IDM Mailing Archive

i meant the first generation of the mp3 codec, vs. mp3pro, not reencoding, which i agree will degrade the data terribly. on the vbr issue, it is my opinion that the relief of the sound may have a tinny quality to it, which may be more or less detectable depending on how high or low your bitrate is, etc., but i wouldn't want to sustain this opinion in a discussion. there are so many other issues to talk about besides, for example the number of instruments in a work. i will also say that we sometimes get to a point on this topic where discussion is really not advanceable without knowledge of engineering, programming and mathematics which i simply do not posess. i have only my intuition in reading into this topic as a tool. so i will be the first to bow out of that part of the discussion. but i will suggest, in answer to how "vbr might do that where cbr didn't", that a series comprised of one repeated operation is more faithful than a series of different operations, on principle of logic. as far not accepting anything below 192k, i never said that. i was just suggesting guidelines. i'll take what i can get, but i'll always shoot for the best. i have had all sorts of experience with files of many and diverse characteristics, and what i said is only a reflection of that. i will not try to detail this lengthy catalogue of testing, etc. ... of course, i have no idea of what you may think is a "better" file, and even less so a "good" one. what i liked about what you say is your argument for being able to recommend better vbr settings for any given cbr settings someone may be using. i think this is indeed possible, especially for a specific track, although again i do not know what your idea of "better" is... for my part i referred my arguments to the standards for psychoacoustics that are a part of the mp3 codec; that is my idea or the idea i have accepted of what sounds well. the idea of finding the optimum vbr settings is nonetheless always tempting. anyway, this was just to show what sense i think what i said may contain. your reply, despite its being intelligent, was somewhat rushed and abbreviates where it needed the most support for its arguments... (i won't stoop to calling it "a crazy statement", or claiming that "it just doesn't make 'logical sense' ", whatever that means, though). i guess it's my fault, for not being brief, so i apologize. : ) On Thursday, January 31, 2002, at 01:50 , Michael Plump wrote:

quoted 32 lines On Thu, 10 Jan 2002, excm. prin. fuminaro konoye wrote:

> On Thu, 10 Jan 2002, excm. prin. fuminaro konoye wrote: > >> if you make a VBR file you are punching the midrange of the sound right >> in the gut. > > I'm sorry, that's just a crazy statement. How could VBR do that where > CBR > didn't? So you refuse to accept that anything lower than 192kbps could > possibly be good? Set your minimum compression level to that, and > you'll > have a better file. > > If you're using a good encoder and you show me a quality CBR file, I can > show you setting that would've produced a better sounding VBR file. > Think > about what you're saying. It just doesn't make logical sense. > >> 192 is if you just want a "useful" mp3, but it must be accepted that >> the >> first generation mp3 must have a higher bitrate than that for real >> quality. > > You really shouldn't ever, ever, ever re-encode your mp3s. All of a > sudden you're taking the artifacts that you produced when you encoded it > the first time, and forcing your encoder to try and encode those > artifacts. You're going to lose a lot of quality. > > I've never tried this, but I would guess that an mp3 file re-encoded > from > 256->192 would probably sound worse than one just encoded originally at > 128. Does anyone have any experience with this? >

_________________________________________________________ Do You Yahoo!? Get your free @yahoo.com address at http://mail.yahoo.com --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: idm-unsubscribe@hyperreal.org For additional commands, e-mail: idm-help@hyperreal.org

Just use MPC, not mp3.. natively its VBR (VBR is different to ABR... its all about the criteria used to detect whether more or less bitrate is needed.. lame dmpreset VBR is good.. mpc is natively VBR and is highly tuned) ANyways just try mpc (aka Mpeg+, musepack) unless you need files in mp3 for portable players its the better format by a long way.. just try encoding Fat Boy Slim's Kalifornia track to see how poor mp3 is... the first 50 seconds is ruined, even at 320k CBR (well its far less at this bitrate but still evident, when its not present at 160k with mpc or ogg for that matter, but ogg is slow to encode and still behind mpc in the tuning stakes) Get the encoding/decoding software at http://www.uni-jena.de/%7Epfk/mpp/ Windows versions of the software you'll need to try it is... http://www.uni-jena.de/%7Epfk/mpp/bin/mppenc-windows-0.90o.zip the command line encoder similar to lame in operation http://www.uni-jena.de/%7Epfk/mpp/bin/mppdec-windows-0.99c.zip the command line decoder http://www.uni-jena.de/%7Epfk/mpp/bin/in_mpc_0.90e_en.zip the winamp decoder plugin The beauty is using something like feurio or EAC to rip your CDs Feurio: http://www.feurio.com/English/index.shtml EAC: http://www.exactaudiocopy.de Feurio being the better ripper for quality but requiring registering after some usage And then either encoding directly from these programs or ripping to waves (if you have a big enough harddrive) and then using monkeys audio to encode all of the waves in one go (id3 tagging them automatically at the same time from the filenames of the waves) http://www.monkeysaudio.com Monkeys is a lossless codec as in you keep the waves but shrink them perfectly by 50%.. but it can be used to encode with any other command line encoder and supports auto id3 tagging and can encode 1000s in different directories so is ideal for leaving running.. Finally MPC is VERY fast.. not quite as fast as music match jukebox but the quality out of that is so so... anything close to it quality wise is slower by a lot (nearly 4x when compared to ogg) And there you go.. the best audio compression for your electronic music at the moment... James ps. why is this on the idm list???

quoted 96 lines -----Original Message-----

> -----Original Message----- > From: excm. prin. fuminaro konoye [mailto:fuminaro@yahoo.com] > Sent: 10 January 2002 20:47 > To: Michael Plump > Cc: idm@hyperreal.org > Subject: Re: [idm] VBR vs fixed rate ripping > > > i meant the first generation of the mp3 codec, vs. mp3pro, not > reencoding, which i agree will degrade the data terribly. > on the vbr issue, it is my opinion that the relief of the sound may have > a tinny quality to it, which may be more or less detectable depending on > how high or low your bitrate is, etc., but i wouldn't want to sustain > this opinion in a discussion. there are so many other issues to talk > about besides, for example the number of instruments in a work. > i will also say that we sometimes get to a point on this topic where > discussion is really not advanceable without knowledge of engineering, > programming and mathematics which i simply do not posess. i have only my > intuition in reading into this topic as a tool. so i will be the first > to bow out of that part of the discussion. but i will suggest, in answer > to how "vbr might do that where cbr didn't", that a series comprised of > one repeated operation is more faithful than a series of different > operations, on principle of logic. > as far not accepting anything below 192k, i never said that. i was just > suggesting guidelines. i'll take what i can get, but i'll always shoot > for the best. i have had all sorts of experience with files of many and > diverse characteristics, and what i said is only a reflection of that. i > will not try to detail this lengthy catalogue of testing, etc. ... of > course, i have no idea of what you may think is a "better" file, and > even less so a "good" one. > what i liked about what you say is your argument for being able to > recommend better vbr settings for any given cbr settings someone may be > using. i think this is indeed possible, especially for a specific track, > although again i do not know what your idea of "better" is... for my > part i referred my arguments to the standards for psychoacoustics that > are a part of the mp3 codec; that is my idea or the idea i have accepted > of what sounds well. the idea of finding the optimum vbr settings is > nonetheless always tempting. > > anyway, this was just to show what sense i think what i said may contain. > your reply, despite its being intelligent, was somewhat rushed and > abbreviates where it needed the most support for its arguments... (i > won't stoop to calling it "a crazy statement", or claiming that "it just > doesn't make 'logical sense' ", whatever that means, though). i guess > it's my fault, for not being brief, so i apologize. : ) > > > > > > On Thursday, January 31, 2002, at 01:50 , Michael Plump wrote: > > > On Thu, 10 Jan 2002, excm. prin. fuminaro konoye wrote: > > > >> if you make a VBR file you are punching the midrange of the sound right > >> in the gut. > > > > I'm sorry, that's just a crazy statement. How could VBR do that where > > CBR > > didn't? So you refuse to accept that anything lower than 192kbps could > > possibly be good? Set your minimum compression level to that, and > > you'll > > have a better file. > > > > If you're using a good encoder and you show me a quality CBR file, I can > > show you setting that would've produced a better sounding VBR file. > > Think > > about what you're saying. It just doesn't make logical sense. > > > >> 192 is if you just want a "useful" mp3, but it must be accepted that > >> the > >> first generation mp3 must have a higher bitrate than that for real > >> quality. > > > > You really shouldn't ever, ever, ever re-encode your mp3s. All of a > > sudden you're taking the artifacts that you produced when you encoded it > > the first time, and forcing your encoder to try and encode those > > artifacts. You're going to lose a lot of quality. > > > > I've never tried this, but I would guess that an mp3 file re-encoded > > from > > 256->192 would probably sound worse than one just encoded originally at > > 128. Does anyone have any experience with this? > > > > > _________________________________________________________ > Do You Yahoo!? > Get your free @yahoo.com address at http://mail.yahoo.com > > > --------------------------------------------------------------------- > To unsubscribe, e-mail: idm-unsubscribe@hyperreal.org > For additional commands, e-mail: idm-help@hyperreal.org > >

