Topic: Misspelling of 'color'

[Pike84]

As for comparison to the original, I think a ripped CD sounds better than the original, particularly with a player like XMPlay.  This isn't the same result I'd get with dedicated sound equipment, just concerns listening at the computer.
Agreed?

That's interesting, that you find the original not sounding as good.. so are you using the same equipment for playing the CDs and the rips? And did you manage to find out, which of the formats (mpc, mp3) sounded closer to the original?

As I said, the (current) improvements are negligible and not worth due to compability issues (friends and other people not having OGG/MPC-capable players for instance -- yeah it's their fault but it becomes your problem).

Ok, understood. For me, however, there are no issues at all, since I only rip for myself. Even if I had to transfer/transport some of my music to a friend that hasn't the compatible software, I'd just tell him/her to get XMPlay .

Re-encoding a lossless format will NEVER happen for me.

Hmm, not sure what you're pointing at with that.

I use CBR because it feels more reliable, I don't like the added uncertainty factor that VBR adds, and as I'm a quality freak, when I tested with VBR, most frame sizes stayed at the CBR level I'm using anyway. ABR is total crap and shouldn't be allowed to exist.

Well, I'm no expert, but I've gotten the idea that both VBR and ABR beat CBR, because they can allocate the bits more efficiently. Could you explain, why you think ABR is total crap?

I mean the improvements are more or less negligible (i.e. "the codecs aren't there yet -- in the future when everything's wonderful and perfect"). OGG isn't really that much smaller size-wise. At crappy, low bitrates yes. But I don't use those ear-killing bitrates. It has other merits though, like license-free and multichannel, but none of that is anything I care about -- yet.

It all boils down to wheter the improvements reach such a level that it's worth all the hassle. Simple.

Nothing much to add here - just that I'm not experiencing any hassle whatsoever myself. But I guess it's all individual and stuff .

[guest]

What about MPEG-4 AAC?

[Tsorovan]

Regarding ABR/VBR as opposed to CBR: in my testing, the space conserving with VBR vs CBR was barely significant. I chose many different types of song material to get as good spread as possible. Sure, I used pretty aggressive quality settings, but I would rather err on the side of caution than well, that other side. After all, 2.00 MB vs. 1.75 MB  per minute... Moreover, VBR decoding is slightly more CPU intensive (albeit in the end by an almost insignificant amount if I'm to be truthful). I maintain it's impossible to hear the difference between 256 CBR (LAME) and an original CD source, and every scientifically carried out blind test I've come across seems to indicate this is so, even on very expensive audiophool gear, so higher frame size than 256 wouldn't be much use IMO.

As I said before, I don't like the uncertainty factor that VBR adds; the more variables you have, the easier a screw-up would be. Hey, that's some really bad grammar, am I turning into George Lucas?

Regarding ABR: the reason for its craptasticalness is the fact that you beforehand must know the dynamic of the music and calculate what bitrate would suffice, and if you're wrong...well, too bad for you, you won't have much bits left in the bits pool towards the end. Or, if your encoder is smart enough, it'll just not allocate enough bitrate for the highbitrate-craving passages throughout the whole song, to keep the ABR rate at check.

Guest: if you've been following the AAC comments lately, you'll see that it has some serious artefact problems. If that's due to the file format or just crap encoders...well, that remains to be seen.
But hey, look, if Apple chose the format, then it must be inferior. :D

[Zarggg]

But hey, look, if Apple chose the format, then it must be inferior.

*smacks Tsorovan on principle* :evil:

[Pike84]

Tsorovan:

Well, in your case it might not matter a lot, since you use so high quality anyway. The alt-presets in LAME 3.90 have been well tested, however, and probably wouldn't screw up anything.

If you're happy with encoding your music to 256kbps mp3s, that's just fine. But I sure don't want to waste my precious hd space like that, if I can get virtully the same (better?) quality with mpcs of around 170-200kbps .

[Torkell]

What flameware?

I would've posted but my flamethrower's out of fuel

[Tsorovan]

Kynes: Yeah. You're totally free to do that, and I understand it. I wasn't even disagreeing much I think...actually I don't even remember why the topic strayed this much. :D

[Pike84]

Hehe.. this was supposed to be about the misspelling of 'colour', but that discussion ended on the second page of the topic :laugh:.

This topic probably doesn't need any more posts .

[Brightguy]

This is all very interesting (but off-topic)...
And kind of pointless, because I doubt either side will convince the other to switch.

[DanaPaul]

Yes, both interesting and relative to your own personal environment, eh? To Wit: file share. (gasp! did he really say that?)

Frankly, ...and to paraphrase one of the major players in the development of a mojor online service provider, and akin to the Internet... file share is a mile wide and one inch deep. A huge majority of the files out there have very poor compression quality, background noise, and snap-crackle-pop.  On the other hand, files compressed from my own CD's on this machine have superior quality that very few files floating around the Net can equal.  

