| |
| |
| |
|
Page: 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 44 45 46 47 48 49 50 51 52 53 54 55 56 57 58 59 60 61 62 63 64 65 66 67 68
Comments:
<0> the "Deathstar" blew up pretty good
<1> From Dr. Zhivago?
<2> Herzen: yep, they do!
<3> I record music day in and out on seagates....p
<4> why you buy deathstar drive
<4> ??
<5> why is that daya?
<0> he bought a dell, and it came with it
<6> Deathstars are also to be avoided
<7> heh. I had a music box that played Laura's Theme as well
<6> they were good in their day though
<7> long time ago
<2> only IBM/Hitachi drive i'll touch is their 7200rpm travel star
<3> sorry...my cats goin' nuts...
<6> Katey..I sold one with laras theme....
<6> I have 2 more now
<3> They (seagates) are fine
<0> I had a hitachi laptop drive
<0> it fried
<2> Cry: everyone jumped on them when they were the first cost effective 7200rpm drive, on a Raid+0
<1> Cometbaby- I have owned perhaps 200 hard drives in the past four or five years, some from almost every brand
<0> I replaced it with a 80gb WD laptop drive
<0> still going strong
<1> In my experience, maxtors are inferior drives.
<6> Katey..I am waiting for the Deichert box :)
<2> herzen: i can't stand slow HD's.. really kills laptop speeds
<4> maxtor is ghey
<6> its ironic....ca. 2000 WD drives were ****
<2> Seagate and Quantum.. WD is okay in their raptors
<6> but IBM Deskstars were reliable
<5> well, I've had both maxtor and WD go out on me .. so I guess I think they are just plain unreliable for the most part :)
<1> I reccomend you try seagate
<6> Seagate and I had some harsh words ca. 1995
<2> when did the IBM 60 and 75GXP's come out? those were the first "deathstars"
<0> I've owned lots of Western Digital drives
<0> their 80gb 7200 rpm drives have gone on me
<1> If my experience is any guide, you will not be disappointed.
<0> but the other ones do okay
<6> they would not replace a Dead Seagate HDD
<5> Daya for the most part I purchase a pre-configured computer so I don't have much say
<1> Cryhavoc- They returned one of mine that I bounced down three flights of stairs
<4> hahaha
<1> Total cost to me: $0
<4> somehow i think it is not covered
<6> CB spends too much time Haxoring
<1> Also I was able to recover perhaps 50% of the data on that drive
<3> recording digital audio at 192khz over and over on a disk is a test imo
<5> lol
<6> thus she needs her PCs ready to wreak havoc
<5> <---- technical idiot
<3> My drives are fine :)
<1> vemod what are you recording, that you need to record at 192?
<6> <5> <---- technical idiot <-------(Actually, El33t Haz0rz!)
<5> hahaha
<6> ;)
<3> daya: music :) I have a capability....but basically a Soldano SLO
<5> .+ban 200.119.30*
<1> At the studio where I work
<2> VemoD: how about 24-bit 15MS/s :-)
<1> We never record above 96k unless the client specifically wants it
<4> my dog might like it but 44khz is fine for me
<6> I forced myself to learn about PCs...so usually build my own
<1> I can't tell the difference between 96k and 192k myself
<6> 128 is fine for me
<3> lupine: meow? Is that better?
<1> kbps more like
<4> how can you tell the difference between 44 and 96
<1> lol
<4> oh
<6> the only reason I could see for 192+ is for video production
<2> VemoD: lol. Of course, i'm not recording music with it, so...
<3> Anyway...I need a decent tape machine
<1> Gravix- only very minutely, and even then not 100% of the time in a blind test
<8> Daya: What do you record in?
<1> Nuendo Necrosan
<8> Ah, Logic here.
<1> Protools is too expensive.
<6> Daya you a musician??
<4> i would like to see you do it, that's like super human hearing lol
<2> Well, there are really two different issues: recording and production.. and the final result
<4> i'm only 22 and i can't hear anything above 18khz or so
<8> CryHavoc: Most real artists will record Hi def.
<1> gravix, we're not talking about
<8> (Any big names you've heard of do most likely)
<1> Frequencies here
<6> gravix...too many speed metal concerts :P
<1> But rather
<2> gravix: well, it is easy to setup a test that you can differentiate them.. thou its not that relevent to normal music :-)
<6> Daya are you a musician?
