|
|
"What HiFi" - can it be trusted?
Stewart Pinkerton wrote:
Sounds like the perfect example of the hi-fi geek who is more concerned about the equipment than actually listening to music. Some of us just love listening to (and, more importantly, playing) music - 24/7 if possible. Ideally on decent kit but if that's not available then on whatever's to hand. Me too, but how can anyone truly appreciate music by listening to half a dozen completely *different* albums *every* day? That's five to six *hours* of *new* music every day of his life!! I don't think anyone said *new* music, but *different* i.e. not the same 8-10 hours of music each day I could understand if he was a radio DJ with a new playlist to fill all the time........... Nope, I'm just a (semi-) retired bloke with a love of music and lots of time on my hands Given a choice I'd *rather* play my 59 Les Paul but, fcuk it, if it's got approximately 6 strings and is in something vaguely approaching tune then I'll play anything rather than play nothing. Working for a living and NOT being able to listen to at least half a dozen *different* albums *every* day seems sadder to me ;-) Ah well, I bow to the serious saddos.................. Indeed |
"What HiFi" - can it be trusted?
On Tue, 20 Jan 2004 17:51:50 +0000 (UTC)
(Stewart Pinkerton) wrote: the plain fact is that such 'grace notes' simply do not *exist* in a single-speaker linear system. Not so. -- Spyros lair: http://www.mnementh.co.uk/ |||| Maintainer: arm26 linux Do not meddle in the affairs of Dragons, for you are tasty and good with ketchup. |
"What HiFi" - can it be trusted?
On Tue, 20 Jan 2004 18:10:31 -0000, "Stimpy"
wrote: Stewart Pinkerton wrote: Sounds like the perfect example of the hi-fi geek who is more concerned about the equipment than actually listening to music. Some of us just love listening to (and, more importantly, playing) music - 24/7 if possible. Ideally on decent kit but if that's not available then on whatever's to hand. Me too, but how can anyone truly appreciate music by listening to half a dozen completely *different* albums *every* day? That's five to six *hours* of *new* music every day of his life!! I don't think anyone said *new* music, but *different* i.e. not the same 8-10 hours of music each day No, my original point was that you can get over 200 entire CDs onto a hard disk these days. I noted that I don't know anyone who listens to that much *different* music in a year, and some geek replied that he listens to 2,000 different disks in an average year. That's the context. I could understand if he was a radio DJ with a new playlist to fill all the time........... Nope, I'm just a (semi-) retired bloke with a love of music and lots of time on my hands Aaah, that would be nice............ :-) -- Stewart Pinkerton | Music is Art - Audio is Engineering |
"What HiFi" - can it be trusted?
On Tue, 20 Jan 2004 18:07:59 -0000, "Stimpy"
wrote: Stewart Pinkerton wrote: Nope, but once you have more than five hundred or so, you're moving from music lover to music collector.................... ...and the two are necessarily mutually exclusive? I think not! Please note that this kook is claiming that he listens to 2,000 *different* albums *every* year................. Still seems perfectly reasonable to me. 30,000+ tracks on a jukebox, playing minimum 8 hours a day + 8,000 tracks on an iPod + iTrip in the car I'm not saying it's impossible to achieve, I'm just wondering what kind of nutter needs that much *new* music in his life? -- Stewart Pinkerton | Music is Art - Audio is Engineering |
"What HiFi" - can it be trusted?
On Tue, 20 Jan 2004 22:29:07 +0000, Ian Molton wrote:
On Tue, 20 Jan 2004 17:51:50 +0000 (UTC) (Stewart Pinkerton) wrote: the plain fact is that such 'grace notes' simply do not *exist* in a single-speaker linear system. Not so. So so. -- Stewart Pinkerton | Music is Art - Audio is Engineering |
"What HiFi" - can it be trusted?
On Wed, 21 Jan 2004 08:08:32 +0000 (UTC)
(Stewart Pinkerton) wrote: the plain fact is that such 'grace notes' simply do not *exist* in a single-speaker linear system. Not so. So so. Play the ****ing sample then -- Spyros lair: http://www.mnementh.co.uk/ |||| Maintainer: arm26 linux Do not meddle in the affairs of Dragons, for you are tasty and good with ketchup. |
"What HiFi" - can it be trusted?