--------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: idm-unsubscribe@hyperreal.org For additional commands, e-mail: idm-help@hyperreal.org

very nice! i have been reading about lossless codecs and file "shortening", and your take on makes it sound very attractive... it is always better to read a thorough account of someone who has had a good experience with a new method like this... i can't very well go ogg or lossless yet... many of us are tied to the mp3 format for more reasons than portable players. hopefully it will be possible sooner than anyone has thought, as portable computing devices progress and become smaller at the same time... why is this on the idm list? perhaps the community is tied to mp3 more than anyone would like... all though it's not all bad... i recall reading that the very first kid 606 remix projects with his pals were mostly done using laptops and mp3's, and i'm sure this is only one example out of many... can anyone fill in the details on that kid 606 story? On Thursday, January 31, 2002, at 04:24 , James R Bamford wrote:

quoted 186 lines Just use MPC, not mp3.. natively its VBR (VBR is different to ABR...

> Just use MPC, not mp3.. natively its VBR (VBR is different to ABR... > its all > about the criteria used to detect whether more or less bitrate is > needed.. > lame dmpreset VBR is good.. mpc is natively VBR and is highly tuned) > > ANyways just try mpc (aka Mpeg+, musepack) unless you need files in mp3 > for > portable players its the better format by a long way.. just try > encoding Fat > Boy Slim's Kalifornia track to see how poor mp3 is... the first 50 > seconds > is ruined, even at 320k CBR (well its far less at this bitrate but still > evident, when its not present at 160k with mpc or ogg for that matter, > but > ogg is slow to encode and still behind mpc in the tuning stakes) > > Get the encoding/decoding software at http://www.uni-jena.de/%7Epfk/mpp/ > > Windows versions of the software you'll need to try it is... > > http://www.uni-jena.de/%7Epfk/mpp/bin/mppenc-windows-0.90o.zip the > command line encoder similar to lame in operation > > http://www.uni-jena.de/%7Epfk/mpp/bin/mppdec-windows-0.99c.zip the command > line decoder > > > http://www.uni-jena.de/%7Epfk/mpp/bin/in_mpc_0.90e_en.zip the winamp > decoder plugin > > The beauty is using something like feurio or EAC to rip your CDs > > Feurio: http://www.feurio.com/English/index.shtml > EAC: http://www.exactaudiocopy.de > > Feurio being the better ripper for quality but requiring registering > after > some usage > > And then either encoding directly from these programs or ripping to > waves > (if you have a big enough harddrive) and then using monkeys audio to > encode > all of the waves in one go (id3 tagging them automatically at the same > time > from the filenames of the waves) > > http://www.monkeysaudio.com > > Monkeys is a lossless codec as in you keep the waves but shrink them > perfectly by 50%.. but it can be used to encode with any other command > line > encoder and supports auto id3 tagging and can encode 1000s in different > directories so is ideal for leaving running.. > > Finally MPC is VERY fast.. not quite as fast as music match jukebox but > the > quality out of that is so so... anything close to it quality wise is > slower > by a lot (nearly 4x when compared to ogg) > > And there you go.. the best audio compression for your electronic music > at > the moment... > > James > > ps. why is this on the idm list??? > >> -----Original Message----- >> From: excm. prin. fuminaro konoye [mailto:fuminaro@yahoo.com] >> Sent: 10 January 2002 20:47 >> To: Michael Plump >> Cc: idm@hyperreal.org >> Subject: Re: [idm] VBR vs fixed rate ripping >> >> >> i meant the first generation of the mp3 codec, vs. mp3pro, not >> reencoding, which i agree will degrade the data terribly. >> on the vbr issue, it is my opinion that the relief of the sound may >> have >> a tinny quality to it, which may be more or less detectable depending >> on >> how high or low your bitrate is, etc., but i wouldn't want to sustain >> this opinion in a discussion. there are so many other issues to talk >> about besides, for example the number of instruments in a work. >> i will also say that we sometimes get to a point on this topic where >> discussion is really not advanceable without knowledge of engineering, >> programming and mathematics which i simply do not posess. i have only >> my >> intuition in reading into this topic as a tool. so i will be the first >> to bow out of that part of the discussion. but i will suggest, in >> answer >> to how "vbr might do that where cbr didn't", that a series comprised of >> one repeated operation is more faithful than a series of different >> operations, on principle of logic. >> as far not accepting anything below 192k, i never said that. i was just >> suggesting guidelines. i'll take what i can get, but i'll always shoot >> for the best. i have had all sorts of experience with files of many and >> diverse characteristics, and what i said is only a reflection of >> that. i >> will not try to detail this lengthy catalogue of testing, etc. ... of >> course, i have no idea of what you may think is a "better" file, and >> even less so a "good" one. >> what i liked about what you say is your argument for being able to >> recommend better vbr settings for any given cbr settings someone may be >> using. i think this is indeed possible, especially for a specific >> track, >> although again i do not know what your idea of "better" is... for my >> part i referred my arguments to the standards for psychoacoustics that >> are a part of the mp3 codec; that is my idea or the idea i have >> accepted >> of what sounds well. the idea of finding the optimum vbr settings is >> nonetheless always tempting. >> >> anyway, this was just to show what sense i think what i said may >> contain. >> your reply, despite its being intelligent, was somewhat rushed and >> abbreviates where it needed the most support for its arguments... (i >> won't stoop to calling it "a crazy statement", or claiming that "it >> just >> doesn't make 'logical sense' ", whatever that means, though). i guess >> it's my fault, for not being brief, so i apologize. : ) >> >> >> >> >> >> On Thursday, January 31, 2002, at 01:50 , Michael Plump wrote: >> >>> On Thu, 10 Jan 2002, excm. prin. fuminaro konoye wrote: >>> >>>> if you make a VBR file you are punching the midrange of the sound >>>> right >>>> in the gut. >>> >>> I'm sorry, that's just a crazy statement. How could VBR do that where >>> CBR >>> didn't? So you refuse to accept that anything lower than 192kbps >>> could >>> possibly be good? Set your minimum compression level to that, and >>> you'll >>> have a better file. >>> >>> If you're using a good encoder and you show me a quality CBR file, I >>> can >>> show you setting that would've produced a better sounding VBR file. >>> Think >>> about what you're saying. It just doesn't make logical sense. >>> >>>> 192 is if you just want a "useful" mp3, but it must be accepted that >>>> the >>>> first generation mp3 must have a higher bitrate than that for real >>>> quality. >>> >>> You really shouldn't ever, ever, ever re-encode your mp3s. All of a >>> sudden you're taking the artifacts that you produced when you encoded >>> it >>> the first time, and forcing your encoder to try and encode those >>> artifacts. You're going to lose a lot of quality. >>> >>> I've never tried this, but I would guess that an mp3 file re-encoded >>> from >>> 256->192 would probably sound worse than one just encoded originally >>> at >>> 128. Does anyone have any experience with this? >>> >> >> >> _________________________________________________________ >> Do You Yahoo!? >> Get your free @yahoo.com address at http://mail.yahoo.com >> >> >> --------------------------------------------------------------------- >> To unsubscribe, e-mail: idm-unsubscribe@hyperreal.org >> For additional commands, e-mail: idm-help@hyperreal.org >> >> > > > --------------------------------------------------------------------- > To unsubscribe, e-mail: idm-unsubscribe@hyperreal.org > For additional commands, e-mail: idm-help@hyperreal.org >

_________________________________________________________ Do You Yahoo!? Get your free @yahoo.com address at http://mail.yahoo.com --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: idm-unsubscribe@hyperreal.org For additional commands, e-mail: idm-help@hyperreal.org

quoted 13 lines -----Original Message-----

> -----Original Message----- > From: excm. prin. fuminaro konoye [mailto:fuminaro@yahoo.com] > Sent: 10 January 2002 22:41 > To: James R Bamford > Cc: idm@hyperreal.org > Subject: Re: [idm] VBR vs fixed rate ripping > > > very nice! i have been reading about lossless codecs and file > "shortening", and your take on makes it sound very attractive... it is > always better to read a thorough account of someone who has had a good > experience with a new method like this... i can't very well go ogg or > lossless yet...