<1> sampling rates
<1> :D
<3> daya: I usually use 48 for bands....but I often have jams where I record in 192...when I record "my" thing it will be in 192...because why not?
<9> APX
<1> Cryhavoc, only if you consider djing 'being a musician'
<2> Vemod: you also buy alot of room by avoiding the brickwall filter effects in the audio range
<1> Which I do not.
<6> oh ok...
<10> If you believe in what you believe, worry about yourself and you'll be ok.
<4> right, the only thing a higher sampling rate does is capture higher frequencies
<3> Anyway, the SLO is usually set around 2 on the preamp and 10 on the power amp
<6> garage
<1> That's not true at all gravix
<3> So....there's a lot of sound going on
<10> http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v22/pfjunkie/gleasonyah.jpg
<2> for my purposes [ which is laboratory measurements, not music ].. I typically need +/- 0.1dB up past ~250Khz
<1> A higher sampling frequency means that you are getting more of the overall musical data, that the resolutions of your waveforms are closer to those of the analogue with less digital 'stepping'
<11> Lupine|: We have some very nice 60GHz Tek scopes in our labs.
<2> daya: um.. you just mushed samplign rate, and bit-resolution :-)
<2> Yaakov: yep, but i bet they're not 24bit ;-)
<1> Lupine- doh
<11> Lupine|: And a couple of Network/Spectrum Analyzers with the same bandwidth.
<1> I suppose I did!
<4> the only frequencies that aren't reproduced correctly are those greater than 1/2 the sampling rate
<2> gravix: not true in real life.. as the anti-aliasing filters will have an effect below that frequency
<3> Yeah...basically.....everything you hear say on a CD is 44.1....sounds fine
<4> i am not able to notice... i guess my hearing is not too good
<2> that is the main advantage of a higher sampling rate than otherwise
<3> But that is the "mastering" process...not the "recording" process
<2> yep.. if you buy headroom in the recording.. you have alot more freedom while mastering
<6> Daya you have any good custom DJ mixes? :)
<3> If I had my way....I want to record to tape and have it pressed on vinyl
<1> Quite a few cryhavoc
<1> They are 10$ if you'd like to purchase one :D
<6> I like mp3s from garage bands/indies/unknowns
<2> VemoD: some years ago, we used our lab equipment to make high resolution recordings off of otherwise irreplacable LP's
<1> What type of music do you like?
<11> Lupine|: The 60+ GHz scopes are sequential, but the 4GHz scopes do 20 GS/s.
<1> I could point you in some good directions
<1> I can't help you.
<1> D:
<6> ok
<3> But....the reason I think that the higher khz is good is for the computers themselves. If you use a computer effect at 192 it has more to work with.
<2> what was interesting is, if you record the LP at a much higher bandwidth, and then re-encode to 44.1 it sounds a hwole lot better than recording at 44.1 directly.
<6> Daya most everything but Rap
<6> :)
<1> Rappers: one letter away from prison
<11> Lupine|: Of course, they are only 8 bits.
<2> VemoD: yep.. keep all the undesirable effects out of the audio band :-)
<3> Technically though....I guess humans can't hear anything above 20khz or so anyway
<4> yeah i can understand wanting more samples for a DSP filter i am just surprised by the claim that someone can tell a difference between 44.1khz and 96khz samples from the same source because i can't tell the difference
<11> Brickwalls at 44KHz hurt imaging rather badly.
<11> It is very helpful to record out to 100KHz plus to maintain the interference signals.
<2> VemoD: right, but there are audio effects below 20Khz with the typical 44.1khz recording
<6> Rapers? LOL
<3> lupine: I don't know what to say besides "duh" ;)
<11> If you get to move your antialias filter out past 100KHz, and you are dealing with well miked (XY or similar) acoutsic signals, the difference in the imaging is apparent to a moderately trained ear.
<3> I personally do find a difference also in micing at say 96 compared to 48....I think it has to do with harmonics
<2> this is what I normally use: 8 simultaneously sampled 24bit 100K+ input bandwidth http://sine.ni.com/nips/cds/view/p/lang/en/nid/5031
Return to
#politics
or
Go to some related
logs:
#visualbasic
#slackware
#politics
sweetrebecca pICS
dexys midnight runner comon eileen
Larry Tenenbaum
#beginner
#ubuntu
Database System Concepts ed2k emule
#goal
|
|
