Come Christmas day, I find somebody selling an Apple IIe with monitor and DuoDisk and a printer for $70 on Facebook Marketplace. Score.
Quoting Spectre to Deepthaw <=-
Come Christmas day, I find somebody selling an Apple IIe with monitor and DuoDisk and a printer for $70 on Facebook Marketplace. Score.
Nice score. What are you using for terminal software on the beast?
Is it enhanced or unenhanced? If enhanced and you're having trouble
with ANSI, then ProTERM, or AGATE are your best friends.
Out interest you get a green monitot II with it? They seem to have
been the rage in schools with that very setup..
to how NTSC retrofit color into it (and the hacky way Apple II does
color as well...)
of the world. Add onto that digital radio which is still the same...whilethe
UK runs DAB signals...while many US stations might have information aboutthe
tune being played...but none of the other aspects DAB would afford because station owners don't want to pony up for the equipment or force thelisteners
to buy updated equipment.
DAB is onsolete useless technology. Worse quality than FM radio or some decent bitrate
internet stream. I would never buy a DAB radio for listening to lossy audio encoded at
64 kbps.
Phoobar wrote to Oli <=-
You have described satellite radio here in the states to a tee. Not
having access...except for what I've read in the past about DAB...had
no idea on the quality.
theDAB is onsolete useless technology. Worse quality than FM radio or some
decent bitrate
internet stream. I would never buy a DAB radio for listening to lossy
audio encoded at
64 kbps.
You have described satellite radio here in the states to a tee. Not having access...except for what I've read in the past about DAB...had no idea on
quality.
DAB is onsolete useless technology. Worse quality than FM radio or
Satellite radio seemed like the best dead tech I'd seen - dozens of channels available with no control over content.
My car also came with Pandora, which got much more usage.
about the sound quality, but my ears prefer FM radio even with
background noise or in mono. I'm not an analog freak, I'm just convinced that you canot throw 94% percent of
the
information away and still have good sounding music.
On 02-02-20 08:20, Spectre wrote to Oli <=-
DAB is onsolete useless technology. Worse quality than FM radio or
We got stuck with DAB+ over here. At the time it was legislated there
was no -one else in the world using it. I have no idea what its uptake
is like, I still don't own a DAB+ radio, the only ones around seem to
be made like some 80's $5 shop style of quality. Still only got FM in
the car, at some point they're meant to be switching FM off, it'll be interesting to see what happens then. I suspect transmission will fall
on its arse and they'll be primarily streaming, which is the other
thing they're already doing.
youabout the sound quality, but my ears prefer FM radio even with
background noise or in mono. I'm not an analog freak, I'm just convinced
that you canot throw 94% percent of
the
information away and still have good sounding music.
Fully understand. When I was working at my last set of stations in Western Arizona...most of the music was on CD's...with a few cuts on cart. Fool
not...listen to something done on an analog format...then list to it as a digital file. So easy to hear what the digital has cut out. Sounds muchmore
fuller & not chopped up into discrete pieces.
Phoobar wrote to poindexter FORTRAN <=-
Before they got hooked onto geolocation...used to stream Absolute Radio/Radio Luxembourg on my phone to an FM transmitter dongle to my radio. Hate it that I can't listen to UK radio anymore.
Phoobar wrote to Oli <=-
format...then list to it as a digital file. So easy to hear what the digital has cut out. Sounds much more fuller & not chopped up into discrete pieces.
I think we disagree on that matter :). I bought my first CD player in
the 80s and it
was a revelation. Uncompressed digital audio is so much better than
Lossy audio compression is a different story (it's called lossy for a reason). Some analog noise and inaccuracies are less annoying than
digital artifacts from lossy
compression.
Before they got hooked onto geolocation...used to stream Absolute Radio/Radio Luxembourg on my phone to an FM transmitter dongle to my radio. Hate it that I can't listen to UK radio anymore.Recreating legacy limitations. How quaint.
Don't get me started on listening to "remastered" versions of classic albums where the gain is cranked up to 11 and all of the detail is lost/clipped.
On 02-02-20 16:02, Oli wrote to Phoobar <=-
I think we disagree on that matter :). I bought my first CD player in
the 80s and it
was a revelation. Uncompressed digital audio is so much better than
Vinyl and you can
make identical copies without any degradation.
Lossy audio compression is a different story (it's called lossy for a reason). Some analog noise and inaccuracies are less annoying than
digital artifacts from lossy
compression.
