Festool power tools.

Page 3 of 12  
wrote:

Even Festool? ;)
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
On 2/3/2012 8:57 PM, Max wrote:

If so quite you can't hear it running is what you're looking for, yes ... it will be just the thing. ;)
--
www.eWoodShop.com
Last update: 4/15/2010
  Click to see the full signature.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload

It may be "well known" but it isn't true.

Nonsense.
You can't be robbed of something that never existed.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload

Cite

Your ignorance is showing. Key words: harmonics and timbre ... Use them to learn something.

Your ignorance is either more profound than your above statements suggest, are you're simply trolling.
Record any music containing an instrument(s) with harmonic content above 22050Hz onto a CD and anything above that frequency will be lost.
Keyword, Nyquist ... Inform yourself before you spout off.
--
www.ewoodshop.com

Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload

*YOU* are making the claim.

Utter audiophoolisms. Look up "Fourier Transform" and "Nyquist limit".

You've listened to too many audiophools.

Wrong (worse than that). The world is not perfect but it doesn't matter. You can't hear it.

You're the one who needs to UNDERSTAND Nyquist. I deal with it every day.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload

Gad! Someone finally mentioned "timber" in this thread. ;-)
Max
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
On 2/5/2012 10:58 AM, snipped-for-privacy@att.bizzzzzzzzzzzz wrote:

http://www.cco.caltech.edu/~boyk/spectra/spectra.htm
Confirms my previous statement ... you're trolling, right?
You really don't believe that ... hell, it's so totally dead wrong that you can't possibly believe it with a straight face?
What you just clearly stated is that there is no cutoff in frequency response, above 22050Hz, on the 16bit/44.1kHz sampling rate of Redbook Audio CD??
And you supposedly "deal with Nyquist every day"??
I hope it's not with your day job, Bubba ... because if they're paying you all they're getting in return is unmitigated ignorance.
Here, learn something before they find out:
http://slack.net/~ant/bl-synth/3.nyquist.html
--
www.eWoodShop.com
Last update: 4/15/2010
  Click to see the full signature.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
On 2/5/2012 11:45 AM, Swingman wrote:

Absolutely amazing exchange ... unbelievable really, that someone could actually reply in that manner and believe it!
If you're unfortunate enough to have been raised in the age of digital music, with the attendant noise, and decrease in dynamic range and frequency response of Redbook Audio, and the advent of the mp3, and you wish to get involved in music reproduction, it is the path of least resistance, and in your best interest, to ignore anything but the status quo.
After all, digital equipment is cheaper, much easier to maintain, requires little or no knowledge and/or basic understanding of underlying audio principles to use, and, despite the fact that almost everyone who has been exposed to the difference between digital and analog recording will agree that analog "sounds better"; those using digital as a preference continue to demand an increase in bit rates and sampling frequency (because of the inherent "Nyquist Limit" in digital sampling) to 24/96kHz to decrease noise, and increase both dynamic range and frequency response; because, when doing so, it suddenly begins to approach the fidelity of musical content recorded on analog equipment ... and, lo and behold, it "sounds better".
and you gotta laugh at the ridiculousness of folks railing against the concept that HFC (high frequency content) colors the sound of music within the human audible range, while immediately using psycho-acoustic properties like "masking", which relies upon HFC to work, as proof that it doesn't ... you can't have your cake and eat it too.
Audio today is much like the debate over climate change, with proponents from each camp railing against each other with a religious fervor. Mp3's now basically rule in the digital music world ... if you don't think that not a move in in the direction of mediocrity in the recording world, then there is no help for you.
Then there is another more disturbing and profound reason:
It's truly sad that when you've ruined your hearing, like manyt folks who have spent their formative years within the last 30, it is no damned wonder that, because you can't hear it, you continue to loudly proclaim/insist that no one else can.
http://news.cnet.com/8301-13645_3-20013937-47.html
http://www.asha.org/public/hearing/disorders/children.htm
As we continue to slide into mediocrity in all things ...
--
www.eWoodShop.com
Last update: 4/15/2010
  Click to see the full signature.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload

You're, of course, completely wrong.

"Digital Music" (I assume you mean digitized music) is crap because that's the way it's recorded; compressed to hell and overly separated. Not because the format is poor (at least for the last 20 years).

