Akapod

I started looking into this a while ago, but didn't get very far. The best source of hackintosh info I found was Tonymacx86. If you do continue, please document your efforts and share with us. Good luck.

Last year, I cobbled together a draft of a guide to setting up a media server on a Mac Mini. It's intended to reflect what the consensus is around here, at least as to the basic issues. I've now revised the guide (with the help of a couple of folk here at CA) and have included a number of screenshots as well, which I hope people will find helpful. <p><a href="/monthly_2013_02/Guide.png.2d0a089b70f2c81cd392dac7307d3350.png" class="ipsAttachLink ipsAttachLink_image"><img data-fileid="28141" src="/monthly_2013_02/Guide.png.2d0a089b70f2c81cd392dac7307d3350.png" class="ipsImage ipsImage_thumbnailed" alt=""></a></p> It's free, and it's available at the iTunes Bookstore.<p><a href="/monthly_2013_02/Guide.png.84978627df852e7e97b0620e5bd28860.png" class="ipsAttachLink ipsAttachLink_image"><img data-fileid="28391" src="/monthly_2013_02/Guide.png.84978627df852e7e97b0620e5bd28860.png" class="ipsImage ipsImage_thumbnailed" alt=""></a></p>

I'm now a paid subscriber. Like several others who posted here, I'm not a fan of the subscription model for CA. But I finally decided to view it as a request for donations, and I'm happy to oblige. Now ... if we can get that subscriber tag to disappear ....

It's not just the lowest frequencies. The A used for tuning -- the one that's six notes up from middle C on a piano -- is 440 hZ, which (according to my questionable math) results in a wavelength about 76 centimeters long.

I agree with bdiament -- not that he needs it -- but I may have a simpler experiment which you can do from the comfort of your listening chaise lounge/couch/bean bag chair. Put on any music which includes a bass part -- electric or the old-fashioned double-bass (i.e., not a bass vocal part). Can you identify a speaker or space on the soundstage where the bass appear to be? If so, you've proved that low frequencies -- those under 80 hZ -- are directional. An open E string on a bass vibrates around 41 times a second. To get to 80 hZ, you'd need go up almost an octave, so let's call it a D. The D string is the the third string on bass. For it to play at or above 80 hZ, you'd basically need to turn the bass into a two-stringed instrument. (Yes, you can play high notes on the E and the A, but work with me here.) I think there's a perception that sub-woofers only help with really, really low sounds like pipe organs, tympani and cannon shots. But pretty much every rock, pop and jazz album -- anything using a bass -- tests the limits of even a good speaker -- getting a flat response down to 40 hZ is impressive. Sub-woofers can help.

I learned, though painful experience, not to go mucking around with things on my computer which (a) I don't understand and (b) can't be easily remedied. Yup, had to do a full install of the system and all applications once. Praise be for back-ups.

Sorry -- I've never had the opportunity to use a C.A.P.S. server, so I don't know.

@orgel Thanks for providing some numbers. One of the most frustrating things about addressing the piracy issues is the paucity of good data. I think it's beyond contention that the RIAA is massively fudging its numbers, but we don't know what "massively" means. Putting on my economist's hat, I wondered about the number of albums released each year. If the music industry were getting much less profitable -- or not profitable -- you would expect to see the numbers of releases drop. But that's not the case. According to Digital Music News (and I have no idea who they are), the number of releases has more than doubled since 2000 (which, I will argue, is when Napster took off and piracy started becoming a real problem). Releases have declined since 2008, but the economy's been in the tank since then, so I don't think that's a surprise. I couldn't verify the numbers at SoundScan, which has a supremely unhelpful web site, but this Billboard article backs up several of the numbers used in the graph. Nothing here suggests that musicians are being paid fairly. But I find it hard to square this data with the recording industry's cries of poverty. Whatever is happening, it's not forcing people to stop making albums.

As CA gets a lot of questions from newbies about setting up their first music server, I thought it would be useful to compile a list of answers, which can be found here. (It's a link to Scribd.) If you're a newbie, please let me know if this is helpful or not so much. If you're an ... uh, oldie ... please feellet me know about any errors or to suggest new answers. Thanks. UPDATE: I posted a revised version today. Same link at Scribd.