Don't forget MPC isn't lossless... monkeysaudio is, and so is LPAC the open standard... if anyone in the industry is using mp3 for wave transport I'd suggest immediately to move over to MPC (-insane quality) if not one of the lossless formats.. once you put bad in you can't remove it.. of course sometimes bad is good..

quoted 2 lines many of us are tied to the mp3 format for more reasons

> many of us are tied to the mp3 format for more reasons > than portable players.

FOr me it was playback on a portable and my incar mp3 player that was holding me back.. but high quality VBR mp3s (lame) were taking so long to make and were growing so large that portable use was inpractical, even when CDRs were used... so I took the jump.. and besides it good to experiment.. its all free.. and only your time is required :) Check out http://www.mp3dev.org/mp3/gpsycho/quality.html for a selection of waves that are very difficult to encode... http://lame.sourceforge.net/download/samples/fatboy.wav is a clip from the fatboy slim track that I told you about.. its a good track when encoding into an mp3 of anything less than 256k CBR that can be used to test your hifi equipment.. my speakers blur the artefact so that you can't hear it, my Sennheiser HD600 headphones tho bring it firmly into view.. its horrible.. and through them phones still audible as I said at 320k/s ... mp3 just can't hack it... hopefully it will be possible sooner than anyone

quoted 2 lines has thought, as portable computing devices progress and become smaller

> has thought, as portable computing devices progress and become smaller > at the same time...

Any other format support would be nice but the masses using mp3 don't help..

quoted 9 lines why is this on the idm list? perhaps the community is tied to mp3 more

> > why is this on the idm list? perhaps the community is tied to mp3 more > than anyone would like... all though it's not all bad... i recall > reading that the very first kid 606 remix projects with his pals were > mostly done using laptops and mp3's, and i'm sure this is only one > example out of many... can anyone fill in the details on that kid 606 > story? > >

MPC all the way :) --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: idm-unsubscribe@hyperreal.org For additional commands, e-mail: idm-help@hyperreal.org

Whoever wrote about his impressions from Tobin show- i agree 100% eventhough i wasnt there this time. Ok, take the rest not seriuos, but still it makes sence ========================================= Smokers(tobaco of course) must be put to concentration camps and given all they can smoke and drink buffet. Will kill them fast. Knitting factory is totally stinking outdated idiotic place of worship where idiots can put some other idiots on the stage and worship them, while another idiots make smoke go out of their filthy mouth Booze- same as above, with 2 differences- doesnt stink upon others but makes a drinker a totally wasted crap of a human being Tobin- good artist, producer, not my favourite, his stuff doesnt really have a what may be called a heavenly spark. Just some good collage, boring though. I think at this point of time good music can not come from the third world country. Good music, most of it comes from nothern cultures- german, brits, canadians, us, some french, belgium, you know what i mean third world more and more is left behind.. Look at those thousands of hip-hop and punk bands recently emerged from all those places, trying to mix ethnic with whatever- it is so outdated and pathetic. Basically Tobin comes from the same line, but being involved in the most sophisticated genre- electronic music, he can produce stuff above the usual 3rd world crappy level. ABout electronic music on the stage- Knit Factory is a worst possible venue for music. Like i sad it is good for worshiping some idiotic punk rocker jumping with the broken guitar The very idea of electronica of any kind is - it is about sound not the performance, dance oriented, no one to worship and no one to lick ass As far as looking on something - video visuals are the way to go. And they are nice. Thats why i say that knit. factory is outdated I go to the clubs to dance and hang out with friends, may be to pick up occasional sexy female for the purpose of sexual gratification or romance I dont give a shit about clowns jumping up there __________________________________________________ Do You Yahoo!? Great stuff seeking new owners in Yahoo! Auctions! http://auctions.yahoo.com --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: idm-unsubscribe@hyperreal.org For additional commands, e-mail: idm-help@hyperreal.org

hey, s r--- don't knock the man around... it would be interesting to see which country or countries you have some knowledge of... while of course i can agree that the self-destructive habits of oneself or others are never the nicest thing to have to look at, it doesn't help to have the perspective that only a deluded morality can give (this is not a personal attack -- i just think it is a problem we all have to deal with). have you thought overmuch about the reasons people do this or the things they seek when they go to parties, celebrate, drink, etc.? someone who is drunken is not just a waste to be looked down one's nose at, if they are worth anything they should still be interesting... what are you like when you are not entirely in your wits, even if this is not caused by alcohol, etc.? there is the historical perspective of celebration... the dyonisian aspect... although of course there is always the possibilty of one way or another not wanting to or not being able to become part of that celebration... which is ok of course... etc. ... then there is also the case for or the discussion of lucidity... no one is usually lucid all the time... how good was your post on someone else's light review of the tobin gig? i enjoyed his or her comments on the gig, even if they didn't think it was so hot... so if you aren't adding anything great to the discussion, maybe you should rethink what you are about to post : ) i.e., i didn't enjoy your post as much as the one it answers. amon tobin is not known for the quality of his live gigs apparently, so i guess people should only go if they really like his work. i think you have no real basis for deriding him, outside of your personal music taste, which i can respect, fair enough. i read your disclaimer about not taking the smoker/drinker comments seriously... the smoker's camp or whatever could be a funny idea, but the rest is morally pale... so despite the disclaimer i take issue with the morality it implies... it's terrible that such habits are so unhealthy, but enjoyment and intelligence, not to mention discussion and experience, are reasons enough to love night life of whatever means by which people arrive at their habits, which at least in my own case am somewhat attached to, although not in an unhealthy manner. the morality we are often raised with often affects our ways of life profoundly, maybe more negatively sometimes than drinking or smoking... morality should just help us enjoy ourselves more and be more perceptive, not make us be unhappy or be narrow-minded (again, this is not directed at anyone personally). as far as tobin, i would recommend giving him another shot and trying to listen to some older materials... if you like anything on ninja tune at all, some of coldcut's atomic moog materials are absolutely lovely to listen to and might constitute a good point of reference for tobin... it would be a shame for anyone to miss out on what could be a good time listening to him. if not, well, i can only say i gave a try at getting someone else to listen to music i value highly. besides, how can good music come only from some places? terrible music can come from everywhere. and if the good stuff was truly an isolated thing, what kind of dialogue would ever occur thanks to music? i hear plenty of good music where i live, thanks very much : ) some amon tobin tracks, off the top of my head, that i find at least likeable: four ton mantis slowly mission creatures the method tabakula beach resort nightlife nova reanimator the new york editor also the video for four ton mantis, as well as the one for slowly, can be seen at the ninja tune site... the four ton mantis is especially of interest... it would be very interesting to hear your thoughts on the video... i feel his music actually says a lot about the third world, and this maybe even extends to the theme of the relationship between the third world and the first (although i think the terms themselves are laughable, i use them for practical reasons). the play between feelings of strangeness or being foreign in an unknown landscape, and the contemplation of the landscape as something beautiful, personal or belonging to oneself, makes me think of the recent historical idea of latin american countries (although it could just as easily be asia) as places that have a rich past that has been made barren, as "modernity" arrives on the scene, and all that a spectator will be left with is the impression of a maze or confused, beautiful patterns... your mileage of course may vary greetings from the third world..................................................................... ............................... On Sunday, February 3, 2002, at 07:00 , s r wrote:

