Dusty Chalk

Well...yeah, but...kinda hard to argue with that...but my attitude towards gear has always been that the better the gear, the fewer the impediments to hearing it properly...but yeah, I've heard good music on some pretty shitty equipment and still managed to enjoy it. I mean, look at what I say over on Head-Fi every time someone says their equipment is boring: "try listening to more interesting music". Yeah, I'm sure there's something in the SH catalog that would interest you, but I get your point, and agree completely.

Awesome -- that's probably DigiPete's. He's the first. I may have to get one eventually, too.

Yeah, really. If they ever stopped making CD's, I'd be dead.

It's got nothing to do with mastering. I've compared needledrops I've made myself -- I.E. with zero additional compression -- and have lost detail. Admittedly, it's not with an Apogee Rosetta or anything, but an Alesis Masterlink ain't no chopped liver. I recorded at 24/88 and downsampled/downmixed to CD. It's just not the same (although the 24/88 was perfectly adequate -- I honestly could not tell the difference). But I am specifically critical of CD, and not of digital in general -- I am a strong believer in digital, I don't even have a turntable set up right now. Don't confuse me for those extremists. Heck, most of my synthesizers are digital, I just prefer to mix them in the analog domain. I wouldn't mind going through the experiment again -- recording a record to high-res digital and 16/44.1 digital, and passing around the files, so that they could use whatever algorithm they like to create their own 16/44.1 digital files, and compare them. Thus eliminating 90% of the variables, but ... will have to be over christmas break or something, I'm swamped through October, at least.

They will if you have a cat...and you leave your records out...or you hide your stash in a record jacket...

So? A modern modern record is probably being done at 24/96 or 24/192, which a CD can't handle. Whereas a record will capture all of it -- so just because it's done in digital, doesn't mean the end result should be digital. I know the pedants over at sh.tv were whining when they found out the record version of Pink Floyd's Echoes compilation was done off the same digital master tapes, but L -- it was 24/96 (IIRC), which should still sound pretty damn good. Like I said -- you keep telling yourself that. I think you're speaking in over-generalizations. BTW, dynamic range <> transients. Yeah, those cannon shots would pop the needle out of the record. And it doesn't take as expensive a system as you're portraying to keep the rice krispies quiet. I'm pretty sure Hirsch's system (including cleaning machine) is only a couple thousand. I'm also pretty sure it can be done for even less (substituting a different table, and a more manual-intensive record-cleaning machine).

Yeah, you keep telling yourself that. CD's have only just barely gotten into the realm of fully utilizing their entire dynamic spectrum, whereas analog has had decades more development. In other words, most of the CD's you have do not have the same dynamic range that vinyl does. But yeah, if all you listen to is live music, it's kind of hard to get a record cutting machine into a concert.

Preach on.

[ame=http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3g-yrjh58ms]Keepon the robot dances to Spoon's "I Turn My Camera On"[/ame] [ame=http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nPdP1jBfxzo]...and Spoon's "Don't You Evah"[/ame]

To me, most Grados look alike.

Oh, okay, I didn't read the whole thread...sorry...I got overwhelmed when I frequented there...

Yeah, I figured out which thread it came from based on the one quote, and you're right, it didn't. And aerius -- awesome South Park reference.

So the mods here use moderation to forward their own selfish agenda, and to instill a fear of posting any other agenda...this is better than Head-Fi how?

Actually, that's not new -- you could do translucent windows in XP. Download, for example, Process Explorer.

No need -- it's the one I use. And why the fuck did this thread get snipped from its other one? It makes no sense on its own.

Maybe to them it looks like a Fleur-de-lis?

But isn't audiocircle just a bunch of vendor-driven forums, anyway?

I guess it depends how good the special pricing is -- if it was (a) something I was going to buy anyway, and ( I could be sure that I was getting the same quality product as I would be if I got it through whatever other channels I was considering (I.E. if he was claiming it was new, and I was considering buying it new, it better come with a valid warrantee), I wouldn't be bothered. But as you so astutely pointed out, it does echo of activities of that other asshat-infested place, so...(shudders)...I don't know if I'd take them up on the offer. But yeah, it's like the PM-equivalent of spam. Why don't they just post publicly?

[ame=http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=AIXubjbO6Rk]Living Stereo fans, click this[/ame]

Both of those were awesome. My contributions: [ame=http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=TaVsaWjzsds]How Michel Gondry solves the Rubik's Cube with his feet[/ame] [ame=http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pB8XedMowDU]Michel Gondry solves the Rubik's Cube with his nose[/ame]

You wanna borrow a pair of HD600's and a Clou Blue?

Quoted for appreciation.

I tell you whut, I'm not much of a gamer, but Overlord makes me want to get back into it.

I really dig that -- have it all the time. Sugar (or rather: corn syrup) and formaldehyde. Nom nom nom nom... PS I'm full of shit -- didn't read Justin's wikipedia entry. I wonder what's in the dip? It tastes too sweet to only be yogurt. And the nuts are covered in something (aerius, please refrain from your "dried K-Y jelly" joke that I see coming)...