Ian Molton wrote:
On Wed, 21 Jan 2004 08:08:32 +0000 (UTC) (Stewart Pinkerton) wrote: the plain fact is that such 'grace notes' simply do not *exist* in a single-speaker linear system. Not so. So so. Play the ****ing sample then I still can't hear the 50Hz beat frequency on my 400/450Hz sample. I can hear a 'warble' when I do 450/451 - but is that the same as a tone? If I had a low-pass filter would I still get the beat if I filtered out the 450 and 451Hz notes? -- Wally www.artbywally.com |
"What HiFi" - can it be trusted?
"Stewart Pinkerton" wrote in message ... On Tue, 20 Jan 2004 16:03:11 -0000, "Keith G" wrote: "Stewart Pinkerton" wrote in message ... On Mon, 19 Jan 2004 18:14:30 +0000, Julian Fowler wrote: On Mon, 19 Jan 2004 08:05:13 +0000 (UTC), (Stewart Pinkerton) wrote: On Sun, 18 Jan 2004 18:05:14 +0000, Julian Fowler wrote: On Sat, 17 Jan 2004 11:51:36 +0000 (UTC), (Stewart Pinkerton) wrote: You can get at least 200 CDs onto a 120GB hard disk if you insist on computer storage, and I don't know *anyone* who listens to more than 200 different discs in an average year. RAOTFL ... A quick estimate suggests that I probably listen to something like 2000 different discs in an average year. I hope you get paid for that................ Nope (and why should I?). Can't imagine what it would be like to only listen to 200 different discs in the course of a year ... I can't imagine how sad you have to be, to listen to half a dozen *different* albums *every* day...................... Of course, the *audiophile* way is to listen to the *same* half dozen albums every single day..... :-) Made only by RR, Sheffield, Mapleshade, Linn etc, of course! :-) And don't forget the Shaded Dogs...... ;-) |
"What HiFi" - can it be trusted?
"Ian Molton" wrote in message ... On Wed, 21 Jan 2004 08:08:32 +0000 (UTC) (Stewart Pinkerton) wrote: the plain fact is that such 'grace notes' simply do not *exist* in a single-speaker linear system. Not so. So so. Play the ****ing sample then No, don't tell me - I'll get it! thinks hard for a moment Got it! - It was in 'Casablanca', wasn't it.....? (Humphrey Bogart?) :-) |
"What HiFi" - can it be trusted?
On Wed, 21 Jan 2004 13:57:57 -0000, "Keith G"
wrote: "Stewart Pinkerton" wrote in message ... On Tue, 20 Jan 2004 16:03:11 -0000, "Keith G" wrote: "Stewart Pinkerton" wrote in message ... On Mon, 19 Jan 2004 18:14:30 +0000, Julian Fowler wrote: On Mon, 19 Jan 2004 08:05:13 +0000 (UTC), (Stewart Pinkerton) wrote: On Sun, 18 Jan 2004 18:05:14 +0000, Julian Fowler wrote: On Sat, 17 Jan 2004 11:51:36 +0000 (UTC), (Stewart Pinkerton) wrote: You can get at least 200 CDs onto a 120GB hard disk if you insist on computer storage, and I don't know *anyone* who listens to more than 200 different discs in an average year. RAOTFL ... A quick estimate suggests that I probably listen to something like 2000 different discs in an average year. I hope you get paid for that................ Nope (and why should I?). Can't imagine what it would be like to only listen to 200 different discs in the course of a year ... I can't imagine how sad you have to be, to listen to half a dozen *different* albums *every* day...................... Of course, the *audiophile* way is to listen to the *same* half dozen albums every single day..... :-) Made only by RR, Sheffield, Mapleshade, Linn etc, of course! :-) And don't forget the Shaded Dogs...... Er, we're talking about high quality here - not LPs......... -- Stewart Pinkerton | Music is Art - Audio is Engineering |
"What HiFi" - can it be trusted?
