Current trends in audio
 

On 24-01-17 02:46, Phil Allison wrote:

** Who told us on Jan 22 that he was posting from Holland.

In the absence of contrary information, I was entitled to draw the obvious conclusion.

You are entitled to draw whatever conclusions you want from
whatever information you want, but we are equally entitled to
ignore your erroneous conclusions.

Anyway, I do have to admire someone who puts his principles
above such mundane details as the success of their business.

You seem to be one of those principled people who dare
to express their views in their own manner, no matter
how unacceptable or disagreeable that might be to your
potential customers. Good for you!

Julf

MP3 coding (was Current trends in audio)
 

Jim Lesurf said:
In article , Richard
Robinson wrote:
For music, LPCM tends to be wasteful. So you can reshuffle how it is
represented and that tends to reduce the number of bits required. Flac
works pretty well for this. Although that has the snag that genuine
random background noise is preserved just as if it were 'real'
information. This is the main reason many 'High Rez' flac files are so
big. Noise, carefully preserved in every detail, not actually
shedloads of more *musical* info.

Yes. That's not the code's problem, though, is it ? If you don't want to
throw anything away you get to keep what's there. Noise in noise out, to
paraphrase.

Yes. You can, of course, reduce the number of bits devoted to noise in some
cases. The classic method being to noise-shape down to fewer bits per
sample. This depends on how many were being wasted. But can have quite a
dramatic effect on the size of 'high rez' flac files or streams. See

http://www.audiomisc.co.uk/MQA/cool/bitfreezing.html

The above, curiously, turns out to be relevant to 'MQA' for reasons that
wouldn't be obvious from reading the MQA claims and documents! So it
something I've been particularly aware of in recent months.

There's a lot of stuff there I knew nothing about, Thinking will be
required. Thanks :-)


--
Richard Robinson
"The whole plan hinged upon the natural curiosity of potatoes" - S. Lem

My email address is at http://www.qualmograph.org.uk/contact.html

Current trends in audio
 

Iain Churches said:
"Richard Robinson" wrote in message
o.uk...
Johan Helsingius said:
As long as you can stand herring, vodka schnapps and
drinking songs... :)

And fiddle tunes ? Could there be fiddle tunes ?

Yes of course, and bears too!
http://www.kolumbus.fi/iain.churches...Test/Bjern.mp3

And Hoven Droven, oh my !


I have friends in Östersund. To nitpick, it's not Finland :-)


--
Richard Robinson
"The whole plan hinged upon the natural curiosity of potatoes" - S. Lem

My email address is at http://www.qualmograph.org.uk/contact.html

MP3 coding (was Current trends in audio)
 

In article , Richard
Robinson wrote:
Yes. That's not the code's problem, though, is it ? If you don't want
to throw anything away you get to keep what's there. Noise in noise
out, to paraphrase.

Yes. You can, of course, reduce the number of bits devoted to noise in
some cases. The classic method being to noise-shape down to fewer bits
per sample. This depends on how many were being wasted. But can have
quite a dramatic effect on the size of 'high rez' flac files or
streams. See

http://www.audiomisc.co.uk/MQA/cool/bitfreezing.html

The above, curiously, turns out to be relevant to 'MQA' for reasons
that wouldn't be obvious from reading the MQA claims and documents! So
it something I've been particularly aware of in recent months.

There's a lot of stuff there I knew nothing about, Thinking will be
required. Thanks :-)

Sadly, I suspect many of those selling or renting 'high rez' material don't
realise it, either! As a result, people are led into assuming that "the
bigger the box, the more it contains". Alas, anyone who has bought things
as diverse as soap power, breakfast cereal, or boxed software, can find
tain't always the case. A big box attracts the eye and uses up space that
might otherwise offer a competitor.

Jim

--
Please use the address on the audiomisc page if you wish to email me.
Electronics http://www.st-and.ac.uk/~www_pa/Scot...o/electron.htm
Armstrong Audio http://www.audiomisc.co.uk/Armstrong/armstrong.html
Audio Misc http://www.audiomisc.co.uk/index.html

Current trends in audio
 

Johan Helsingius wrote:

Phil Allison wrote:

** Nor a Scientologist or member of the KKK.
Very likely a scumbag like you is both.

I see you haven't bothered to look me up on google or
Wikipedia... :)




** Write that Wiki all yourself did you ?

I hope you washed you hands thoroughly afterwards .......


FYI:

Although I have no association with the KKK whatsoever - I did have a close encounter of the worst kind with a bunch of Scientologists back in the early 1980s.

I worked briefly ( sub contract ) for a self appointed audio guru named Allen Wright, known better as the proprietor of "Vacuum State Electronics".

Google those names if you like, the man is RIP these days.

Allen was a horrible boss and his Scientologist colleagues no better.

I see you had a run in with the *******s too.

Whatever, any connection between yourself and the world of hi-fi audio seems non existent.

Except for being one of Iain Churches bum chums.




.... Phil

Current trends in audio
 

I hope you washed you hands thoroughly afterwards .......

Nah, I only seem to have to do that after encountering one of
your postings, but I am trying to cut you some slack in case
you are one of the unfortunate sufferers of a syndrome involving
involuntary coprolalia.

Julf

Current trends in audio
 

Johan Helsingius wrote:


I hope you washed you hands thoroughly afterwards .......

Nah,



** You need to.

Cos you have wank all over them even now.

You are a raving nut case Johan.

And so proud of it too.




.... Phil

Current trends in audio
 

On 24-01-17 15:25, Phil Allison wrote:

** You need to.

What I need to is to remember not to feed the troll. Have a good day.

Julf

Current trends in audio
 

"Dave Plowman (News)" wrote in message
...
In article ,
Iain Churches wrote:
I'm referring to the era when Des was (dis)gracing our screens when
line-ups were done properly and cameras matched on cuts (also mixes and
wipes!)

Was there such an era? I was probably at the fridge and missed it:-)))

You like to give the impression you know everything about broadcasting
technical matters, Iain. That comment says you know very little.

If you'd ever been in a TV studio of any major broadcaster worthy of the
name at the beginning of the day, you'd have noticed all the cameras on a
chart etc being lined up. And that line up being checked before any
recording, etc.

I sort of assumed you'd understand this. Seems you simply switched on the
studios you work in and started recording with no checks.

You misssed my smiley then?
Iain