...easier, so the hucksters had to move onto something else to sucker the audiophools. Monster cable. <giggle>

When you use words like "colors" you merely show your audiophoolism. Physics isn't with you.

Good analogy. AGWers are much like the hucksters selling expensive crap to audiophools.

Sure, blame me for physics.

That we can agree on. Physics being a prime area.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload

Certainly not.

Nope. It's you who doesn't understand what he's saying.

That's not what I said. Since you conveniently snipped it, I can only assume you're intentionally obfuscating what was said (read: lying).

Every day. I'm an electronics engineer, currently working in the audio industry, after 30+ years in computers.

You're doing a good enough job of that here. Stick to cabinets. You're really good at that.

Completely irrelevant.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
On 2/5/2012 12:21 PM, snipped-for-privacy@att.bizzzzzzzzzzzz wrote:

IOW, with no experience whatsoever in making a living in the recording industry while both owning and operating a successful recording studio.
Get back to me after you've spent 20+ years doing that.
--
www.eWoodShop.com
Last update: 4/15/2010
  Click to see the full signature.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload

You've obviously never studied the science behind Nyquist or Fourier.

You can spout audiophoolery all you want, but it's just that.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
On 2/5/2012 12:54 PM, snipped-for-privacy@att.bizzzzzzzzzzzz wrote:

You obviously have no clue as to the effects of Nyquist on the _frequency response_ of the resultant digital recording.

LOL ... another newly coined audio term, and derogatory at that, from those grasping at straws to cover up their ignorance?
You know you've made your point successfully when the derogatory terminology starts flying in lieu of reasoned response.
--
www.eWoodShop.com
Last update: 4/15/2010
  Click to see the full signature.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload

You're *quite* wrong. I understand the science behind Nyquist and Fourier perfectly. What I don't understand is how, so called, "professionals" can get caught up in audiophoolery.

No, it's not newly coined and describes you to a tee.

You obviously wouldn't understand Nyquist if I explained it to you, or you wouldn't have posted a reference to a site that shows my point.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
On 2/5/2012 3:19 PM, snipped-for-privacy@att.bizzzzzzzzzzzz wrote:

Let me say it once again:
"An audio CD can represent frequencies up to 22.05 kHz, the Nyquist frequency of the 44.1 kHz sample rate."
If you want to continue playing cutesy with terminolgy, you either agree with the above, or you need to specify and Cite why you don't.
Unlike you, I'm reasonable and will listen to any reasoned refutation, but I will NOT accept you simply saying it is "wrong", which you have repeatedly done without explanation.
Here it is again:
"An audio CD can represent frequencies up to 22.05 kHz, the Nyquist frequency of the 44.1 kHz sample rate."
Have at it ... by my guest and pick it apart.
--
www.eWoodShop.com
Last update: 4/15/2010
  Click to see the full signature.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload

At best, sure. ...as long as your "represent" means *perfectly* reproduce. So far, so good.

It a waveform is *perfectly* reproduced, where's the beef?

...except you haven't. You *state* the same old, tired, audiophoolery. There is *NO* science behind it; religion, at best.

Where "represent" == "perfectly reproduce"

How much better than *perfect* does a waveform need to be for an audiophool? IOW, you're arguing my point. Thanks.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
On 2/5/2012 5:44 PM, snipped-for-privacy@att.bizzzzzzzzzzzz wrote:

--
www.eWoodShop.com
Last update: 4/15/2010
  Click to see the full signature.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
On Sun, 05 Feb 2012 18:44:06 -0500, " snipped-for-privacy@att.bizzzzzzzzzzzz"
I have yet to see the audio equitment either analog or digital that pefectly reproduces any recorded sounds.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
On 2/6/2012 3:30 PM, Markem wrote:

Agreed. AAMOF, there is no equipment in the current "state of the art" that has brought us any closer to faithfully recording/reproducing content as experienced by the human ear.
And _the removal of frequency content inherent in the source material_ , in an effort to do, so has arguably gotten us further from that ultimate goal. :(
(BTW, your keyboard types as bad as mine) ;)
--
www.eWoodShop.com
Last update: 4/15/2010
  Click to see the full signature.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload

Because the components aren't perfect (or perfectible). The math is.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload

Site Timeline

Related Threads

    HomeOwnersHub.com is a website for homeowners and building and maintenance pros. It is not affiliated with any of the manufacturers or service providers discussed here. All logos and trade names are the property of their respective owners.