quoted 83 lines Whoever wrote about his impressions from Tobin

> Whoever wrote about his impressions from Tobin > show- i agree 100% eventhough i wasnt there this > time. > > Ok, take the rest not seriuos, but still it makes > sence > ========================================= > Smokers(tobaco of course) > must be put to concentration camps and given all > they can smoke and drink buffet. Will kill them > fast. > > Knitting factory > is totally stinking outdated idiotic place of > worship where idiots can put some > other idiots on the stage and worship them, while > another idiots make smoke go out of their filthy > mouth > > Booze- same as above, with 2 differences- > doesnt stink upon others > but makes a drinker a totally wasted crap of a > human being > > Tobin- > good artist, producer, not my favourite, his > stuff > doesnt really have a what may be called a > heavenly spark. Just some good collage, boring > though. > I think at this point of time good music can not > come from the third world country. > Good music, most of it comes from nothern > cultures- > german, brits, canadians, us, some french, > belgium, you know what i mean > third world more and more is left behind.. > Look at those thousands of hip-hop and punk bands > recently emerged from all those places, trying to > mix ethnic with whatever- > it is so outdated and pathetic. > Basically Tobin comes from the same line, but > being involved in the most sophisticated genre- > electronic music, he can produce stuff above the > usual 3rd world crappy level. > > ABout electronic music on the stage- > > Knit Factory is a worst possible venue for music. > Like i sad it is good for worshiping some idiotic > punk rocker jumping with the broken guitar > > The very idea of electronica of any kind is - > it is about sound not the performance, dance > oriented, no one to worship and no one to lick > ass > > As far as looking on something - video visuals > are the way to go. And they are nice. > > Thats why i say that knit. factory is outdated > > I go to the clubs to dance and hang out with > friends, may be to pick up occasional sexy female > for the purpose of sexual gratification or > romance > > I dont give a shit about clowns jumping up there > > > > > > > __________________________________________________ > Do You Yahoo!? > Great stuff seeking new owners in Yahoo! Auctions! > http://auctions.yahoo.com > > --------------------------------------------------------------------- > To unsubscribe, e-mail: idm-unsubscribe@hyperreal.org > For additional commands, e-mail: idm-help@hyperreal.org >

_________________________________________________________ Do You Yahoo!? Get your free @yahoo.com address at http://mail.yahoo.com --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: idm-unsubscribe@hyperreal.org For additional commands, e-mail: idm-help@hyperreal.org

What about people who do drugs? Shouldn't we do something terrible to them? Especially now that we know they supply terrorists? I say the next time RDJ asks for a joint on stage or some such thing we all stop buying his records. On Sun, 3 Feb 2002, s r wrote:

quoted 83 lines Whoever wrote about his impressions from Tobin

> Whoever wrote about his impressions from Tobin > show- i agree 100% eventhough i wasnt there this > time. > > Ok, take the rest not seriuos, but still it makes > sence > ========================================= > Smokers(tobaco of course) > must be put to concentration camps and given all > they can smoke and drink buffet. Will kill them > fast. > > Knitting factory > is totally stinking outdated idiotic place of > worship where idiots can put some > other idiots on the stage and worship them, while > another idiots make smoke go out of their filthy > mouth > > Booze- same as above, with 2 differences- > doesnt stink upon others > but makes a drinker a totally wasted crap of a > human being > > Tobin- > good artist, producer, not my favourite, his > stuff > doesnt really have a what may be called a > heavenly spark. Just some good collage, boring > though. > I think at this point of time good music can not > come from the third world country. > Good music, most of it comes from nothern > cultures- > german, brits, canadians, us, some french, > belgium, you know what i mean > third world more and more is left behind.. > Look at those thousands of hip-hop and punk bands > recently emerged from all those places, trying to > mix ethnic with whatever- > it is so outdated and pathetic. > Basically Tobin comes from the same line, but > being involved in the most sophisticated genre- > electronic music, he can produce stuff above the > usual 3rd world crappy level. > > ABout electronic music on the stage- > > Knit Factory is a worst possible venue for music. > Like i sad it is good for worshiping some idiotic > punk rocker jumping with the broken guitar > > The very idea of electronica of any kind is - > it is about sound not the performance, dance > oriented, no one to worship and no one to lick > ass > > As far as looking on something - video visuals > are the way to go. And they are nice. > > Thats why i say that knit. factory is outdated > > I go to the clubs to dance and hang out with > friends, may be to pick up occasional sexy female > for the purpose of sexual gratification or > romance > > I dont give a shit about clowns jumping up there > > > > > > > __________________________________________________ > Do You Yahoo!? > Great stuff seeking new owners in Yahoo! Auctions! > http://auctions.yahoo.com > > --------------------------------------------------------------------- > To unsubscribe, e-mail: idm-unsubscribe@hyperreal.org > For additional commands, e-mail: idm-help@hyperreal.org >

--------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: idm-unsubscribe@hyperreal.org For additional commands, e-mail: idm-help@hyperreal.org

Please give me a quick recommendation, oh good IDM people! I have never worked with MD, but somebody in need of quick cash is offering a 6-month old Sony minidisc player/recorder for what sounds like a good price, compared to what they go for new. Do I want this device? Is it yet ANOTHER format to fiddle with? Will it Betamax, or is it here to stay? Is the consumable media expensive or is it readily available? I need to make a decision by tomorrow morning, and am relying on your collective advice. Advance thanks, much appreciated. I * --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: idm-unsubscribe@hyperreal.org For additional commands, e-mail: idm-help@hyperreal.org

Hi there...

quoted 10 lines Please give me a quick recommendation, oh good IDM people!

> Please give me a quick recommendation, oh good IDM people! > > I have never worked with MD, but somebody in need of quick cash is > offering a 6-month old Sony minidisc player/recorder for what sounds > like a good price, compared to what they go for new. > > Do I want this device? Is it yet ANOTHER format to fiddle with? > Will it Betamax, or is it here to stay? Is the consumable media > expensive or is it readily available? >

Do you want it? Well... depends on what you want to achieve with it. It makes an excellent digital recorder, coupled with a nice mic... I use mine often to record shows and samples for later processing and music creation. Super clean. Extremely portable and reliable. Very easy to shuffle play track order which can be nice for getting rough ideas on composition. Once I have my MD filled up, I usually dump the samples to keep onto my Mac and just reuse the MD media over and over again. I also like to ability to record from the computer or CD using digital cable to get an exact copy. Yes, I guess it is another format to fiddle with. I really don't think it will Betamax... seems like I've been using mine for almost a decade now... the media is readily available (they even carry MD's at my local supermarket) and a whole box of them are cheap, and I think I've been recording over and over with the same original 10 or MD for years and years now... no loss in quality. Let me know what you decide '-) joel --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: idm-unsubscribe@hyperreal.org For additional commands, e-mail: idm-help@hyperreal.org

At 10:34 AM 30/01/02, Irene McC wrote:

quoted 5 lines I have never worked with MD, but somebody in need of quick cash is

>I have never worked with MD, but somebody in need of quick cash is >offering a 6-month old Sony minidisc player/recorder for what sounds >like a good price, compared to what they go for new. > >Do I want this device? Is it yet ANOTHER format to fiddle with?

Personally, I love my portable MiniDisc. I bought it a couple of years ago to replace both a failing CD Walkman and a failing tape deck, and haven't regretted it in the least. I record MP3s and vinyl to it for portable listening, and sometimes use it during DJ sets to play with on-the-fly loops and such.

quoted 1 line Will it Betamax, or is it here to stay?

>Will it Betamax, or is it here to stay?

The format is popular enough in Japan (and the UK to a lesser extent) that I don't think it'll ever disappear. The main reason it didn't catch on strongly when it was first introduced a decade or so ago is because Sony foolishly pushed it as a new pre-recorded medium in most territories at a time when everyone was still busy getting used to CDs. If they had instead pushed it as a great replacement for cassettes (i.e. "you used to record your records to cassettes - why not record your new digital CDs to digital MDs?"), it might've caught on a bit stronger. Advertising over the past few years has emphasized this recordable aspect more strongly, and aside from a handful of titles, the major labels have given up on releasing albums on MD. So I think it's found a niche as a higher quality and more efficient replacement for cassettes.

quoted 1 line Is the consumable media expensive or is it readily available?

>Is the consumable media expensive or is it readily available?

