neveronfriday

Saw an interesting article in Maximum PC, where they performed a blind listening test comparing 128 to 256, using both the Apple earbuds and $400 headphones. The quality of the headphones mattered far more than the encoding rate. At the risk of putting my tech ignorance on public display, I'm bringing this back up to see if I can get some feedback. I just did a little experiment myself, and the result seems to match up with the aforementioned Maximum PC test. After nearly filling up my first iPod with downloads, curiosities, selected videos from Youtube, and music from a variety of genres other than jazz (generally everything BUT the music I love the most- all the classic jazz in my CD collection), I opted to buy another iPod and start ripping my jazz CD's so that I'll be more inclined to actually listen to them again. I know, I know. Everybody's got their own way of surviving in this cruel world. So anyway, with the price having dropped drastically since my original ipod purchase, I just bought another 160 GB model, and began pondering whether I can actually get most (all?) of my roughly 2600 CD's onto this thing. Apple's general guideline suggests 30,000 songs (4 min. per song; encoded at 128 kbps). Okay, so the first thing I realized is that I've never bothered to change the default (128 kbps mono, 256 kbps stereo) setting in iTunes. Oddly enough, one of the first CD's I've just experimented with ("Presenting Cannonball Adderley", on Savoy/Denon) is a mono recording, but iTunes is telling me that it was in fact encoded at 256 (and indicates "stereo") when used the 256 setting. Anyway, that's not what's puzzling me. I ripped "Kind Of Blue" three times, at 128, 256, and also in lossless. After ripping to iTunes, I synched all three versions to my new iPod. I listened carefully to all three in iTunes (using two different pairs of earbuds), and I literally could not detect any difference in sound quality- even playing the same tune in the 128 version followed immediately by the same tune in lossless. I tried the same experiment on the iPod, and the result was the same. The sound quality differs considerably in terms of comparing the earbud sound (and I already knew that), but comparing the three different bit rates on the same earbuds leaves me puzzled. Could there be some technical factor here that I'm overlooking? At any rate, I'm not very picky about sound quality anyway, and I'm leaning toward going with 128 kbps and maximizing my storage space, but if there's something I'm overlooking here and I can figure out how to get improved sound via lossless, I might rip some discs at that higher quality rate. Btw, I understand that a pair of high quality headphones might make me see (hear) things differently, but I'm not sure about that option yet, for a variety of reasons which I'll set aside for now. Interested in hearing about the experiences and points of view of some of our ipod veterans... Thanks. JimR, let me pull a quick brownie (Yo! Guy!) here and appear for a single post. Don't make the same mistake(s) I made if you are considering ripping your entire collection. My suggestion, very briefly (and it comes from years of having done things wrong) outlined below, does demand more work and you will probably have to invest into at least (!) two external HDs (1TB * 2): Rip all your CDs to FLAC, a lossless format (you'll find tons of info around the Net on how to do that). I use EAC for that (difficult to set up perfectly, but also lots of guides available), but there are lots of other programs. I'm sure people here can advise you. Why? Without wanting to start a discussion on the various formats here, FLAC is a universally accepted lossless format which is even supported by many mobile players, streaming servers, etc. (increasingly so). What's the benefit? It's future-proof! Plus (and that's the beauty of it all): Once you have all of your CDs ripped to FLAC and stored somewhere, you can a) burn a CD from a rip at any time you please (I use Burrrn, the simplest of programs), b) transcode your FLAC rip into any format any time you like (and as many times as you like), c) and, because of the huge following of that format, you'll probably be able to transcode to any other future format as well. In addition, if you buy yourself some machine (streaming clients, etc.) in the future, you can just hit your rips again and generate anything you need from those (much, MUCH quicker and basically an automated process if set up properly). Downside: a) FLACS are a lot bigger than most other formats. Example: The Japanese "Chet Baker: Chet (+1)" (51 minutes, 10 tracks) eats 259 MB of HD space! b) You need external storage solutions (I use 1TB USB HDs, one set for rips and another set for backups) ... which have come down considerably in price these past months (mine cost below $100 each and I bought one every two months for a while, spreading out the costs). c) You need extra time for i) ripping to flac and ii) converting to another format (and reading up on everything). With a smart setup (I use a player called foobar to convert FLAC files to just about anything), you can transcode one CD into, say, 320 kbps MP3s in about a minute (or two) and have foobar tag your stuff properly. Summary: More reading, work (and more cash) at first, pure pleasure thereafter. I'm a totally happy camper today with my collection (10.000+) securely ripped (and completely "mirrored" once on an equal number of drives) and am absolutely sure I won't have to do all of that work again (unless my house burns down [i do keep my backups elsewhere and check them once in a while, so even that won't kill me]). Believe me, if you want your entire collection digitalized, this is the only sensible way of doing it, IMHO. Over and ... out again.