There are also many ways to make digitally recorded, mixed and/or
mastered music sound
shitty. bad resampling, dynamic range compression (loudness war), etc. This is the
reason that some albums sound better on LP than on CD. It's not thst analog is better
than digital, they just messed up the digital version.
Also most contemporary music is digitally recorded or processed in some way even if you
buy the LP, so the Vinyl copy cannot be more accurate than the direct digital copy.
On 02-02-20 07:37, poindexter FORTRAN wrote to Phoobar <=-
Phoobar wrote to poindexter FORTRAN <=-
Before they got hooked onto geolocation...used to stream Absolute Radio/Radio Luxembourg on my phone to an FM transmitter dongle to my radio. Hate it that I can't listen to UK radio anymore.
Recreating legacy limitations. How quaint.
Reminds me of the story of Sony doing a movie premiere in Second Life
back when it first came out. People had to queue up to go through turnstiles to get in. Physical limitations where there are none.
On 02-02-20 07:55, poindexter FORTRAN wrote to Phoobar <=-
Don't get me started on listening to "remastered" versions of classic albums where the gain is cranked up to 11 and all of the detail is lost/clipped.
On 02-02-20 12:25, Phoobar wrote to Oli <=-
Remember when I was in college in '83 (graduated in '84) & a buddy had
a Denon system he had built. 1st time I'd come across CD's. Loved the sound.
In terms of uncompressed digital audio...not even sure I've heard it...except in FLAC.
Totally agree with you. Had to encode the music from CD for the on-air system at 48K/320 to get it sounding "decent" for the system.
Myself...do 48K/192 for my personal stuff...even audio books.
In terms of uncompressed digital audio...not even sure I've heard it...except in FLAC.You have, on those CDs. ;)
I'm fairly flexible. CDs, I'll rip to 320k for general use. If I want
On 02-02-20 20:43, Phoobar wrote to Vk3jed <=-
In terms of uncompressed digital audio...not even sure I've heard it...except in FLAC.You have, on those CDs. ;)
Okay...never considered that until now. With the way it was explained
to me back in the day...digital is sampled...so you're not hearing the complete wave. Can't believe I've been wrong all these years.
I'm fairly flexible. CDs, I'll rip to 320k for general use. If I want
The rule at the station was 320. Tried to bring in OGG...but was told
to only use MP3 because that was the "standard".
Not all hardware based devices support OGG. MP3 is the safest bet for "universal" playback. :)
On 02-03-20 18:30, Spectre wrote to Vk3jed <=-
Not all hardware based devices support OGG. MP3 is the safest bet for "universal" playback. :)
Sounds like I've had the bull by the horns, but I thought (ow) that ogg was playable as an mp3... ponder... I've never used it myself, which probably shows. I thought it was a different rendering algorithm to an mp3 container.
Ahh dem good ol' days when everyone one busy arguing the pros and cons
of bog standard mp3 and bit rates vs ogg and I think flac at the
time... I just stuck with mp3, didn't see the point in trying to
convert to format to keep up, you're not going to improve it, and
you're at the mercy of yet another level adaption.
areLossy audio compression is a different story (it's called lossy for a
reason). Some analog noise and inaccuracies are less annoying than
digital artifacts from lossy
compression.
That is true. Overdo l,ossy compression and it sounds crap. Some people
also extremely sensitive to lossy compression. I'm "moderately sensitive"in
that I can pick up a lot that most people miss, but I do know people muchmore
sensitive than me, that I've had to use FLAC with for any critcallistening,
because even 320k MP3 was too lossy for them. For me, 192k is usually acceptable for general listening, though I can sometimes hear artifacts atthis
bitrate.
I also seem to not do as well with AAC as MP3 sometimes, so I'msupposed to
probably more sensitive to what AAC removes, despite the fact it's
be "better". :)
Digital is sampled, but it is an accurate representation of the analog signal for frequencies up to 1/2 of the samiling frequency (the "Nyquist limit"). Actually, that's not the only scenario, but it's the one
relevant to digital audio. Side note: it's possible to sccurately
Not all hardware based devices support OGG. MP3 is the safest bet for "universal" playback. :)
On 02-03-20 09:01, Oli wrote to Vk3jed <=-
Sometimes I feel 192 kbps is good enough for casual listening and sometimes I'm convinced I can hear the MP3 artifacts even at 320 kbps.