I think this depends on where you're located. In Canada (or more specifically, Toronto), there are a lot of electronics stors that sell blank MDs, although they are a little pricey (usually around CDN$5 per disc). I mainly buy my blanks from an online store in Montreal, and get together with a couple of friends who also have MDs so we can order 100 at a time and get the best price - it think it was around CDN$3.50 a disc last time we ordered. I'd recommend checking out http://www.minidisc.org/ - there is LOADS of material there about everything you could ever want to know about MDs. I'm sure there's a section somewhere or other about the availability and prices of blank MDs in South Africa. Greg :::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::: Greg Clow ::: greg@stainedproductions.com ::::::::: concert & event promotions ::: http://www.stainedproductions.com :::::: electronic music radio & reviews ::: http://www.feedbackmonitor.com ::: electronic/experimental record label ::: http://www.pieheadrecords.com ::::::::: 158 Close Ave. 2nd Floor ::: Toronto, Ontario M6K 2V5 ::: Canada --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: idm-unsubscribe@hyperreal.org For additional commands, e-mail: idm-help@hyperreal.org

--- Greg Clow <greg@stainedproductions.com> wrote:

quoted 9 lines Personally, I love my portable MiniDisc. I bought it

> Personally, I love my portable MiniDisc. I bought it > a couple of years ago > to replace both a failing CD Walkman and a failing > tape deck, and haven't > regretted it in the least. I record MP3s and vinyl > to it for portable > listening, and sometimes use it during DJ sets to > play with on-the-fly > loops and such.

I think MD is very useful for people involved in music making. However, mine is quickly gathering dust on the shelf. I bought it for n5MD releases, and that's all I've used it for. (I'd be willing to sell it, except now that I own a couple of MDs, I need it if I ever want to play or copy them again.) The thing is, if you have a ton of music (or in my case, all of my music) in MP3 format, it's much more convenient to burn 3 or 4 CD-RW discs at 8x than to sit around recording audio to your MD player. So I think the usefulness of MD is highly dependent on what technology you already use. I guess if you're used to MD and don't have a CD-RW drive or don't use your computer much for audio-related activities, it could be worth it. I like the idea of shuffling audio without pauses between the tracks. Anyway, I'd say, go for it if you really intend to start using the format, or if you make music and need something for recording and sampling. It really is a high quality replacement for cassette in that respect. But if you can already do everything you need, as far as music and audio go, to and don't really see yourself starting to do more, don't bother. .adam __________________________________________________ Do You Yahoo!? Great stuff seeking new owners in Yahoo! Auctions! http://auctions.yahoo.com --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: idm-unsubscribe@hyperreal.org For additional commands, e-mail: idm-help@hyperreal.org

At 11:46 AM 30/01/02, Adam Piontek wrote:

quoted 4 lines The thing is, if you have a ton of music (or in my

>The thing is, if you have a ton of music (or in my >case, all of my music) in MP3 format, it's much more >convenient to burn 3 or 4 CD-RW discs at 8x than to >sit around recording audio to your MD player.

I agree that getting a CD burner/writer as opposed to a MD for recording of MP3s makes a lot of sense now. But when I got my MD recorder about 2.5 years ago, CD burners were a lot more expensive, and CD-RW wasn't very common at all (if it even existed in the commerical market, I can't remember for sure). So MD was my preferred option at the time. Plus a had a copy of that Gescom MD that I really wanted to listen to. :) I actually still don't own a CD burner/writer, although my wife and I are considering getting one soon. Not really for music (although it may come in handy for that at some point), but mainly for backing up data, etc. I had a big scare a couple of weeks ago with the boot sector on my hard drive got fried - made extra scary by the fact that I work from home, so I thought I'd lost all of my personal AND work data in one fell swoop. Thankfully, the tech guys at my office were able to restore the boot sector with no data loss, but it was a little too close for comfort. So we'll probably pick up an external burner/writer that will allow us to back up data from both my wife's computer and mine. Greg :::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::: Greg Clow ::: greg@stainedproductions.com ::::::::: concert & event promotions ::: http://www.stainedproductions.com :::::: electronic music radio & reviews ::: http://www.feedbackmonitor.com ::: electronic/experimental record label ::: http://www.pieheadrecords.com ::::::::: 158 Close Ave. 2nd Floor ::: Toronto, Ontario M6K 2V5 ::: Canada --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: idm-unsubscribe@hyperreal.org For additional commands, e-mail: idm-help@hyperreal.org

Yes you should buy it, they are excellent. You can get a nifty mic for about $US40 to record shows. I have several bootlegs and they are great. They are also very small and the discs are cheapish and can be reused millions of times. BTW they record using a compression system called ATRAC 3: some details about it: http://hem.passagen.se/telis/?noframe -i --- Irene McC <substar@iafrica.com> wrote:

quoted 23 lines Please give me a quick recommendation, oh good IDM people!

> Please give me a quick recommendation, oh good IDM people! > > I have never worked with MD, but somebody in need of quick cash is > offering a 6-month old Sony minidisc player/recorder for what sounds > like a good price, compared to what they go for new. > > Do I want this device? Is it yet ANOTHER format to fiddle with? > Will it Betamax, or is it here to stay? Is the consumable media > expensive or is it readily available? > > I need to make a decision by tomorrow morning, and am relying on your > collective advice. > > Advance thanks, much appreciated. > > I > * > > > --------------------------------------------------------------------- > To unsubscribe, e-mail: idm-unsubscribe@hyperreal.org > For additional commands, e-mail: idm-help@hyperreal.org >

__________________________________________________ Do You Yahoo!? Great stuff seeking new owners in Yahoo! Auctions! http://auctions.yahoo.com --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: idm-unsubscribe@hyperreal.org For additional commands, e-mail: idm-help@hyperreal.org

I love my minidiscs (I have a MD deck and Portable Player) because in my opinion they are so versatile and useful. Its true that its easier to record bulk mp3s onto a cd but portable cd players are too big and you can get some miniscule MD player/recorders now. I record stuff onto MD and take it out with me and its pretty hassle free. I got my MD player back in '98 (when they weren't too common) and I have seen them go from strength to strength and especially useful is the fact you get track names coming up. Quality wise, the sound is excellent (not even worth comparing to 128kbps mp3) and only the real music buffs can tell any difference. Hope that helps, Ben ----- Original Message ----- From: "Irene McC" <substar@iafrica.com> To: <idm-m@yahoogroups.com>; <idm@hyperreal.org> Sent: Wednesday, January 30, 2002 3:34 PM Subject: [idm] OT : minidisc advice

quoted 24 lines Please give me a quick recommendation, oh good IDM people!

> Please give me a quick recommendation, oh good IDM people! > > I have never worked with MD, but somebody in need of quick cash is > offering a 6-month old Sony minidisc player/recorder for what sounds > like a good price, compared to what they go for new. > > Do I want this device? Is it yet ANOTHER format to fiddle with? > Will it Betamax, or is it here to stay? Is the consumable media > expensive or is it readily available? > > I need to make a decision by tomorrow morning, and am relying on your > collective advice. > > Advance thanks, much appreciated. > > I > * > > > --------------------------------------------------------------------- > To unsubscribe, e-mail: idm-unsubscribe@hyperreal.org > For additional commands, e-mail: idm-help@hyperreal.org > >

--------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: idm-unsubscribe@hyperreal.org For additional commands, e-mail: idm-help@hyperreal.org

--- Ben Browett <ben@eskimo.force9.co.uk> wrote:

quoted 2 lines wise, the sound is excellent (not even worth

> wise, the sound is excellent (not even worth > comparing to 128kbps mp3) and

Who uses 128kbps anymore? Seriously? Besides places like EMusic who either don't know any better or have to for some reason... 192kbps, maybe, at least. LAME VBR preferred And once 1.0 finally arrives, a hi quality Ogg! back to the topic, MD is just too inconvenient for me and CD size is not an issue if you're already using CDs and are comfortable with it Pbbbtt! .adam ===== .Adam http://www.damek.org/ __________________________________________________ Do You Yahoo!? Great stuff seeking new owners in Yahoo! Auctions! http://auctions.yahoo.com --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: idm-unsubscribe@hyperreal.org For additional commands, e-mail: idm-help@hyperreal.org

On Thu, 31 Jan 2002, Irene McC wrote:

quoted 1 line Is this *really* better than a fixed, say, 192?

> Is this *really* better than a fixed, say, 192?

