|
|
Post by Anonymous on Oct 31, 2002 18:47:47 GMT -5
haha that's the cutest thing i've ever seen.
|
|
|
|
Post by Mr. Danger on Oct 31, 2002 21:59:15 GMT -5
Sounds good to me too! That Record has some ballz!
|
|
|
|
Post by Anonymous on Nov 1, 2002 13:42:55 GMT -5
hornak when you get home i'm going to blindfold you and you can test whether you're smelling a cdr or a cdrw
DONTTURNYOURBACKONMESCAR
|
|
|
|
Post by Ahmed Johnson on Nov 1, 2002 22:08:55 GMT -5
The true challenge was not conducted yet ... although it was proven that the record had a little more "ballzier" rawer sound (which wasn't the dispute) ... the real challenge is this:
Tivo says that you can listen to a cd and it sounds totally like shit, but then when you pop on the record it sounds money. This I don't believe, and will be decided with the Sound Challenge 2k2!
TAKEITTOTHEHOLE
|
|
|
|
Post by Steve All-Star on Nov 1, 2002 22:41:18 GMT -5
The challenge, dear Ahmed Johnson, was that record sounds more rockin' than a CD. A CD sounds too thin and perfect. A record sounds badass and rockin', like the band is right in front of you with all amps and drums turned up, kickin' ass. BOOM!
RATIONALEFEDERALES
-Jizz
|
|
|
|
Post by Mr. Danger on Nov 2, 2002 1:12:25 GMT -5
I'm going to end this right now! (turns off the TV)
shwoo that feels better.
Anyway your all a bunch of morons.
Yes a record the first few times played will sound better than a cd. Because that is analog witch is original sound but a cd is digital sound and it only takes a certain rate of analog.
So no information is lost on a record but is on a cd. The pluses of cds is that they are smaller. More accessable today. Plus if you take a old record and make it digital and enhance it you can make it sound brand new.
another thing CD's keep the sound quality longer than records. Records get warn out while even if a cd gets scached up you can still transfer it to a new cd and your set. (or just buffer that cd). Records are alot harder to replace.
Also records get hising and scratching noises that cd's do not have.
Thanks for your time children.
|
|
|
|
Post by T-Rex on Nov 2, 2002 2:17:42 GMT -5
was that actually hornak posting that?
|
|
|
|
Post by Ahmed Johnson on Nov 2, 2002 3:13:48 GMT -5
Just a little addition to what dange posted:
In the studio if they are recording onto reel2reel then to achieve the best most original sound you would need to listen to that. All the transfers are going to be less in quality (regardless of format).
If you record it digitally it can go right on the old harddrive and well it will still loose quality in the transfer, but it seems you wouldn't loose as much from the harddrive to a cd.
I can go into the analog/digital compare-contrast if you'd like.
STONECOLDOUTSIDE
|
|
|
|
Post by Steve All-Star on Nov 2, 2002 3:34:30 GMT -5
Most vinyl is mastered separately from CD mixes, as in being sent to a "vinyl-only" mastering house. There it is transferred from reel-to-reel directly to metal, then it is shipped off to the pressing plant. This is why records have a separate sound quality than CD's. I will continue to extoll records at every turn.
Game, set, match.... Jizzler!
BJORNBORGOROTH
-Jizz
|
|
|
|
Post by Anonymous on Nov 2, 2002 19:00:47 GMT -5
those technical posts look like google search posts so i'll add mine along w/my twelve cents "Original sound is analog by definition" Therefore a CD/DVD would have to convert back to analog thru the amp in order to be heard. Whereas there is no conversion for the raw analog type. The waveform: A "digital recording is not capturing the complete sound wave" which means "...the waveforms from a vinyl recording can be much more accurate, and that can be heard in the richness of the sound" So infact records in all technicallity do sound better due to the raw data versus the rate at which digital copies are produced. In any case, CD/DVD's are smaller and more efficient. Where as good ol records can emit noise or static from a speckle of dust. Finally, he who gets rid of all of his CD's so he can just have records can be viewed as a "homosexual". ho·mo·sex·u·al (hm-sksh-l, -m-) adj. Of, relating to, or having a sexual orientation to persons of the same sex. See tivo, steve-o, stephanie |
|
|
|
Post by T-Rex on Nov 2, 2002 20:30:25 GMT -5
that's wild, i always thought that DVD's are supposed to have the best sound
|
|
|
|
Post by Mr. Danger on Nov 3, 2002 1:14:14 GMT -5
yeah nick i did learn that stuff from google searches... but not recent ones. I get bored so I look up stuff that I wonder how it works. I looked up stuff about how sound was recorded a few months ago. The Internet is not just a free porno store its also free knowlege w00t. (for those who dont know it).
Now that i think about it i think i read that exact page that nick got that stuff from durring that time... w00t =]
IMAGIN_A_WORLD_WITHOUT_SHARED_KNOWLEDGE_EVERONE_WOULD_BE_MORONS!
|
|
|
|
Post by Ahmed Johnson on Nov 3, 2002 2:17:16 GMT -5
It all depends on what the sample rate is to determine how much sound is actually lost (in digital that is). At 44k there is no real notice in the sound, however if you get lower samples (say 22k or the dreaded 9k) then your looking at some pretty poor sound.
I didn't check out the google sound info but we did learn about it in some of my classes.
BETTEROFFAhmed JohnsonEAD
|
|
|
|
Post by Mr. Danger on Nov 3, 2002 23:44:37 GMT -5
you still talking?
|
|
