flyfisher

I've long lost the ability to do any meaningful website coding and have a lot of respect for those who still can and do. But I do remember the heady days when 'the web' started to emerge around 1990 and a useful web page could be thrown together with a few html tags. Sure, it was nowhere near as versatile as it is today, but I do sometimes wonder how much complexity (and legacy) is forced onto developers purely for the sake of style and appearance. The amount of time, money and computing resources all this consumes is huge. A bit like windows really. PCs may run a zillion times faster than in the 80s and have gazillions more memory and storage, but how much of this is dissipated within the OS before the PC ever gets around to doing a bit of work for the increasingly-frustrated user? I used to be able to do word processing, spreadsheets and email with an 8-bit Z80 running at a few MHz, but these days I need a relative supercomputer to do the same things - or more accurately, a supercomputer to run windows and a few of its spare CPU cycles to do my word processing, spreadsheets and emails. No wonder Bill and Steve made such a fortune; it's the best con ever.

[quote name='51m0n' timestamp='1339767072' post='1694018'] This is not the same as the maximum resolution of the human eye for instance, which is definable as a product of the number and size of rods/cones in the retina and the quality of the lens and the distance from the object viewed. [/quote] Well, if we're going to get into the psychology of perception (audio or visual) then most bets are off because who knows how we really 'hear' or 'see' things? The point about the human eye structure is a good example but it's interesting to note that the image sensor in a decent DSLR has a higher resolution than the eye. But a lot of what we 'see' is made up by the brain anyway. Colour, for example, is something we construct from the limited response from three types of cones. Indeed, the response of digital video systems has to be tweaked to match the eye's response, which is an odd thing to have to do when striving for hi-fidelity if you think about it. Also, we only see a tiny portion of our field of view in high resolution. Our peripheral vision is not nearly as acute as our central vision, but the brain compensates for us. These are only some of the things I've learned from working a lot with video engineering. I'm less sure about the ear but I'd be surprised if similar things didn't apply. I'm in no way doubting that some people prefer analogue recordings to digital recordings but, as I think you've previously and rightly pointed out, a lot of this could be down to the immense amount of signal processing involved (in both domains) and, frankly, I really don't care one way or the other. People know what they like and that's fine. What amuses me is when they start arguing that something is 'more real' than something else.

[quote name='51m0n' timestamp='1339759156' post='1693819'] On top of whicvh it is an analogue system, so sample rate is a really dodgy phrase to use at all.... [/quote] Exactly. If analogue systems had an 'effective' sampling rate then there really couldn't be any sensible debate about the differences between analogue and digital systems. The anti-digital view is generally based on the fact that any digital representation of an essentially analogue thing cannot, by definition, be a perfect equivalent of the analogue thing. In practice, of course, this takes things to a ridiculous theoretical extreme and can therefore be mostly ignored - unless you're the sort of person who would also pay a few thousand pounds for a 'kettle lead' in the pursuit of the 'perfect' system. Besides, there is no such thing as an analogue audio system that doesn't introduce its own distortion and colouration, which is probably why such things are referred to as 'high fidelity' rather than 'absolute fidelity'.

Music is so widely and cheaply available these days that it has become devalued. Before recording, music would only be heard live and, mostly, it would involve the exchange of money. Thus it was 'special' and it was valued. If you wanted to make music the only way would be to learn an instrument and that process would reinforce an appreciation of what's involved. Today, music is everywhere and it's mostly free, thus diminishing its novelty and value. Even when people pay a lot to attend a concert, a big part of it is about celebrity rather than the music itself. C'est la vie.

[quote name='LeftyBiskit' timestamp='1339742632' post='1693489'] Precisely,not forgetting the Basses-I have one on a hanger next to the bed so I can have a quick practise without getting up [/quote] A hanger? You mean you don't sleep with your bass then?

Whatever the rights and wrongs of this whole sorry tale, it's proof that whenever things escalate into a public row then neither party is likely to come out smelling of roses. Trial by media is bad enough, but trial by a tribal Internet forum is even less edifying.

[quote name='pete.young' timestamp='1335344361' post='1629444'] I don't understand why using a stand will reduce the amount of vibration transmitted to the floor. It seems to me that any stand capable of holding up a 2x12 or 4x10 is going to be very rigid and will transmit the same amount of vibration to the floor as the cab would. Anyone? [/quote] 'very rigid', perhaps, but not as rigid as cab plywood, so some of the vibration transmitted to the foam will move the foam itself and in doing so will be absorbed before being passed on to the stage. While I'm sure such foam pads can have an effect on the sound, I'd expect the actual effect to vary a lot depending on the weight of the cab/stack because this would affect the amount of compression of the foam and affect the way in which the foam absorbs the vibration, i.e. would change the 'frequency response' of the foam pad in terms of which frequencies are absorbed and by how much. But I've never tried one so that's all just supposition.

Seems like the world is getting increasingly fed up with IE, not just using it but also having to keep tweaking their websites to support it. Here's an interesting development: http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/technology-18440979

A somewhat less polished but no less haunting example of sheer 'less-is-more' feel . . . starts at 2:12 http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QkFOBZRAbMU

Yep, me too. Ray Davies recently released a CD with choral arrangements for many of his famous songs. Not really an improvement, in my view, but could be useful for the OP's project? http://www.amazon.co.uk/The-Kinks-Choral-Collection-Davies/dp/B001W6Q4BU

Yeah, I though of that when I wrote it. Thought I might get away with it. Should have known really. Damn.