On Wed, 21 Jan 2004 13:11:03 -0000
"Wally" wrote: If I had a low-pass filter would I still get the beat if I filtered out the 450 and 451Hz notes? No. -- Spyros lair: http://www.mnementh.co.uk/ |||| Maintainer: arm26 linux Do not meddle in the affairs of Dragons, for you are tasty and good with ketchup. |
"What HiFi" - can it be trusted?
Ian Molton wrote:
If I had a low-pass filter would I still get the beat if I filtered out the 450 and 451Hz notes? No. So, the note doesn't exist, then? -- Wally www.artbywally.com |
"What HiFi" - can it be trusted?
On Wed, 21 Jan 2004 18:05:55 -0000
"Wally" wrote: If I had a low-pass filter would I still get the beat if I filtered out the 450 and 451Hz notes? No. So, the note doesn't exist, then? thats kinda like saying if I pull one leg out from under a table, does it stand up still? ;-) -- Spyros lair: http://www.mnementh.co.uk/ |||| Maintainer: arm26 linux Do not meddle in the affairs of Dragons, for you are tasty and good with ketchup. |
"What HiFi" - can it be trusted?
Stewart Pinkerton wrote:
Please note that this kook is claiming that he listens to 2,000 *different* albums *every* year................. Still seems perfectly reasonable to me. 30,000+ tracks on a jukebox, playing minimum 8 hours a day + 8,000 tracks on an iPod + iTrip in the car I'm not saying it's impossible to achieve, I'm just wondering what kind of nutter needs that much *new* music in his life? I don't know because I don't listen to that much *new* music; I've had much of it for years. I guess I get maybe 10-15 *new* albums a month |
"What HiFi" - can it be trusted?
On Tue, 20 Jan 2004 18:01:55 +0000 (UTC),
(Stewart Pinkerton) wrote: My post at 20.37 yesterday, pointing to samples of the beats that you said shouldn't occur through one speaker. It would be useful if you quoted these posts, since we don't all keep archives of Usenet dross - and you did *not* obtain any such beats with a linear system....................... -- OK Here you are. It was a fairly prompt response to a thread in which you were active. I can't think how you could have missed it :-) .................................................. ................. OK, I'll make it easier for you. I've posted some demos. http://mysite.freeserve.com/LP1/index.html ....contains two wav files. A stereo wav containing one channel: sinewave 440Hz, the other: sinewave 441Hz. A mono wav containing a ,mix of the two, 6dB down, to avoid overload. Now, on the laptop I'm using, both are mainly a demonstration of how crap a laptop speaker is :-) At normal volume, the speaker turns it into a square wave! But turn it low, or play on a decent system, you'll hear the beats. If you play the stereo file IN STEREO, the brain seems to want to turn the beats into spatial information. "Tune in" one way, you'll hear beats; another way, you'll hear a sound moving between the speakers. Rather like those trick pictures that can be perceived two ways. But mono the mix, there's no question. Even when overloading a laptop speaker, those beats are clearly audible. To make it easier, I've added a mono mix of the two channels. Look at the waveform in your wave editor, listen to it. The beats are impossible to miss! ................................................ |
"What HiFi" - can it be trusted?
In article , Wally wrote:
Ian Molton wrote: If I had a low-pass filter would I still get the beat if I filtered out the 450 and 451Hz notes? No. So, the note doesn't exist, then? Indeed, it's an audible beat but it's not a separate signal in the frequency domain. The beat is not from a mixing (i.e. non-linear) process, but arises (AIUI) from the mathematical *identity* (if I have derived it correctly): sin(w1.t) + sin(w2.t) = 2 . sin((w1+w2)/2.t) . cos((w1-w2)/2.t) So two same-amplitude sine waves at different (angular) frequencies, w1 and w2, added (perfectly linearly) together, is the identical equivalent of having a sine wave at the mean frequency that is 100% amplitude modulated by a cosine wave at half the difference frequency (t is instantaneous time in the above). I think you will hear the amplitude variation as being at the difference frequency itself (not half the difference). A negative amplitude is not distinguishable audibly from a positive one and I think you will hear the square of the amplitude modulation (i.e. at w1-w2 - twice the modulating frequency). So the difference tone itself does not exist - just the two original tones. You hear the difference because of the mathematical identity above - no process creates a separate signal. -- John Phillips |
"What HiFi" - can it be trusted?