It depends on the music, the
encoder and the speakers or headphones, maybe even the room. My theory
is that cheap
equipment or a listening position far off-center makes it easier to recognize the
distortions. The compression is based on a psychoacoustic model. Some frequencies
masking others. In a non-ideal listening environment this could break
down and distortions you shouldn't hear become obvious. It's just a
theory based on my own
observations.
As storage getting cheaper every year I just don't see any reason for lossy compression
for mu own music collection. Even for streaming on the Interenet a flac stream uses
much less bandwith than a 1080p youtube.
My brain is trained to recognize MP3 artifacts, but I think it's
plausible that
some
people are more sensitive to AAC artifacts. Maybe AAC files also often
use lower
bitrates, because people believe it is so good that you can get CD
quality at 96 or 128
kbits.
We often have different artifacts from repeated encoding. Youtube
video: original
source mp4, encoded by youtube to opus, encoded by your phone to some shitty bluetooth
codec for your wireless headphones.
On 02-03-20 04:36, Phoobar wrote to Vk3jed <=-
Digital is sampled, but it is an accurate representation of the analog signal for frequencies up to 1/2 of the samiling frequency (the "Nyquist limit"). Actually, that's not the only scenario, but it's the one
relevant to digital audio. Side note: it's possible to sccurately
Still the same for PSK31/JT65/FS8?
Not all hardware based devices support OGG. MP3 is the safest bet for "universal" playback. :)
True...but did like the quality control I got with it.
Still the same for PSK31/JT65/FS8?Relevance? I don't follow your logic, since those are DATA modes, not even for speech, let along music reproduction. *confused look*
True...but did like the quality control I got with it.What sort of quality control?
Sometimes I feel 192 kbps is good enough for casual listening and sometimes I'm convinced I can hear the MP3 artifacts even at 320kbps.
Yes, there's a bunch of variables. Sometimes it works fine, other times it sounds crap. :)
On 02-03-20 20:23, Phoobar wrote to Vk3jed <=-
Still the same for PSK31/JT65/FS8?Relevance? I don't follow your logic, since those are DATA modes, not even for speech, let along music reproduction. *confused look*
Do the same "rules" for audio also for these digital modes?
True...but did like the quality control I got with it.What sort of quality control?
In terms of setting the quality of encoding the files.
On 02-04-20 16:16, Spectre wrote to Vk3jed <=-
I find the player makes a bigger difference than the encoding, or it
used to seem that way. The only thing I use, and has been for years
now, is VLC, and sometime before that it was erm.. MusicMatch JukeBox
long before it went to pot. But you could have the same data set sound realllllly rough in some players while others could make it sound at
least to me, like the band was still playing in the next room :)
True...but did like the quality control Igot with it. What sort of quality control?
In terms of setting the quality of encoding the
files.
More information needed - what extra controls
did you have that you didn't have with MP3?
On 02-05-20 08:49, Oli wrote to Vk3jed <=-
In theory the Vorbis encoder could be better
optimized for the content. The disadvantage is
that you need the codebook from the beginning of the
file / stream, which made some use cases harder to
implement.
I don't remember that the encoding tools had more
options than Lame based MP3 encoders, maybe even
less. I haven't used that stuff for a while. Nowadays
it's all FLAC (or wavpack) and Opus.
More information needed - what extra controls did you have that you
didn't have with MP3?
VLC is quite good too, though I use my phone more than anything else
these days for audio (in the car). :)
On 02-05-20 05:20, Phoobar wrote to Vk3jed <=-
More information needed - what extra controls did you have that you
didn't have with MP3?
Was an experiment with something I had read about to see if it would
allow a better sounding file.
On 02-06-20 00:10, Spectre wrote to Vk3jed <=-
VLC is quite good too, though I use my phone more than anything else
these days for audio (in the car). :)
In the car, I have the FM radio glued to moldy oldies these days...
Was an experiment with something I had read about to see if it would allow a better sounding file.And did it help?
On 02-06-20 04:43, Phoobar wrote to Vk3jed <=-
Was an experiment with something I had read about to see if it would allow a better sounding file.And did it help?
I thought so...but my mgr told me to quit my experience & go back to
MP3.
internet stream. I would never buy a DAB radio for listening to lossy audio encoded at
64 kbps.
| Sysop: | sneaky |
|---|---|
| Location: | Ashburton,NZ |
| Users: | 31 |
| Nodes: | 8 (0 / 8) |
| Uptime: | 56:26:55 |
| Calls: | 2,097 |
| Files: | 11,143 |
| Messages: | 950,212 |