Jump to content
Computer Audiophile

iansen

  • Content count

    40
  • Joined

  • Last visited

About iansen

  • Rank
    Freshman Member
  1. Article: CA Goes To Dynaudio In Denmark

    As a responsible parent I must express my shock and outrage at the fact that your five year old daughter is listening to the Bill Evans Trio. Needless to say, my 14 month old daughter is now being fed a strict diet of Aphex Twin for breakfast, Thelonius Monk for lunch and Delia Derbyshire for supper.
  2. Thanks tmoomh for the link. Yes, I am aware of the developer's recommendations. I ws just wondering if any BitPerfect users on this forum had any further recommendations/ opinions.
  3. Dynamic Range Compression Equivalent In Video

    True. Indeed over here in London, England if you walk into any TV showroom you are confronted with a barrage of screens - all with the brightness and colour turned up - vying for your attention. Often, the screens are displaying animations or CGI-heavy films which not only accentuate and exaggerate said brightness and colour but also prevent the viewer from making any proper assesment of colour accuracy. Placing my iPhone5 against my Pioneer Kuro Plasma Screen: and the colours on my phone appear vivid and enticing, and my television appears dull and drab in comparison. It's only when I move my eyes away from the screens and look at a tree through my window that I realise which of the screens is a more accurate representation of the real world.
  4. Chord 2Qute

    Just got the 2Qute. And am thinking of getting the Yggy. Jimmypowder: any further thoughts on these two DACs one month on?
  5. Chord 2Qute

    Come on Ted-B! We're still waiting....
  6. Any audiophiles here into Electronica

    And of course Detroit's Juan Atkins aka Model 500 collaborating with Berlin's Mark Ernest's (one half of Basic Channel) remixed by Chilean minimalist Ricardo Villalobos... over 45 minutes...
  7. Any audiophiles here into Electronica

    [video=youtube;Fi3p-ts_Te0]https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Fi3p-ts_Te0
  8. Any audiophiles here into Electronica

    Most audio stores seem to share your assumption. I really don't understand why though. As Electronic Music fans we listen to the complete sound spectrum, rather than specific, favoured instruments. And, in my experience, the makers of electronica are deep into sound: in using electronics to make sound and also to reproduce it. That's why I always take one of Aphex Twin's sound engineers with me when I go to audition equipment! Most played this year? Aphex Twin's Computer Controlled Acoustic Instruments Part 2 Some of the introverted, melancholic, glacial, minimalism of the recent sino-grime revival: Visionist's I'm Fine Part 1 and I'm Fine Part 2 Fatima Al Qadiri's Asiatisch album on Hyperdub (the same label as Burial)
  9. The Takacs have technique. And the sound quality of the recordings are very good. The interplay between the performers is clear. For some (Gramophone Magazine included) the Busch Quartet's interpretations from the 1920s are the gold standard. Unfortunately, the sound quality can only be described as "historical" at best. I think most downloads have been recorded off Shellac! If you can handle the "screechy" high end and the pitch wavering check them out.
  10. My Top10 Jazz Covers Of Pop Songs

    Likewise. And you've just got another subscriber to your blog...
  11. Yes, that is how I remember it working. There's another interesting article here by Kirk McElhern aka "The iTunes Guy" at Macworld: How iTunes Match and Apple Music work together | Macworld Of course, my problem is that I have neither an iTunes Match account nor an Apple Music account, and am (almost) certain that I did not have either in the past. Scott was kind enough to respond to an email that I sent to Macworld, and I have provided him with all the details. I am now closely watching his personal blog and iTunes forum: Kirkville | Writings about Macs, music and more by Kirk McElhearn Kirk's iTunes Forum So, let's see...
  12. Mwheelerk and Wgscott: I very much appreciate how you are trying to help me out here... OK, Note 1: (As suggested by Wgscott)…I copied the tracks of the compilation album onto my desktop, and deleted the folder containing the compilation out of my iTunes Music folder (on my hard disc) and deleted the details of the album from within the iTunes user interface. I then re-imported the album (to see if it made any difference). That is why you will see on the screenshots that the compilation album now has as its date created as 23/11/2015. Note 2: In the UK dates are arranged as day/month/year Screenshot 1: the single track that has been replaced from a compilation ripped from CD and is now “Purchased AAC” Screenshot 2: an example of one of other tracks on the compilation that remains as “Apple Lossless” Screenshot 3: the same track from the normal (non-compilation) album by the same band, which was purchase off iTunes and showing the track as “Purchased AAC” Screen1 Screen2 Screen3
  13. We don't need no stinking hi-rez

    Back to the original post. I think the article is an interesting polemic… but ultimately flawed. The writer states: Is this even factually correct? For example: Did Apple create the hardware - a small silver hand held box (let’s call it the “iPod”) - and then think of the idea of writing some software for it? So the silver box could download and play music? Do we, as consumers, buy hardware and then consider the software? Or do we buy hardware on the basis of which software we can (actually or potentially) run on it? The title of the piece is 12 reasons why hi-res audio will never go mainstream. In my opinion, if the article had as its title 12 reasons why hi-res audio is currently not mainstream, then I would tend to agree with it. But "never" is a very strong word. Points such as “1. The library is too small” and that there are “8. No big backers” refer only to the current position. As with all new formats (e.g. vhs, cd, blue-ray) libraries can and do increase exponentially over time. Big backers (in any area, not just music) can and do get together at any time, and can and do create new standards. Just because they haven't today does not mean they won't tomorrow. As for “7. Mastering sucks”: this is like saying that just because the majority of black and white 1950s TV programs were of poor artistic merit, then colour TV was never going to be come along and be accepted. Similarly (as discussed elsewhere on this site) there is an argument that dynamic range compression could be considered a contemporary aesthetic choice for certain pop music producers, rather than a permanent default position for music production for eternity (or even for the next 18 months). As for “8.Your Room Matters More”: this is akin to saying that people won’t buy a camera with a higher pixel count because they don’t have a monitor to view it on. The writer appears to think that just because an emerging technology is currently in a non-dominant position then it will remain there. In this day and age, I consider that position as utterly ridiculous. The same article with the same basic points could have been written in the 1970s about synthesizers or home computers. in the 1970s synthesizers and home computers cost more than cars and houses. Look at us now. What is high-res today is low-res tomorrow.
×