On 22 Jan 2004 09:00:40 GMT, John Phillips
wrote: So the difference tone itself does not exist - just the two original tones. You hear the difference because of the mathematical identity above - no process creates a separate signal. It's quite loud, for something that doesn't exist :-) As it demonstrably DOES exist, it must be the theory that is lacking - or is inapplicable to this situation. |
"What HiFi" - can it be trusted?
In article , Laurence Payne wrote:
On 22 Jan 2004 09:00:40 GMT, John Phillips wrote: So the difference tone itself does not exist - just the two original tones. You hear the difference because of the mathematical identity above - no process creates a separate signal. It's quite loud, for something that doesn't exist :-) As it demonstrably DOES exist, it must be the theory that is lacking - or is inapplicable to this situation. I do accept that the theory may be lacking or inapplicable. However in that regard it has also to be accepted that a theory which says that PERCEPTION of a beat at a given frequency means that the frequency EXISTS may also be lacking or inapplicable. -- John Phillips |
"What HiFi" - can it be trusted?
On 22 Jan 2004 09:00:40 GMT, John Phillips
wrote: In article , Wally wrote: Ian Molton wrote: If I had a low-pass filter would I still get the beat if I filtered out the 450 and 451Hz notes? No. So, the note doesn't exist, then? Indeed, it's an audible beat but it's not a separate signal in the frequency domain. The beat is not from a mixing (i.e. non-linear) process, but arises (AIUI) from the mathematical *identity* (if I have derived it correctly): sin(w1.t) + sin(w2.t) = 2 . sin((w1+w2)/2.t) . cos((w1-w2)/2.t) So two same-amplitude sine waves at different (angular) frequencies, w1 and w2, added (perfectly linearly) together, is the identical equivalent of having a sine wave at the mean frequency that is 100% amplitude modulated by a cosine wave at half the difference frequency (t is instantaneous time in the above). I think you will hear the amplitude variation as being at the difference frequency itself (not half the difference). A negative amplitude is not distinguishable audibly from a positive one and I think you will hear the square of the amplitude modulation (i.e. at w1-w2 - twice the modulating frequency). So the difference tone itself does not exist - just the two original tones. You hear the difference because of the mathematical identity above - no process creates a separate signal. Ah, superposition. Bugger........................... -- Stewart Pinkerton | Music is Art - Audio is Engineering |
"What HiFi" - can it be trusted?
On 22 Jan 2004 14:19:01 GMT, John Phillips
wrote: In article , Laurence Payne wrote: On 22 Jan 2004 09:00:40 GMT, John Phillips wrote: So the difference tone itself does not exist - just the two original tones. You hear the difference because of the mathematical identity above - no process creates a separate signal. It's quite loud, for something that doesn't exist :-) As it demonstrably DOES exist, it must be the theory that is lacking - or is inapplicable to this situation. I do accept that the theory may be lacking or inapplicable. However in that regard it has also to be accepted that a theory which says that PERCEPTION of a beat at a given frequency means that the frequency EXISTS may also be lacking or inapplicable. Nope, it's just superposition theory, it works just fine, you guys are right, I was wrong. -- Stewart Pinkerton | Music is Art - Audio is Engineering |
"What HiFi" - can it be trusted?
On 22 Jan 2004 14:19:01 GMT, John Phillips
wrote: I do accept that the theory may be lacking or inapplicable. However in that regard it has also to be accepted that a theory which says that PERCEPTION of a beat at a given frequency means that the frequency EXISTS may also be lacking or inapplicable. If you create tones corresponding to the overtones of a low note, the brain will sometimes "hear" the low note. OK. this is a perception thing. That low note won't show on any sort of readout or display. But the beat frequency between two close tones, or the harmonics of tones aren't invented by the brain. They're clearly and grossly visible - as in the waveform I posted. Come on, Stuart P., you've gone very quiet? :-) |
"What HiFi" - can it be trusted?
