you are talking about "gimickery," you might want to include the idea that the average human can tell the difference between high quality AAC files and lossless.
The idea that you need lossless because people can "tell the difference" is just nonsense. It's been disproven over and over again. Only one person in a thousand can tell the difference between 256k MP3's and lossless. When you are talking AAC and over 256k, the number drops to essentially zero.
Sounds to me like he was hired for the Apple TV. By that I mean, a real TV and not just the box. Either that or Apple is coming up with better speaker systems for their computers or for the living room.
Just as a point of interest, "THX" derives from "Tom Holman Crossover", that being the crossover he originally designed for Lucas to enable better theater sound.
Hmm, I'm not so sure about that. Lucas' first movie, "THX 1138" came out in 1971, which is well before the debut of THX in 1983. I always assumed that was the derivation. Of course, since Tom Holman shares his first two initials with THX, that might have been why it was reused. It could also be a sort of backronym that was applied later.
Additionally, I remember hearing that "THX 1138" was the license plate number of the car George Lucas was in when he got into a near fatal crash when he was fairly young. Of course, that could just be a rumor as well.
Hmm, I'm not so sure about that. Lucas' first movie, "THX 1138" came out in 1971, which is well before the debut of THX in 1983. I always assumed that was the derivation. Of course, since Tom Holman shares his first two initials with THX, that might have been why it was reused. It could also be a sort of backronym that was applied later.
Additionally, I remember hearing that "THX 1138" was the license plate number of the car George Lucas was in when he got into a near fatal crash when he was fairly young. Of course, that could just be a rumor as well.
Check the interview I linked to above-- the coincidence of Tom Holman's initials tying in with THX 1138, Lucas' first feature, was why they went that way.
Comments
Right, so they hired Holman just for the hell of it? Apple can't sort out where the shortcomings in audio quality are? Holman doesn't know software?
THX certification is on any number of consumer audio and video devices, it's not just "equipment" but rather a set of standards and specs (including, yes, software). If Holman does nothing but apply THX type standards to Apple's audio efforts there will be a huge increase in quality across the board.
I'm not even sure what you think you're arguing. Holman is a sound engineer, and a very good one. His hiring means that Apple intends for him to work improving sound. Again, he's not going to just stand their scratching his head because Apple isn't making cinema sound systems.
Just as a point of interest, "THX" derives from "Tom Holman Crossover", that being the crossover he originally designed for Lucas to enable better theater sound.
Dude, not every post here is a rhetorical question. Yeah, I actually asked for information. Or do we need an emoticon for that? Sheesh.
In any case, the "deficiencies" that ipods have are irrelevant to 99% of the population. I am willing to see what comes of it, but audio quality up until now hasn't been anything apple cared about.
Just as a point of interest, "THX" derives from "Tom Holman Crossover", that being the crossover he originally designed for Lucas to enable better theater sound.
I didn't know that. Another bit of trivia learned today for when Alex Trebek invites me to play Jeopardy.
Dude, not every post here is a rhetorical question. Yeah, I actually asked for information. Or do we need an emoticon for that? Sheesh.
In any case, the "deficiencies" that ipods have are irrelevant to 99% of the population. I am willing to see what comes of it, but audio quality up until now hasn't been anything apple cared about.
Which I agree with and why I'm excited by this hire-- it suggests that Apple intents to take sound more seriously.
I didn't know that. Another bit of trivia learned today for when Alex Trebek invites me to play Jeopardy.
The "X" in THX stands for eXperiment, not for a crossover.
I am willing to see what comes of it, but audio quality up until now hasn't been anything apple cared about.
Seems now they do.
Up until the iPhone they didn't care anything about personal communications devices.
Seems now they do.
Up until the iPhone they didn't care anything about personal communications devices.
They care about making useful electronics for the masses. It was only a matter of time.
Those same masses think 128kbps mp3s are cd quality too, and most can't tell the diff btw SD and HD either.
If that is the case, why not sue all the people who currently use ogg/vorbis like
Epic
Activision
Wikipedia
Blizzard
Sandisk
Google (who is already being looked at with webm)
and others who currently use FLAC in 24 bit to sell music.