I stand with proponents of Ogg Vorbis. Relatively speaking, MP3 can't come close to the quality of Ogg Vorbis for my expansive CD collection parked on my hard drive.  My environment will be a better place when quality and useful applications, like my favorite MusicMatch Jukebox, empowers (me) consumers with available options.

Finally, to paraphrase former President Clinton, I may have downloaded an MP3 or two, but I didn't listen.

My 2 Cents

[Olego]

By the way...
Ten thousandth post on the Un4seen forums!!!

Yay!  *feels special*

~Olego~

[Torkell]

This topic probably doesn't need any more posts .

I know, but it's fun to have a flame war ocassionally, as long as it's all in good humor and no-one goes too far

[Brightguy]

Okay, here I go again.  Back on to the original topic...  I noticed that when you switch pattern display modes, the two options are "follow" and "center".

Of course, we all know it's correctly spelled centre.

It is also spelled 'center' in xmplay.txt.  This time I'm sure that 'centre' is the correct British spelling...

[Zarggg]

Well, you know what they say about the british: Give them 2.54 centimitres, and they'll take 1.609344 kilomitres.

*doesn't care if that joke is cheesy, he just had to work it in somehow :laugh: *

[Torkell]

Well, you know what they say about the british: Give them 2.54 centimitres, and they'll take 1.609344 kilomitres.

Or, if you still use imperial measurements, "Give them an inch and they'll take a mile"

In the UK we use metric for everything that's not car-related (miles, yards and miles per gallon)!

[Octie]

Of course, we all know it's correctly spelled colour.

Hehe. You know, Jasc's Paint Shop Pro has different language versions for UK and US. The only difference I've noticed is US-version has replaced "colour" with "color". (Now that I think it, US version must also have different lenght measurement magnitudes)

But yes, it is "colour", really. I friggin' hate the "color" form of "colour".

[Philidor11]

In the UK we use metric for everything that's not car-related (miles, yards and miles per gallon)!

You're among friends here; is this true?
I've already worked out that the French language is an elaborate hoax designed to aggravate and intimidate tourists.  French people go home, kick back, and speak English just like anyone else.  Some, who don't want to be bothered learning the elaborate rules, settle for incomprehensible.
Told my daughter, who's good in French here in the US, that she was among the few people in the world who actually spoke the language.  She reported our conversation at her school, and everyone whom she told found the concept intuitively obvious.  They passed along my insight so diligently that I think the game will soon be over.
Anyway, is there such a thing as the metric system nowadays?  And if there is, does anyone actually use it?
I mean, I know it came from the French (aha!) revolutionary legislature, which also wanted 10 month years and 100 minute hours.  Weren't the revolutionary measurements rejected as fast as the changes to the calendar?
Aren't most people in the world followers of the Babylonians, the people who devised measuring systems based on 6es.  I think we all know how good six is.

[Philidor11]

Oh yes, and I assume spellings like 'colour' and 'centre' are just badges of English identity.  
Could someone over there survive a round of a spelling bee using them?  Thought not.

[DanaPaul]

"I have nothing but contempt for anyone who can spell a word only one way."

The origin of this quotation has been credited to Thomas Jefferson, one of the founding fathers who participated in the drafting of the Declaration of Independence.  :evil:

[Pike84]

Philidor:
Whoa.. you're actually trying to start a flame war here? Tsk, tsk.. .

I know, but it's fun to have a flame war ocassionally, as long as it's all in good humor and no-one goes too far

Gotta say here, that I personally dislike any kind of flame war at any range .

[Brightguy]

In the UK we use metric for everything that's not car-related (miles, yards and miles per gallon)!

Miles?  Yards?  Gallons?  What do they mean?...

Are you saying you still drive in miles per hour?

[Philidor11]

Flame wars require opposition.  Now, Kynes, who could be angered by the ideas that the French language doesn't exist and that nobody uses the metric system when the accuracy of these observations is so self-evident.
And then notice Brightguy asking what miles, yards, and miles per gallon mean?  He knows them very well; they're part of the only system of measurement in actual use.  See, I'm not outraged; a bit condescending, yes, but as a form of humor it's certainly not worth getting angry about.

[Tsorovan]

Well, the "humour" part is debatable...

[Philidor11]

Well, the "humour" part is debatable...

I wanted his humor to be phlegm, not bile.

[Pike84]

Flame wars require opposition.  Now, Kynes, who could be angered by the ideas that the French language doesn't exist and that nobody uses the metric system when the accuracy of these observations is so self-evident.
And then notice Brightguy asking what miles, yards, and miles per gallon mean?  He knows them very well; they're part of the only system of measurement in actual use.  See, I'm not outraged; a bit condescending, yes, but as a form of humor it's certainly not worth getting angry about.

Ah, cut the crap already.. . Yes the humour part certainly is debatable. I, for example, somehow don't find myself very amused. I think this is actually getting pretty childish, not to mention old..