Far too dangerous in that world of ours, as you should know.

Hm. I have to support John all the way here, not only because we are friends and have been for quite a while (thanks to this board by the way), but also because he has given voice to my exact thoughts as well. I've been away for a few days and have only now read through all of this and I don't think I have anything to say aside from replicating what John an Flurin have said again ... no real point to that. I'd like to add this though: When I posted that one-liner upon which Jim announced the closing down of this board, I meant what I said. In all this subsequent euphoria re the saving of this board, that one important point got a bit buried. Before the shmooze fest going on at the moment, posting had slowed to a crawl around here. Some people said that it was because everything had been talked to death, others assumed that it was just a slow month, etc. My theory is that it happened because lots of people left or lots of people withdrew. There was a time when I could open one of those "another 100.000 posts" threads ever so often, now it will seemingly take another decade to reach another milestone. Of course, the number of posts (especially those with smileys, double-smileys and triple smileys) do not the quality of a board make, but for months (not weeks) things had slowed down majorly that a visit once a week (for me) was enough to check on the worthwhile stuff. I can only speak for myself, but I only dropped by here to read once in a while and did not really feel like posting anything. There were just too many derailed threats, too many which seemed more like an ego display for some and a dump-on for others. No fun. The latter is what killed it for me and, despite all these "we saved the BigO" posts, I don't really see any change in what I personally perceived to be wrong with this board lately. I'm far past wanting to point fingers or taking single individuals to task (I myself could be taken to task for, for example, not contributing to tip the scales, and I'm well aware of that), but the fact remains that if things continue to develop the way they have been developing these past two or three years, slowly and gradually, you simply won't have many of the posters around that once made this a fun and highly communicative site. I'm also aware of the fact that many of those who seemingly do not understand what some of us "complainers" are getting at are telling us to just drop it or leave, because we're being a nuisance (that is the definite feel I get from this thread) and I guess many of the more vocal opposition and those from the silent rows in the back will just do that, drop it or leave. We all know that both the leaving here and the dropping of issues and going quiet has already been taking place on a major scale these past weeks and months and I get the definite feel that for many others that is a necessary evil to "endure" for keeping things going the way they always have (they haven't really always been going that way now, have they?). My suggestion is simple. We end the discussion right here, because this thread clearly shows that nothing can be gotten from it and those who object leave and join those elsewhere who have already. It's really a simple solution. And it saves Jim the trouble of having to put up with this shite.

I really hope everybody won't proceed as they've always been doing. Some things have been going in the wrong direction for some time - negatativity, mudslinging etc. - and I know I'm not alone in thinking that this place is not quite as healthy as a few years ago. Since self-moderation tends to get weaker when you think you "know" your fellow forum members, the results are not always very civilized, and ultimately not for the best if you want to have a friendly atmosphere which will welcome new members. I totally agree with that and would add that the slowing down of this board (not technically, but post-and content-wise) and the absence of some former regulars or the disappearence of others into the "off" of this board is also directly related to these issues. I think they need to be addressed at some point.