Vorbis is already BSD and has been around for 10+ years, and even predates aac in the early development stages, back all they way to 1993.
The reason why at this point Apple won't use it is just because they are apple. Microsoft never touched it because it didn't make WMA look good.
Because, as you know, sometimes these lawsuits take a decade or more to come to fruition. Not a single one of these companies wouldn't give up FLAC if it came down to it. In fact, the owners of a couple of the patents that are in dispute, are working on a possible new standard, which will likely use their patents, among others in a consortium, the way we see with H.264, and others. It's possible they are waiting to see what happens in negotiations.
One of the biggest sellers of online 24 bit music is Chesky. I spoke to David a couple of months ago, and he stated that he was concerned about this, but for now, it seems ok. He would prefer to license Apple's Lossless Compression software if Apple would do that. He's spoken to them, and he thinks that there is just a glimmer that it may happen at some point, but that we shouldn't hold our breaths.
If Apple does indeed go to 24/96 downloads, they may use it themselves. If so, then all the music companies will be using it as well. Chesky might sell their catalog over iTunes as well.
This is what we spoke about. Just saying.
The "X" in THX stands for eXperiment, not for a crossover.
From an interview with Holman:
People have been asking the question for years: what does THX stand for? And this is was exactly Jim Kessler's marketing intent: keep 'em asking question after question, and they're taking about you!" [...] "It's gotta sound cool, high-tech, and I wanted a way to credit Tom Holman, the inventor," said Kessler. Doodling around, "I just wrote the initials for Tom Holman Crossover on my desk one day."
To be fair, I've heard several versions of the THX provenance myself, including that it means nothing at all and the "Tom Holman" was retconned from THX1138. The Lucas people seem to take some perverse delight in changing it up (I guess ala the "keep 'em guessing" strategy above).
But the story does seem to have settled on crossover, something I've heard from people at Skywalker Ranch.
Put up or shut up.
You don't know what you're talking about, and you bring things into the post that have nothing to do with anything. What does apple not producing THX equipment have to do with anything? Nothing! So why did you bring it up?
And your opinion about Cowan, is just that, your opinion. I don't have to put anything up. You do, as it's YOUR assertion.
From an interview with Holman:
To be fair, I've heard several versions of the THX provenance myself, including that it means nothing at all and the "Tom Holman" was retconned from THX1138. The Lucas people seem to take some perverse delight in changing it up (I guess ala the "keep 'em guessing" strategy above).
But the story does seem to have settled on crossover, something I've heard from people at Skywalker Ranch.
Interesting. I've seen both definitions for what the X stands for so the "keep 'em guessing" strategy does indeed apply.
You don't know what you're talking about, and you bring things into the post that have nothing to do with anything. What does apple not producing THX equipment have to do with anything? Nothing! So why did you bring it up?
Perhaps if you can read better, I said THX doesn't sell any hardware, unless stated otherwise which already it has. The guy in question can improve stuff, but you don't hear THX improving Denon's hardware, right?
And your opinion about Cowan, is just that, your opinion. I don't have to put anything up. You do, as it's YOUR assertion.
So, first off, you accuse me of knowing nothing, then make a complete ass of yourself by claiming that it's only my opinion that Cowon makes great sounding audio equipment?
You are such a hypocrite. You couldn't be bothered to first google Cowon and see they've been making iAudio products before the ipod came out, and that their reputation for great sounding PMPs is well known. You couldn't read sites like anythingbutipod that actually test products that picky audiophiles buy either.
Just goes to show everyone, you know so little. Please, shut up before I own you further.
Perhaps if you can read better, I said THX doesn't sell any hardware, unless stated otherwise which already it has. The guy in question can improve stuff, but you don't hear THX improving Denon's hardware, right?
Well then, your reading abilities aren't all that great, because he never said they did produce hardware. But they do a great deal of R&R in the area, and license the standards, as well as chack equipment. Your reply certainly did look as though you were referring to Apple.
So, first off, you accuse me of knowing nothing, then make a complete ass of yourself by claiming that it's only my opinion that Cowon makes great sounding audio equipment?
You are such a hypocrite. You couldn't be bothered to first google Cowon and see they've been making iAudio products before the ipod came out, and that their reputation for great sounding PMPs is well known. You couldn't read sites like anythingbutipod that actually test products that picky audiophiles buy either.