Can it hurt? You lower the bitrate for some parts that are easier to encode, and raise it for parts that are harder. If the quality is high enough, you might average 192 still, but you'll have a better sounding mp3. If the quality is lower, the average bitrate will be lower, but it will still sound as good. Bottom line: The quality/size ratio of a VBR file will always better if you have a good encoder. --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: idm-unsubscribe@hyperreal.org For additional commands, e-mail: idm-help@hyperreal.org

if you make a VBR file you are punching the midrange of the sound right in the gut. 192 is if you just want a "useful" mp3, but it must be accepted that the first generation mp3 must have a higher bitrate than that for real quality. so, it depends on what you are aiming for. if you really want quality, use LAME, but at 256 CBR with true stereo, as joint stereo also messes up a file for manipulation during playback or remixing later on... lower bit rates and joint stereo are no good if you really, really appreciate the track or tracks in question... for more coommon tracks or brute4 archival purposes, you can use 192 just fine though... many people even use 160k for vinyl, which is kind of a twisted rationale if you ask me, if we recall that vinyl is supposed to have a wider dynamic range compared to CD even if it also has more noise... therefore vinyl should also be ripped at a higher rate... a friend says even a vinyl mp3 will still sound "warm" and have good definition... On Thursday, January 31, 2002, at 02:36 , No one in particular wrote:

quoted 18 lines On Thu, 31 Jan 2002, Irene McC wrote:

> On Thu, 31 Jan 2002, Irene McC wrote: > >> Is this *really* better than a fixed, say, 192? > > Can it hurt? You lower the bitrate for some parts that are easier to > encode, and raise it for parts that are harder. If the quality is high > enough, you might average 192 still, but you'll have a better sounding > mp3. If the quality is lower, the average bitrate will be lower, but it > will still sound as good. > > Bottom line: The quality/size ratio of a VBR file will always better if > you have a good encoder. > > > --------------------------------------------------------------------- > To unsubscribe, e-mail: idm-unsubscribe@hyperreal.org > For additional commands, e-mail: idm-help@hyperreal.org >

_________________________________________________________ Do You Yahoo!? Get your free @yahoo.com address at http://mail.yahoo.com --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: idm-unsubscribe@hyperreal.org For additional commands, e-mail: idm-help@hyperreal.org

quoted 2 lines if you make a VBR file you are punching the midrange of the sound right in

>if you make a VBR file you are punching the midrange of the sound right in >the gut.

how do you figure? i still havn't heard a good argument against VBR. it's theoretically best because it will dynamically assign a frame size basic on content. in practice VBR is only as good as the encoder you use, but by the same token so is a constant bitrate mp3. your mp3 is only as good as your encoder. the real question with fixed bitrate vs VBR should be this: is the algorithm which determines frame size going to pick a large enough value for the frame? if you don't trust LAME to pick this value correctly, how can you trust it to correctly decide which parts of the music are expendable? personally i trust that the frame size picking algorithm is at least as good as the algorithm which decides what sound to eliminate. as for joint stereo i think it's preferable to true stereo, but i wouldn't claim to be an expert on the specifics. again, your mp3 is only as good as your encoder. most of the info on www.r3mix.net is quite good and worth reading over (although their myths section is bullshit). cheers _________________________________________________________________ Join the world?s largest e-mail service with MSN Hotmail. http://www.hotmail.com --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: idm-unsubscribe@hyperreal.org For additional commands, e-mail: idm-help@hyperreal.org

good to hear some clear thinking on the subject, helix t. i agree with you mostly, and although i believe that if in a hypothetical situation you would think that engineering was as good for one part of a given program as for another (that cbr and vbr comment you made), it's a bit of a gamble without more specific info than we have. it's a smart one, so i like what you say allright. i can probably neither prove nor disprove it, but i will say the following. i like the r3mix site, which i read over in its entirety a while back, but you may notice that many of the graphs show remarkable differences between different versions of LAME. of the two versions of LAME included in their semi-informal study, the earlier version of LAME that was shown to work better with VBR than the later version (which shows higher quality results on the graphs when using CBR) very likely does not have as good psychoacoustics as the later; and i believe we are on yet later versions of LAME even as we type now. psychoacoustics is indicated to be one of the more important directions the people working on this are headed towards, if not the most important. so this would be an indication for anyone concerned with encoding as much as we are to always try the updated versions and keep tabs on the discussion of these new versions. the latest versions have a tendency towards better ps.acoustics with the use of CBR, as is shown by this idea, as well as by the graphs at www.r3mix.net, i would say (at 256kbps, which is also what i advocate for most electronic music, if i want a high quality mp3. again, i will use 192kbps if i only need to archive content that is not as important for me.) thanks for reading through and for your replies (anyone) On Thursday, January 31, 2002, at 04:16 , Helix Tradesman wrote:

quoted 36 lines if you make a VBR file you are punching the midrange of the sound

>> if you make a VBR file you are punching the midrange of the sound >> right in the gut. > > how do you figure? > > i still havn't heard a good argument against VBR. it's theoretically > best because it will dynamically assign a frame size basic on content. > in practice VBR is only as good as the encoder you use, but by the same > token so is a constant bitrate mp3. your mp3 is only as good as your > encoder. > > the real question with fixed bitrate vs VBR should be this: is the > algorithm which determines frame size going to pick a large enough > value for the frame? if you don't trust LAME to pick this value > correctly, how can you trust it to correctly decide which parts of the > music are expendable? personally i trust that the frame size picking > algorithm is at least as good as the algorithm which decides what sound > to eliminate. > > as for joint stereo i think it's preferable to true stereo, but i > wouldn't claim to be an expert on the specifics. again, your mp3 is > only as good as your encoder. most of the info on www.r3mix.net is > quite good and worth reading over (although their myths section is > bullshit). > > cheers > > _________________________________________________________________ > Join the worldís largest e-mail service with MSN Hotmail. > http://www.hotmail.com > > > --------------------------------------------------------------------- > To unsubscribe, e-mail: idm-unsubscribe@hyperreal.org > For additional commands, e-mail: idm-help@hyperreal.org >

_________________________________________________________ Do You Yahoo!? Get your free @yahoo.com address at http://mail.yahoo.com --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: idm-unsubscribe@hyperreal.org For additional commands, e-mail: idm-help@hyperreal.org

--- "excm. prin. fuminaro konoye" <fuminaro@yahoo.com> wrote:

quoted 2 lines i like the r3mix site, which i read over in its

> i like the r3mix site, which i read over in its > entirety a while back,

www.ff123.net has some useful mp3 info www.hydrogenaudio.org is a great forum www.r3mix.net is pretty outdated, and the --r3mix preset is no longer the best preset. However, the forum is still active, as are other places on the internet, and I, personally, side with the "list of recommended LAME MP3 encoder settings" which has been posted in a few related forums, as well as at cdfreaks.com: http://www.cdfreaks.com/document.php3?Doc=63 Not that its ubiquitous nature lends it some sort of power, but I currently use "--alt-preset standard" for all my encoding needs. At least until Ogg Vorbis is finalized. Not that Ogg Vorbis will be the best quality (there seem to be plenty of people who prefer other methods like MP3Pro as far as quality goes), but because it's the best quality completely free format. .adam __________________________________________________ Do You Yahoo!? Great stuff seeking new owners in Yahoo! Auctions! http://auctions.yahoo.com --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: idm-unsubscribe@hyperreal.org For additional commands, e-mail: idm-help@hyperreal.org

thank you, very good stuff Adam! i think i will adopt this as my main resource... it gives the discussion more dimension, and is very frequently updated.... i recommend others check this out as well On Thursday, January 31, 2002, at 11:31 , Adam Piontek wrote: --- "excm. prin. fuminaro konoye" <fuminaro@yahoo.com> wrote: i like the r3mix site, which i read over in its entirety a while back, www.ff123.net has some useful mp3 info www.hydrogenaudio.org is a great forum www.r3mix.net is pretty outdated, and the --r3mix preset is no longer the best preset. However, the forum is still active, as are other places on the internet, and I, personally, side with the "list of recommended LAME MP3 encoder settings" which has been posted in a few related forums, as well as at cdfreaks.com: http://www.cdfreaks.com/document.php3?Doc=63 Not that its ubiquitous nature lends it some sort of power, but I currently use "--alt-preset standard" for all my encoding needs. At least until Ogg Vorbis is finalized. Not that Ogg Vorbis will be the best quality (there seem to be plenty of people who prefer other methods like MP3Pro as far as quality goes), but because it's the best quality completely free format. .adam __________________________________________________ Do You Yahoo!? Great stuff seeking new owners in Yahoo! Auctions! http://auctions.yahoo.com --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: idm-unsubscribe@hyperreal.org For additional commands, e-mail: idm-help@hyperreal.org

a few more of my opinions :P

quoted 1 line very nice! i have been reading about lossless codecs and file

> very nice! i have been reading about lossless codecs and file

mp3, ogg, and mpc are all lossy flac, monkey's audio, rkau, etc are lossless lossless is attractive for quality - you know the quality is tops because it's lossless! but the best compression you will get is ~50%, which is horrible if you're backing up CDs. I mean, you want to back up your audio in good quality, but you'll basically need half as many CD-Rs to store as many CDs as you own (50% compression = ~2 albums per disc, right?). so physical storage space becomes a big concern. If you have a giant HD, great, but if your HD gets trashed, you have to rip & encode them all again. I suppose, once backed up, you don't have to rip again, you can just keep decompressing the lossless audio packs whenever you need to. I own about 800 CDs, which even in CaseLogic ProSleeves take up four of the CaseLogic storage cabinets (which hold about 200 cds in sleeves). I shudder at the thought of getting two more cabinets just to store my backups, when CD-Rs full of MP3s can fit in a much, much smaller space...