Funny, but not so daft. Some of the multi-output PSUs I've seen would take up about the same space! Get a 4-way power strip, plug in four PP3 battery eliminators and put the whole lot in a suitable box. Spray it a nice colour, add some fancy blue LEDs and Bob's your Dad's Brother.

Matching abilities is one of the most difficult things when finding people to play with - temperament being the other! I've always found it best to play with people better than me but not too good that I'm obviously holding them back. The urge to improve to match the other players is a great incentive to improve your own playing. Generally, I've found other players pretty forgiving, even if things haven't worked out, because they might be miles better than you but they all realise they were at that stage once, so a parting of the ways is amicable - in my limited experience anyway. Anyway, if others do get arsey about your playing then they're probably not the sort you'd want to play with anyway. So, yes, go for it, but just be prepared to have to try a few different situations before finding something that really works.

He's a kid, of course he's going to go for the flashy/trashy stuff at his age. Might take him another 10 years to grow out of it, who knows. But there's no doubt he has talent and it would be a crime to dissuade him from playing. We might be watching the next Victor Wooten. At least he's not rapping.

when you spend more time on stage than on BC?

Interesting device here: http://www.dimensionengineering.com/datasheets/Negatron.pdf It will operate with +9v in and can be adjusted to give -9v out at a maximum of 290mA. Would still need a small box and suitable cables but no safety-critical mains voltages to deal with. Loads of similar devices/circuits out there, so plenty of choice. (I'd still go for two PSUs though, for sheer simplicity and ease of carrying a spare).

[quote name='EdwardHimself' timestamp='1339591310' post='1691022'] Usually it means something that has been badly encoded. I mean there is really no need to encode at 128 kB/s any more given the huge amounts of data storage offered by modern hard drives. [/quote] . . . unless you want to minimise transmission bandwidth because some poor souls are still blighted by slow internet connections. Agree about the storage non-issue though.

[quote name='BassBod' timestamp='1339581863' post='1690807'] But from what I've read, the issue with the RL stuff is really the mini jack plug connection - that can short out the supply quite easily if its connected/pulled with the power on. [/quote] Yes, it's certainly not an ideal power connector for this very reason. It can be protected against, of course, by the PSU design but it then complicates things for 3rd party PSUs so I can't really see the point. Thing is, the lack of any real standards for low voltage DC power is a real pain for equipment manufacturers. In this case, there are plenty of 3-pin alternative connectors but you can never guarantee they're not also used by something else - e.g. an XLR would do a good job for a 9-0-9 PSU but someone, somewhere, sometime will end up plugging the it into a mic input! The PC industry has done a pretty good job with all their various connectors and it's pretty much impossible to connect things in the wrong way, especially with the colour coding of audio jacks, but I guess the music business has a longer history.

Is it true that you actually need [u]permission [/u]to record or perform a cover? I'm sure I've read that the only legal requirement is to pay the appropriate royalty. I don't know the definitive answer though.

Ha! So it's not just me then. I had two people compliment me after the last gig - one was the sound guy saying my bass sounded really good and the other was the bass player in another band on the bill, who I had replaced when he went off to form his own band. Since I'm never entirely happy with my playing I was really dead chuffed but could only thing of saying "thanks, I'm glad you enjoyed it". Must be a British reserve thing.

Not sure I understand the ground lift thing. Well, I do, but why would it be necessary with a balanced output? Or are we talking about unbalanced DI outputs? I don't have a wide experience of instrument amps but my Ashdown head and Ampeg combo DI outputs are both balanced.

Anyone listening to this programme on R4? http://www.bbc.co.uk/programmes/b01jqjl7 Probably available later on iplayer. Worth 30mins of any blues fan's time.

[quote name='BRANCINI' timestamp='1339496313' post='1689188'] I understand your point, but I think you'll find said sparkie is obliged to only use certified equipment. So dont forget to ask the insurance company and the fire officer if they are happy with you using a non CE certified power supply, built by the local sparkie, and connected to the mains, just so long as he puts a PAT label on it.... . For the sake of the cost of two 'Battery Eliminators' it just aint, imho, worth the risk. [/quote] Sadly, in these increasingly litigious days, those are very good points. DIY electronics is fine for personal use but once things become commercial then such complications can raise their ugly heads - especially when safety-critical components such as mains PSUs are involved. I wouldn;t think twice about building an effects pedal powered from 12v, but I'd still buy in the mains PSU to power it because it will have been tested and certified as meeting all the required safety regulations. I suppose it's technically possible to argue that a DIY PSU doesn't legally need to be CE-marked or certified for electrical safety (and EMC standards) because it's not being "placed on the market", but it's not an argument I'd like to have while combing through the smoking remains of my last gig venue. Also, because there's no real financial savings to be gained by DIYing a mains PSU and there's no significant technical or functional advantages either, I really can't see any practical reasons for not just buying a commercial PSU.

OK, a stereo jack would certainly support 9-0-9, though I've never seen it done that way before. It would be very easy to wire up two separate floating 9v PSUs to a single 2.5mm stereo jack. Just need to know the polarity details for the jack.

[quote name='Mornats' timestamp='1339461084' post='1688904'] Mr. Foxen is spot on, copyright is automatic as soon as you create the work. Enforcing it is another matter. [/quote] Yep, that's the crux of the matter. It's no coincidence that IP litigation is a lucrative part of the legal profession.