Just goes to show everyone, you know so little. Please, shut up before I own you further.
Oh, please! What you don't understand about audio would overflow a landfill. If you did know anything about this, you would know that most all of the biggest names in audio, including high end audio make docks for Apple's products to interface with their, and other's equipment.
This has nothing to do with Cowon themselves, i know who they are, just your assertion as to how people who care about high quality sound buy their devices as opposed to Apple's. That's patently untrue. It's just your opinion. You know nothing about "picky audiophiles", because WE don't read that site. I guess you do. After you've designed as much professional audio equipment as I have, come back and argue with me. Until then, go away.
24 bit won't make MP3 or other lossy formats magically (ha) sound better, unless its also lossless (preferably FLAC, but probably never gonna happen). And also, I doubt comparatively low fidelity devices like iPods will be able to take advantage of the expanded range of 24 bit. Will mostly be marketing gimickery, IMO.
It would never be FLAC, but Apple Lossless.
Oh, please! What you don't understand about audio would overflow a landfill. If you did know anything about this, you would know that most all of the biggest names in audio, including high end audio make docks for Apple's products to interface with their, and other's equipment.
There you go again, talking out of your ass. I've been recording audio from cd's and records to cassette since I was 4. I'ved used MD as a means of recording high quality audio which was the only easy medium at the time. I've done research into what makes DSD good and not so good vs. PCM.
This has nothing to do with Cowon themselves, i know who they are, just your assertion as to how people who care about high quality sound buy their devices as opposed to Apple's. That's patently untrue. It's just your opinion.
Uh, no. People who ask for good sound quality recommend Cowon without hesitation or even the Sansa Clip. No one recommends apple for sound quality. This is universal on just about any site dedicated to audio.
You know nothing about "picky audiophiles", because WE don't read that site.
What the fuck? I thought I told you to shut up before you make yourself look even worse. I know nothing because you or "we" don't follow hardware news and products? Yeah, great point there genius.
Why don't you post what sites you read? Seriously.
After you've designed as much professional audio equipment as I have, come back and argue with me. Until then, go away.
Yes. A forum moderator who designs audio equipment. You are welcome to post your creations here as proof.
Otherwise, it's amazing how you magically know more the more I own you.
24 bit won't make MP3 or other lossy formats magically (ha) sound better, unless its also lossless (preferably FLAC, but probably never gonna happen). And also, I doubt comparatively low fidelity devices like iPods will be able to take advantage of the expanded range of 24 bit. Will mostly be marketing gimickery, IMO.
While you are talking about "gimickery," you might want to include the idea that the average human can tell the difference between high quality AAC files and lossless.
The idea that you need lossless because people can "tell the difference" is just nonsense. It's been disproven over and over again. Only one person in a thousand can tell the difference between 256k MP3's and lossless. When you are talking AAC and over 256k, the number drops to essentially zero.
Just as a point of interest, "THX" derives from "Tom Holman Crossover", that being the crossover he originally designed for Lucas to enable better theater sound.
Hmm, I'm not so sure about that. Lucas' first movie, "THX 1138" came out in 1971, which is well before the debut of THX in 1983. I always assumed that was the derivation. Of course, since Tom Holman shares his first two initials with THX, that might have been why it was reused. It could also be a sort of backronym that was applied later.
Additionally, I remember hearing that "THX 1138" was the license plate number of the car George Lucas was in when he got into a near fatal crash when he was fairly young. Of course, that could just be a rumor as well.
Hmm, I'm not so sure about that. Lucas' first movie, "THX 1138" came out in 1971, which is well before the debut of THX in 1983. I always assumed that was the derivation. Of course, since Tom Holman shares his first two initials with THX, that might have been why it was reused. It could also be a sort of backronym that was applied later.
Additionally, I remember hearing that "THX 1138" was the license plate number of the car George Lucas was in when he got into a near fatal crash when he was fairly young. Of course, that could just be a rumor as well.
Check the interview I linked to above-- the coincidence of Tom Holman's initials tying in with THX 1138, Lucas' first feature, was why they went that way.