On Thu, 22 Jan 2004 18:06:29 +0000, Laurence Payne
wrote: Come on, Stuart P., you've gone very quiet? :-) OK, your apology beat me by a minute :-) |
"What HiFi" - can it be trusted?
On Thu, 22 Jan 2004 19:04:47 +0000, Laurence Payne
wrote: On Thu, 22 Jan 2004 18:06:29 +0000, Laurence Payne wrote: Come on, Stuart P., you've gone very quiet? :-) OK, your apology beat me by a minute :-) Who's Stuart P? :-) -- Stewart Pinkerton | Music is Art - Audio is Engineering |
"What HiFi" - can it be trusted?
"Stewart Pinkerton" wrote in message ... On Thu, 22 Jan 2004 19:04:47 +0000, Laurence Payne wrote: On Thu, 22 Jan 2004 18:06:29 +0000, Laurence Payne wrote: Come on, Stuart P., you've gone very quiet? :-) OK, your apology beat me by a minute :-) Who's Stuart P? :-) Remember school class roll call? The answers 'Here Sir' ;-) -- Stewart Pinkerton | Music is Art - Audio is Engineering |
"What HiFi" - can it be trusted?
On Fri, 23 Jan 2004 08:10:30 +0000 (UTC),
(Stewart Pinkerton) wrote: Who's Stuart P? :-) It's a nonlinear distortion :-_) |
"What HiFi" - can it be trusted?
On Tue, 20 Jan 2004 18:03:05 -0000, "Stimpy"
wrote: Stewart Pinkerton wrote: I can't imagine how sad you have to be, to listen to half a dozen *different* albums *every* day...................... Variety is the spice of life... Yeah, but do you need half a dozen brand new spices *every* day? ****, he's claiming to listen to five hours of *new* music *every* day. When does he find time to listen to music he actually *likes*? *different*, not necessarily *new* No, the original point was about the mass storage requirement for a year of listening, hence it's all *new*, not existing stuff already stored. The original replier claimed that he listened to 2,000 *new* albums every year. I think he's bull****ting, or in the music business, or dangerously obsessive...................... -- Stewart Pinkerton | Music is Art - Audio is Engineering |
"What HiFi" - can it be trusted?
|
"What HiFi" - can it be trusted?
Stewart Pinkerton wrote:
No, the original point was about the mass storage requirement for a year of listening, hence it's all *new*, not existing stuff already stored. The original replier claimed that he listened to 2,000 *new* albums every year. I think he's bull****ting, or in the music business, or dangerously obsessive...................... That was me... On 17-Jan-04 the following was posted: Stewart Pinkerton wrote: You can get at least 200 CDs onto a 120GB hard disk if you insist on computer storage, and I don't know *anyone* who listens to more than 200 different discs in an average year. What?? I have the stereo on for at least 8 hours a day, that has to be around 8-10 albums a day minimum. Those days when I'm not at home I'm on the road and have music on in the car. It's safe to say rarely a day goes by when I don't listen to at least 8 albums worth of music. 8 * (say) 300 days = 2400 albums/year as a minimum You said DIFFERENT (not NEW) and I mentioned neither NEW nor DIFFERENT, merely '2400 albums/year' |
"What HiFi" - can it be trusted?
On Mon, 26 Jan 2004 18:44:03 -0000, "Stimpy"
wrote: Stewart Pinkerton wrote: No, the original point was about the mass storage requirement for a year of listening, hence it's all *new*, not existing stuff already stored. The original replier claimed that he listened to 2,000 *new* albums every year. I think he's bull****ting, or in the music business, or dangerously obsessive...................... That was me... So, which is it? :-) On 17-Jan-04 the following was posted: Stewart Pinkerton wrote: You can get at least 200 CDs onto a 120GB hard disk if you insist on computer storage, and I don't know *anyone* who listens to more than 200 different discs in an average year. What?? I have the stereo on for at least 8 hours a day, that has to be around 8-10 albums a day minimum. Those days when I'm not at home I'm on the road and have music on in the car. It's safe to say rarely a day goes by when I don't listen to at least 8 albums worth of music. 8 * (say) 300 days = 2400 albums/year as a minimum You said DIFFERENT (not NEW) and I mentioned neither NEW nor DIFFERENT, merely '2400 albums/year' Since the context is mass storage, you clearly implied that you listen to 2400 *different* albums every year. If you're listening to a different selection of the same 2-300 albums (say) at various times, then you're just weaselling, and a 120GB hard disk would be adequate -- Stewart Pinkerton | Music is Art - Audio is Engineering |
"What HiFi" - can it be trusted?