quoted 2 lines lossless yet... many of us are tied to the mp3 format for more reasons

> lossless yet... many of us are tied to the mp3 format for more reasons > than portable players. hopefully it will be possible sooner than anyone

The thing about MPC/MpegPlus/MusePack is that, while it certainly has the best quality, it's gone backwards for ID tagging capability. It only uses ID3v1, IIRC. I need more than this! Ogg isn't finalized yet, and the sound quality can only get better, and it has so much potential for tagging! It's an open ended system, so you can use whatever you need (label tag, catalog tag, multiple performers for band/orchestra members, 'version' tag for remixes, etc...) The only reason I haven't switched to anything other than mp3 yet is that little bit about Ogg not being finalized - when they get past 1.0, I may re-archive my music collection in a couple years. Who knows, maybe by then something better will come along. For now, MP3 serves its purpose "good enough"

quoted 1 line why is this on the idm list? perhaps the community is tied to mp3 more

> why is this on the idm list? perhaps the community is tied to mp3 more

well, electronic music in general has more affinity for digital music than most other types of music, and i think on the idm list in particular there are a lot of people on low budgets who like to be able to try the music before we buy it - especially when the styles vary so much, you never know what you're going to get when everybody's talking about a new artist! .adam --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: idm-unsubscribe@hyperreal.org For additional commands, e-mail: idm-help@hyperreal.org

On Thu, 31 Jan 2002, Adam Piontek wrote:

quoted 3 lines The only reason I haven't switched to anything other than mp3 yet is that

> The only reason I haven't switched to anything other than mp3 yet is that > little bit about Ogg not being finalized - when they get past 1.0, I may > re-archive my music collection in a couple years.

For what it's worth, the actual format of ogg files has been set in stone for well over a year. When 1.0 comes out, you will still be able to play all your old ogg files. Basically 1.0 will just be a relatively arbitrary point when they decide the quality is "good enough". So... if you don't think the quality is good enough, I can understand not wanting to use it, but don't hold off just because you think it's not "finalized" yet. For most purposes of that word, it is finalized. --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: idm-unsubscribe@hyperreal.org For additional commands, e-mail: idm-help@hyperreal.org

--- No one in particular <idm@cocksalad.com> wrote:

quoted 5 lines For what it's worth, the actual format of ogg files

> For what it's worth, the actual format of ogg files > has been set in stone > for well over a year. When 1.0 comes out, you will > still be able to play > all your old ogg files.

Yes, I know that. That's not the issue. The issue would be that my "old ogg files" wouldn't be encoded with the higher quality that I would gain as the format advances. So why waste my time now when I could benefit more in the future?

quoted 3 lines Basically 1.0 will just be a relatively arbitrary

> Basically 1.0 will just be a relatively arbitrary > point when they decide > the quality is "good enough".

I'm not holding 1.0 as a quality mildstone. I didn't explain myself well. I am not "waiting around for Ogg to get better", but rather, I have just archived my audio collection and am happy enough for now, so I have no reason to use anything other than MP3. I could just start using MPC, but I hate ID3v2 enough as it is to have to go back to ID3v1, not to mention give up on my usual tagging tools because of it. Recently I've become interested in learning to program, so I have other priorities. What I meant about waiting a couple of years was this: In a couple of years, I may consider re-archiving my CD collection, in which case I am hoping that Ogg has by then surpassed other formats in quality, or that MPC has adopted a better tagging format, or that a new even better format will have come along.

quoted 6 lines So... if you don't think the quality is good enough,

> So... if you don't think the quality is good enough, > I can understand not > wanting to use it, but don't hold off just because > you think it's not > "finalized" yet. For most purposes of that word, it > is finalized.

For the purpose which I meant, it is not. IE, the format has not reached a quality level that would justify abandoning MP3. MPC is very attractive, but I'd rather wait a year or two to see if Ogg can surpass it, to benefit from the Open Source and superior tagging capabilities. And maybe by then I can help code some utilities for myself to deal with the ripping/encoding/tagging/cataloging process of whatever format I choose. I guess I'm just not an early adopter. .adam __________________________________________________ Do You Yahoo!? Great stuff seeking new owners in Yahoo! Auctions! http://auctions.yahoo.com --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: idm-unsubscribe@hyperreal.org For additional commands, e-mail: idm-help@hyperreal.org

quoted 14 lines -----Original Message-----

> -----Original Message----- > From: Adam Piontek [mailto:adam@damek.org] > Sent: 31 January 2002 23:11 > To: Inconvenient Dark Matter > Subject: Re: [idm] VBR vs fixed rate ripping > > > a few more of my opinions :P > > > very nice! i have been reading about lossless codecs and file > > mp3, ogg, and mpc are all lossy > flac, monkey's audio, rkau, etc are lossless >

Yup

quoted 8 lines lossless is attractive for quality - you know the quality is tops because

> lossless is attractive for quality - you know the quality is tops because > it's lossless! but the best compression you will get is ~50%, which is > horrible if you're backing up CDs. I mean, you want to back up your audio > in good quality, but you'll basically need half as many CD-Rs to store as > many CDs as you own (50% compression = ~2 albums per disc, right?). so > physical storage space becomes a big concern. If you have a giant HD, > great, but if your HD gets trashed, you have to rip & encode them > all again.

Yep again ;) I've kept some CDs in monkey format but all of my CDs are in MPC at varying quality levels.. -xtreme for stuff that I don't love too much (about 200k/s) and "-insane -nmt 32 -tmn 16" or something like that for my favourites.. bringing it in at about 300k/s ... its perhaps a little overkill but I've got the hdd space at the moment and I think harddrives will grow faster than my CD collection :)

quoted 7 lines I suppose, once backed up, you don't have to rip again, you can just keep

> > I suppose, once backed up, you don't have to rip again, you can just keep > decompressing the lossless audio packs whenever you need to. I own about > 800 CDs, which even in CaseLogic ProSleeves take up four of the CaseLogic > storage cabinets (which hold about 200 cds in sleeves). I shudder at the > thought of getting two more cabinets just to store my backups, when CD-Rs > full of MP3s can fit in a much, much smaller space...

digital music beyond stuff you buy is only really for putting on a harddisk in my opinion.. I have a 8ft shelf above my bed with all my CDs on it, or I have a remote control and a jukebox server I've ported across to mpc as well as mp3.. from my bed at night with my headphones on I can flick through all 500 albums, or just have it take me on a random ride through them all using the remote and in total darkness.. this is what its about :) for me anyways .. if anyones interested in the software to do that you'll need linux.. but you can download the source if this isn't a problem from my webpage http://www.jimtreats.fsnet.co.uk ... I've got voice synthesis integrated into my version at home so I can enquire what track is currently being played (when I'm having the afore mentioned late night sleepy listenings)

quoted 7 lines lossless yet... many of us are tied to the mp3 format for more reasons

> > > lossless yet... many of us are tied to the mp3 format for more reasons > > than portable players. hopefully it will be possible sooner than anyone > > The thing about MPC/MpegPlus/MusePack is that, while it certainly has the > best quality, it's gone backwards for ID tagging capability. It only uses > ID3v1, IIRC. I need more than this!

Why do you need more.. sure about 1% of my tracks (5000) have their details shortened cause it can't fit.. I agree this is a pain... but apart from getting that lengthed thats all I'd want.. I don't want lyrics, images, videos, or biographies bloating up my files.. I'll have that seperate thanks.. Ogg isn't finalized yet,

quoted 6 lines and the sound

> and the sound > quality can only get better, and it has so much potential for > tagging! It's > an open ended system, so you can use whatever you need (label tag, catalog > tag, multiple performers for band/orchestra members, 'version' tag for > remixes, etc...)