@wgscott Fair enough. I recognize the appeal to authority as a fallacy. In my defense, I was just trying to figure out a set up for Anti-Anthropogenic Global Warming Audiophile. I would totally check that site out.

@dallasjustice One of the terrific things about this forum is the amount of comity it has. Accusing another member of a hidden agenda goes against that. Also, you might wish to reconsider the benefits of arguing about global warming with a bunch of guys with backgrounds in science and engineering. This may be an issue better raised in Anti-Anthropegenic Global Warming Audiophile, which I believe is a spin-off from Young Earth Audiophile.

Chris: Yes, you can't play New York every night. But Chuck, being based in D.C., would routinely play at venues in Maryland and Virginia, as well as do tours in the south. Again, Chuck never got rich doing this. But it was sustainable at some level, and he was a pretty obscure musician (though one of my favorites).

Sorry -- should have included this below. A while back the London Times ran an article (sorry, link broken) on music revenue, and tossed up this chart and analysis: The most immediate revelation, of course, is that at some point next year revenues from gigs payable to artists will for the first time overtake revenues accrued by labels from sales of recorded music. Why live revenues have grown so stridently is beyond the scope of this article, but our data - compiled from a PRS for Music report and the BPI - make two things clear: one, that the growth in live revenue shows no signs of slowing and two, that live is by far and away the most lucrative section of industry revenue for artists themselves, because they retain such a big percentage of the money from ticket sales.

I have three quibbles with the Trichordist. 1. He makes a big deal about these claims: Recorded music revenue is down 64% since 1999. Per capita spending on music is 47% lower than it was in 1973!! The number of professional musicians has fallen 25% since 2000. Of the 75,000 albums released in 2010 only 2,000 sold more than 5,000 copies. Only 1,000 sold more than 10,000 copies. Without going into details, 10,000 albums is about the point where independent artists begin to go into the black on professional album production, marketing and promotion. But he fails to provide a link to support any of them. Oddly, for the first two, I can. 2. Piracy is a problem, but I think it's over-blown. I cranked some numbers based off a report on the RIAA web site in this post, and it looks like piracy is responsible for somewhere between $400 and $800 million in lost revenue per annum. Unfortunately, the recording industry has lost over 50% of its yearly revenue -- some $7.4 billion -- since 2000. Piracy, according to the industry's own estimates account for around 10% of that. I think there are two other culprits, and neither gets much attention in these discussions. The first is that the number of entertainment options have exploded over the last ten years -- internet, cable, X-box, iPads, Kindles, etc. The second is the iTunes Store. With the iTunes store, music lovers got the option to buy only the good song (or songs) off an album, something which those of us who grew up with LPs and and CDs did not. (Yes, there were 45s, but they sounded like crap, and CD singles were always over-priced). There was a total of one billion units sold in 2000, and a total of 1.7 billion units sold in 2010. That's great! Unfortunately, in 2010, 1.2 billion of those units were downloaded singles. 3. The Trichordist slides over other sources of revenue, such as touring. He is correct to say that most touring was done in support of the release of a new album. The tour was typically supported by the label (recoupable) and was supposed to help break the band (and the album) into new markets. But there are other tours which focus on an established fan base, and which are money-makers. If you're popular in the Northeast, doing a Boston -- Hartford -- New Haven -- New York run makes sense. It probably doesn't make sense to drive to Kansas City, try to get on radio to do some publicity and hope a hundred people buy concert tix. Also, making your own merchandise (t-shirts and caps, plus CDs) adds more revenue. You won't get rich doing these things, but many, many musicians survive by doing this. The late Chuck Brown hadn't recorded an album with a major in thirty years, but he could still pack the old Tramps in New York which, I'll ballpark, could hold 1000 people. At $20 a ticket, it was a pretty good day's work. (Chuck and his eight-piece band would usually drive back to DC after the show.) I have no interest in being an apologist for Emily White (but kudos to her for 'fessing up). But if you're really interested in the state of the music business, I don't think rallying around (against?) the pirate flag is enough.

Dr. Thompson, so good of you to join us.