On Mon, 26 Jan 2004 18:40:09 +0000, Julian Fowler
wrote: On Mon, 26 Jan 2004 17:40:46 +0000 (UTC), (Stewart Pinkerton) wrote: On Tue, 20 Jan 2004 18:03:05 -0000, "Stimpy" wrote: Stewart Pinkerton wrote: I can't imagine how sad you have to be, to listen to half a dozen *different* albums *every* day...................... Variety is the spice of life... Yeah, but do you need half a dozen brand new spices *every* day? ****, he's claiming to listen to five hours of *new* music *every* day. When does he find time to listen to music he actually *likes*? *different*, not necessarily *new* No, the original point was about the mass storage requirement for a year of listening, hence it's all *new*, not existing stuff already stored. The original replier claimed that he listened to 2,000 *new* albums every year. I think he's bull****ting, or in the music business, or dangerously obsessive...................... I don't know whether I'm the "original replier" or not; however, I do probably listen to 2000 discs-worth of previously unheard performances every year, and I definitely don't fall into the first two categories, or see why being obsessive is necessarily dangerous :-) Well, of course *you* don't see it................... :-) -- Stewart Pinkerton | Music is Art - Audio is Engineering |
"What HiFi" - can it be trusted?
Stewart Pinkerton wrote:
On Mon, 26 Jan 2004 18:44:03 -0000, "Stimpy" wrote: Stewart Pinkerton wrote: No, the original point was about the mass storage requirement for a year of listening, hence it's all *new*, not existing stuff already stored. The original replier claimed that he listened to 2,000 *new* albums every year. I think he's bull****ting, or in the music business, or dangerously obsessive...................... That was me... So, which is it? :-) (b) on a semi-pro basis but (c) about music in general On 17-Jan-04 the following was posted: Stewart Pinkerton wrote: You can get at least 200 CDs onto a 120GB hard disk if you insist on computer storage, and I don't know *anyone* who listens to more than 200 different discs in an average year. What?? I have the stereo on for at least 8 hours a day, that has to be around 8-10 albums a day minimum. Those days when I'm not at home I'm on the road and have music on in the car. It's safe to say rarely a day goes by when I don't listen to at least 8 albums worth of music. 8 * (say) 300 days = 2400 albums/year as a minimum You said DIFFERENT (not NEW) and I mentioned neither NEW nor DIFFERENT, merely '2400 albums/year' Since the context is mass storage, you clearly implied that you listen to 2400 *different* albums every year. If you're listening to a different selection of the same 2-300 albums (say) at various times, then you're just weaselling, and a 120GB hard disk would be adequate Correct, I implied DIFFERENT, not NEW as you suggested earlier. I fail to see the issue. My jukebox is 2 * 250gb hard disks holding mp3's ripped at 320k. I use iTunes as a front end and have it running on 'random' pretty much all the time I'm at home. Given that I'm pretty much retired, this easily comes to a minimum of 8 hours a day. As explained above this easily makes 2400 albums worth of music per year. Some of them are NEW as I'm adding 20-30 new CDs a month to the jukebox and some are DIFFERENT as the jukebox just churns out random tracks all day long. Either way, it's approximately 24000 tracks a year. Give me a few more months and this setup will have been running for a year - iTunes will then tell me how many tracks it's played in that time :-) |
| All times are GMT. The time now is 06:32 PM. |
Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.6.4
Copyright ©2000 - 2025, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
SEO by vBSEO 3.0.0
Copyright ©2004-2006 AudioBanter.co.uk