Sure ogg is an upcoming star and is fully open source but its soooooooooooo slow at the moment and still doesn't sound up to MPC which isn't finalised either.. and is due to get stream8 this year which will further improve its quality and performance.

quoted 7 lines The only reason I haven't switched to anything other than mp3 yet is that

> > The only reason I haven't switched to anything other than mp3 yet is that > little bit about Ogg not being finalized - when they get past 1.0, I may > re-archive my music collection in a couple years. Who knows, > maybe by then > something better will come along. For now, MP3 serves its purpose "good > enough"

Sure mp3 ain't bad but I've enjoyed moving across.. when we all have terrabyte hdds I'll be reencoding one last time to lossless.. so that in the future when a disc stops playing due to scratches I don't have to buy it again

quoted 12 lines why is this on the idm list? perhaps the community is tied to mp3 more

> > > why is this on the idm list? perhaps the community is tied to mp3 more > > well, electronic music in general has more affinity for digital music than > most other types of music, and i think on the idm list in particular there > are a lot of people on low budgets who like to be able to try the music > before we buy it - especially when the styles vary so much, you never know > what you're going to get when everybody's talking about a new artist! > > .adam > >

sure I'm all for that and I love the scene, both music and codec.. in fact I'm sure my love of electronic music is spawned from the enjoyment of computer game music over the years.. its made me accept that music of that type is perfectly valid.. something that older generations sometimes cannot get over... Turrican 2's music for example on the Amiga.. classic :) Jim

quoted 6 lines ---------------------------------------------------------------------

> > --------------------------------------------------------------------- > To unsubscribe, e-mail: idm-unsubscribe@hyperreal.org > For additional commands, e-mail: idm-help@hyperreal.org > >

--------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: idm-unsubscribe@hyperreal.org For additional commands, e-mail: idm-help@hyperreal.org

On Thu, 31 Jan 2002, Adam Piontek wrote:

quoted 5 lines I mean, you want to back up your audio in good quality, but you'll

> I mean, you want to back up your audio in good quality, but you'll > basically need half as many CD-Rs to store as many CDs as you own (50% > compression = ~2 albums per disc, right?). so physical storage space > becomes a big concern. If you have a giant HD, great, but if your HD > gets trashed, you have to rip & encode them all again.

Oh, another thing. You know, for less than the cost of all those CDRs, you could also probably get 3 100GB hard drives and do a software level 5 RAID (giving you 300GB... enough for about 1200 average-sized CDs at 50% compression), so that even if one drive goes bad, you don't lose any data, and you can just replace it. Maybe too much effort for you, but something to consider if you're serious about making high-quality backups... --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: idm-unsubscribe@hyperreal.org For additional commands, e-mail: idm-help@hyperreal.org

--- No one in particular <idm@cocksalad.com> wrote:

quoted 4 lines On Thu, 31 Jan 2002, Adam Piontek wrote:

> On Thu, 31 Jan 2002, Adam Piontek wrote: > You know, for less than the cost of all those CDRs, > you could also > probably get 3 100GB hard drives and do a software

ok, stop right there. 200 80-minute CDrs at $.30 each (cdrexpress.com) = $60.00. that's also about 140 GB. according to pricewatch, 100gb EIDE HD = $193. no contest. i already have one of those HDs, and it's very nice, of course, but much more useful for lossy than lossless. ===== .Adam http://www.damek.org/ __________________________________________________ Do You Yahoo!? Great stuff seeking new owners in Yahoo! Auctions! http://auctions.yahoo.com --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: idm-unsubscribe@hyperreal.org For additional commands, e-mail: idm-help@hyperreal.org

--- James R Bamford <jim@jimtreats.com> wrote:

quoted 5 lines digital music beyond stuff you buy is only really

> digital music beyond stuff you buy is only really > for putting on a harddisk > in my opinion.. I have a 8ft shelf above my bed with > all my CDs on it, or I > have a remote control and a jukebox server I've

well, I listen to my digital music off my hard drive, but I don't want to recopy everything so I'm sure as heck gonna have the digital stuff backed up - which has to be stored, which for a 24 year old in an apartment is an issue!

quoted 1 line night sleepy listenings)

> night sleepy listenings)

my gf wouldn't like that :P i always listen to my stuff while i'm out and about; not at home much. different lifestyles lead to different priorities - i think that can pretty much sum up our differences of opinions :)

quoted 10 lines capability. It only uses

> capability. It only uses > > ID3v1, IIRC. I need more than this! > > Why do you need more.. sure about 1% of my tracks > (5000) have their details > shortened cause it can't fit.. I agree this is a > pain... but apart from > getting that lengthed thats all I'd want.. I don't > want lyrics, images, > videos, or biographies bloating up my files.. I'll

I don't need any of that period. Just the music, and identifying information. But a big part of that for me, especially for this-listy music is the label and catalog number. having that in addition to the usual stuff makes my mp3 collection itself the database of my music collection...

quoted 4 lines Sure ogg is an upcoming star and is fully open

> Sure ogg is an upcoming star and is fully open > source but its soooooooooooo > slow at the moment and still doesn't sound up to MPC > which isn't finalised either..

which kinda gets at the nub for me which is that MP3 *is* basically finalized and has a track record and supporting software and tons of people using it ... no incentive to switch to anything yet, given my lifestyle and a host of other things. So basically, I agree with you - MPC is the winner, the crown, as far as the audio itself goes, for lossy compression. It's kinda like gif vs jpg vs tiff vs bmp vs ... so many choices, all good for certain situations, and all intercompatible as long as you have good software. In fact, "everyone else uses MP3" isn't even an argument when you look at it this way. Who cares if your friend starts using MPC? When they're all built into WinAmp (inevitible) or some other common player, it doesn't matter if you have a mixed format music collection... So maybe I should just give in and start using MPC :P .adam __________________________________________________ Do You Yahoo!? Great stuff seeking new owners in Yahoo! Auctions! http://auctions.yahoo.com --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: idm-unsubscribe@hyperreal.org For additional commands, e-mail: idm-help@hyperreal.org

quoted 16 lines I mean, you want to back up your audio in good quality, but you'll

> > I mean, you want to back up your audio in good quality, but you'll > > basically need half as many CD-Rs to store as many CDs as you own (50% > > compression = ~2 albums per disc, right?). so physical storage space > > becomes a big concern. If you have a giant HD, great, but if your HD > > gets trashed, you have to rip & encode them all again. > > Oh, another thing. > > You know, for less than the cost of all those CDRs, you could also > probably get 3 100GB hard drives and do a software level 5 RAID (giving > you 300GB... enough for about 1200 average-sized CDs at 50% compression), > so that even if one drive goes bad, you don't lose any data, and you can > just replace it. > > Maybe too much effort for you, but something to consider if you're serious > about making high-quality backups...

No, you'd only have 200 gigs, since the equivalent of one of the drives goes to parity. --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: idm-unsubscribe@hyperreal.org For additional commands, e-mail: idm-help@hyperreal.org

On Thu, 31 Jan 2002, Andrew Hime wrote:

quoted 2 lines No, you'd only have 200 gigs, since the equivalent of one of the drives goes

> No, you'd only have 200 gigs, since the equivalent of one of the drives goes > to parity.

You're right, of course. Typo.

quoted 4 lines ok, stop right there. 200 80-minute CDrs at $.30 each

> ok, stop right there. 200 80-minute CDrs at $.30 each > (cdrexpress.com) = $60.00. that's also about 140 GB. > > according to pricewatch, 100gb EIDE HD = $193.

You, too, are showing me up to be an idiot here. I thought you could get them for half that And I never buy CDRs in bulk, so I didn't know they were that cheap either. I'll do more research before I post next time. (Oh, who am I kidding.) Apologies, --me --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: idm-unsubscribe@hyperreal.org For additional commands, e-mail: idm-help@hyperreal.org

"excm. prin. fuminaro konoye" wrote:

quoted 9 lines why is this on the idm list? perhaps the community is tied to mp3 more

> > > why is this on the idm list? perhaps the community is tied to mp3 more > than anyone would like... all though it's not all bad... i recall > reading that the very first kid 606 remix projects with his pals were > mostly done using laptops and mp3's, and i'm sure this is only one > example out of many... can anyone fill in the details on that kid 606 > story? >

mp3 = 21st century audio samizdat -- John von Seggern Digital Cutup Lounge http://www.digitalcutuplounge.com --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: idm-unsubscribe@hyperreal.org For additional commands, e-mail: idm-help@hyperreal.org