The other side of what? Come to the light, Brownie & MG!!! Count me out! [...] but let's face it, I won't be part of next year's activities. I'll probably be lurking in from time to time ande enjoy the posts from a distance. I have lots of plans (personal, family, plus various passions) for the year 2008 and the following years and aim to concentrate on those. [...] Now, that is a real pity ... but perfectly understandable. I'm already now planning a trip to Paris for next year and if you are around, perhaps we could sample some fine wines somewhere. That would be grand. In my eyes, you've always been the most level-headed and all around positive regular around here and I don't think I'm the only one who would say that. Also, many of your posts pointed me towards and turned me on to more music I like and I will sorely miss your contributions. Volkher P.S.: ... and thanks for completing my JiP collection with that sampler which surprisingly showed up on my doorstep one day. It was a very nice gesture and was and is still appreciated very much. I know I'm still missing an item or two, but what I wanted I now have and both gloat over it and listen to it constantly. Thanks again, also for all the other help and information over these past years!

Proof ... Organissimo in south-western Germany, unfortunately the only copies I'm aware of in the area.

I bought both albums, thrice (twice as presents).

This might be old, don't know, but it was new to me. Something to file away for future use.

No chance of keeping it here or elsewhere? Idea: Move it/keep it here and ... put some community code into place; ... get ten respected members to police it; ... figure out a way of financing (larger parts of) it. Interested/ideas? Post here. P.S.: The other thread is locked and what I wanted to post as a response there I'll send to Jim as a PM later this week.

The tense is off. I'd use past tense here.

That would be "sexually transmitted diseases", right?

Man, they're really recycling that series. Gotta update my list.

Count me in!

I'm sorry, but I totally disagree. This is one of Bellson's weaker outings. I find it rhythmically bland/boring. Sorry. Edit: This comes from a drummer who appreciates lots of Bellson stuff. Just not this.

All these points just lead to the conclusion that there is definite need for an "open source" project to which people can contribute freely. If needed. that project group would also have to fight off copyright infringement cases brought to court by people who claim the have a copyright although they don't. I have no idea how easy/difficult that might be in one country/various countries. Technically, it should be more than easy to pull off, but are there any people who have the stamina to do so? Probably not.

I'll raise you by one you can keep erect for 5 days straight. How about that? Ha!

a) He did. b) If there ever was a guy I would have liked to throw darts at, it was him. Besides that, I would agree with much of what has been said about the Who, but I mainly wanted to second, third or whatever the Kinks recommendations. IMO music didn't come much better than on those early albums, my faves being Face to Face and, especially, the Village Green one. I still think Something Else is a shaky affair, still quite good though. Ray Davies had brains, to boot, and that's probably why the Village Green Preservation Society did quite poorly in comparison to what the Beatles and the Stones had on offer. It stood the test of time and even survived the '68 turmoils. Great album!

Yeah, I remember reading that WSJ article. Yeah, right.

Reading and grasping a post before responding to it might also be regarded as a measure of intelligence. I wondered if vol. 8 was as sloppy as the previous volumes have been--that is an observation followed by a question, not a chronic complaint. Man, relax, I didn't even read your post. I was referring to complaints that pop up all over the place regularly. Ja, så må du undskylde! "Den man elsker tugter man."

Reading and grasping a post before responding to it might also be regarded as a measure of intelligence. I wondered if vol. 8 was as sloppy as the previous volumes have been--that is an observation followed by a question, not a chronic complaint. Man, relax, I didn't even read your post. I was referring to complaints that pop up all over the place regularly.

I would consider this to be a much more intelligent thing to do than just complaining about it everytime the program is mentioned.

Yeah, I've been over there and read most of it. One I liked was that one from a producing/directing gig in Paris: "I had four cameras and was screaming half the time at the guys because they couldn't hear through the intercoms as it was so loud. I even had a hand-held Éclair they outfitted me with. All I did was shoot ALL THE CLOSE-UPS like I knew when Johnny Hodges was going to stand up and solo, so I hit him with an ECU and that's all I did for 3 days. Mr. ECU and glad-handing all the performers, half of whom I already knew, and half of whom looked at me like I was dirt, especially Monk, but when Oscar told him who I was in music, he at least was civil to me and nodded when I said some things, like "Play it towards us when you can!" Of course he didn't." Made me laugh. Or this title (interesting): "BASSEY BITCH" Quite a quirky collection of remeniscenses.

Yeah, I was wondering the same. Up and left? Do you think I was kidding about the menders? Nope. I was wondering about the "never came back" part.

Yeah, I was wondering the same. Up and left?