randy909
Also the high end sounds better the faster the vinyl is going so the outer tracks win there too. 45rmp records have more sparkle. The speed of the vinyl is like sample rate.
I don't believe this is the case. The RIAA curve is a very aggressive curve (40db) and no one would tolerate an uncorrected signal (plug your turntable into the line in for a taste, all you hear is sibilance). Also the filter would be applied by the person mastering the vinyl - it would not be applied before the master tape.
IMO the thin sounding CDs were because producers were used to vinyl which still has issues with bass even with the RIAA curve in place. Also because CDs were new and we lacked the knowledge and tools to use them to their potential. For example my teachers in college would have me turn in my DAT tapes with peak levels around -18db (late 90's).
Another huge factor that affects the sound is the damned stylus. It's like switching speakers. Each one has its own signature. Then there's the phono preamp/RIAA filter too! I prefer our modern times where only the choice of speakers matters that much. Think of all the permutations of stylus, preamp, and speakers you had to consider in the early HiFi days.
This is true of tape but not vinyl. High frequencies are difficult for vinyl and are better off rolled off. A lot of exciters were used before the tape to get a certain, pleasing distortion. Sounded bad when people started switching to ADAT from analog tape.
I would guess that most of the time a CD made from the master tape sounds better than the vinyl even without a remaster. Of course the remaster is almost always the best bet.
I do agree that it can take extra mental energy to translate "this idea is stupid" to "the downside of this approach is..." if you are prone to thinking in a harsh, cynical voice (I'm guilty of it). That is energy well spent.
It is legal to enter an intersection (i.e. cross the white line) when your light is not red. Therefore at least one car can turn left legally per light cycle. Agree completely that this isn't good enough.
I like to think "what would I do in this situation if this were an adult?" and respond accordingly. If you hit someone for spitting in your face you'd end up in jail. Is that the behavior you want to model? I don't understand why we think it's OK to treat kids that way. Violence is violence in my book.
Edit: You MUST learn to set boundaries without violence. A lot of bad parenting stems from our own upbringing where boundaries were set with violence so we don't know how to set them in other ways. Many of us just end up not setting any boundaries at all rather than use violence which can end very very badly with a boundary-pushing child. Learn to say "no" and stick to it at least some of the time (and flex when they negotiate well). I've gotten a ton of mileage out of taking away part of TV time if they act poorly or refuse to contribute to chores.
* Keep trying. If you're having a bad time with it it's because you haven't figured out how to use it well. SRS must be useful for at least some of your knowledge. Don't add too much and get overwhelmed. Add fewer cards and try to figure out what makes a good card vs bad.
* Stop adding cards if you get overwhelmed. Do all your reviews for a while and the daily number will reduce to something more manageable. Let the magic of SRS work itself out. You get the real benefit when it starts spacing things in years.
* Start slow. Develop your skill of making good cards by making a few and observing your mistakes then ramp it up as you gain confidence.
* Delete or fix bad cards aggressively. Flag them if you can't fix them immediately.
* Use cloze deletion. This is like "[Paris] is the capital of [France]" and you get two cards where one or the other is blanked out. Much easier to create cards this way. Be careful not to make too many.
* Use image occlusion. It's like cloze deletion for pictures. Really excellent for visual stuff.
Uh, what!? Command-T does much of its work in C to make it as fast as possible. I find it to be mind-numbingly fast. It is extremely well done. Did you open Vim from root or something? If it's ugly, it's because vim is ugly.
Your complaints about plugin management, Vimscript, and poor error handling are fair. When someone creates a modernized modal editor, I'll consider switching. Until then I'll suffer. It's incredibly satisfying when I do something really powerful in vim. It makes it my programming job more fun. A lot of programming is mundane editing. Editing with vim can make most painful editing tasks a fun challenge rather than a boring repetition of mouse clicks. This more than anything is why I won't switch to Sublime, even if I love its pretty face.
Vim (and unix tools) make you into, and feel like, a badass computer wizard. The more time you put into studying the spells, the more powerful spells you can cast. Newbs, do you want to be a Gandalf of computers (the answer is yes btw)? Then you need vim.
I realize any differences in this area would be very slight if they exist at all. Anyone know more about that?
Edit: Apparently no one can dell a difference in listening tests with well made equipment. Theoretically if a device was built using an extremely cheap filter you'd be better off with the higher sampling rate, but I can't find any real examples.
I'll give this a stab. Assume you're connecting the dots (samples) with a pencil. You can see that the high frequency filter would not let the pencil go up or down several times between 2 adjacent dots because any movement at that rate would be too high a frequency right? Now extend that thinking: Any movement not along a specific path (the one possible solution) would produce frequencies above the limit of the filter. Even a teeny tiny little bend in that line would result in a tiny few decibels of sound at a frequency above the filter and hence are not allowed. Make sense? Experts: is that accurate?
This was incredibly helpful for my understanding. This is the one corner of this story that was always fuzzy for me. In the video he seemed to be making this point when he drew silly stuff all over the screen but it didn't quite click. Thank you.
It reminds me of what the blue-man-group does. It's novel, a few people make a lot of money doing it, but it's not the next electric guitar by any stretch.
I think one of the core attributes of EDM is that it is performed by machines. The MPC-live thing seems like an effort to step backwards just to have something to do on stage. I'd rather listen to someone mix a 808/909/303 live. The subtle timing and tuning shifts they make are a thing of beauty (and laptops don't do this). But that's probably just my preference for techno over hip-hop/dubstep coming through.
Anyway, good article regardless.
Isn't that focusing on mental illness? I thought that was misguided. Misguided title I think.