Quake3World

seremtan wrote:

vesp wrote:foobar was linux and itunes was XP) :P

"...before turning the gun on himself."

heh.. just my perception at the time. I have gone way past the point where i am usually bothered by tweaking - the days of customised IRC, desktops and custom skins for whatever are way past for me

TBH I have installed foobar again and it now has exactly what I needed: an initial setup choice that lets you decide how the library/playlists/etc are laid out, so I am giving it a shot right now!

it does the job it needs to, and it can rip CDs easily

one thing it can't do is tell all your facebook friends which album you're listening to at that particular moment - which is a shame, because that's vital info that people need to know, preferably as soon as possible so as not to miss out

mrd so fucking clueless. Sound systems have changed over the years, so unless you are only listening to the latest stuff you are going to need to tweak the EQs to get it to sound as originally intended. Now, re-releases could have that done already, but they (generally) don't. Also different producers have different sound systems, they are not all the same, so you might want - if not need - to tweak the EQs to account for that aswell.

Just cause some morons are shit at tweaking EQs doesn't mean the EQs shouldn't be tweaked.

Probably the only situation where there's no way you'd need to adjust the EQs is if you'd have a THX certified source on a THX certified system. (Not used a THX system myself, just the impression I got from what THX certification is supposed to be for.)

seremtan wrote:it does the job it needs to, and it can rip CDs easily

how is the quality of rips? that's honestly my biggest complaint about itunes... even beyond the instability. anything i rip in it - even brand new cds in perfect condition - are skippy as fuck. it's like the messed up the buffering or something. i'm using EAC for ripping now, but if foobar is better...

Great, DTS is telling me what's up. Please, tell me more sir.

@menkent: foobar always rips fine for me. I always do FLAC or WAV rips, never had a problem.

Yeah? Fuck you.

DTS wrote:Yeah? Fuck you.

OK here, I'll bite, since you seem to be sad.

You say you need to tweak old music so it sounds like "it's originally intended." That's a pretty fucking vague statement, but ignoring that, how should anyone know what "it's originally intended" to sound like? Again, unless you know what you're doing, tweaking the EQ will 9 times out of 10 just ruin the fucking mix. If you're gunna tell me that you should be tweaking the EQ to account for shitty speakers then I will tell you to just buy higher quality speakers. No music will ever sound good on boombox speakers or computer speakers. Furthermore, most re-mixes/re-releases/etc. of old content simply put a super high-end digital compressor over the mix, one that could not have existed back in the day when the original mix was produced. That's about it. Perhaps they do some minor EQ'ing over it, or an "exciter" (which is basically still a compressor.)

Different producers have different sound systems? Yeah, and the sky is blue. Are you suggesting that we should all research the $500,000 sound systems our favourite producers use and then devise some sort of compensation EQ package to make our sound system try to match that? Mastering engineers gear their mixes towards consumer grade sound systems because they know that most people don't have high quality shit. There's an old saying that engineers use -- "sometimes monitors are too precise." They are so clear that you can hear very minor tweaks and variances in EQ, compression and gain that simply are physically unable to be replicated on lower grade consumer gear. Thus, they typically stop splitting hairs at a certain point in the mix because they know it's a wasted effort.

Not sure what the fuck THX has to do with any of this.

Also, another comment about old music: most of it sounds better because it preserves dynamic content, which is what makes music sound lively, punchy, organic, 3D and with depth. Granted, a very well placed compressor will do just about as good, but by the very nature of compression, you are losing dynamic content. Most old mixes sound fucking great, sometimes better than newer mixes, if you just turn it up. There's a volume knob for a reason. I'm sorry that most people are too lazy to realize that compression has basically turned all music into fucking mush, but if a song is quieter or louder than the previous one, just use the god damn volume knob.

Anyway, I've already stated that small tweaks here and there on the EQ are OK if you truly feel it will help. But again, most people simply can't even hear a +2dB in the 500hz range, for example. So why bother?

because he's autistic.

What a weird dude.

spotify

Zune because its pretty.
Pandora One when I want random.

Pretty simple. The rest are garbage.

fuck this guy.

MKJ wrote:fuck this guy.

Haters gonna hate. But Zune is pretty as fuck and thats what matters.
Plus, It handles 35,000 or so songs pretty fucking well. Unlike winamp/itunes. Id just use this fancy pants google music player but sadly google still has that pesky 20,000 song restriction.

fuck u...

LawL wrote:fuck u...

Only if you're on bottom. And the GF gets to watch.

I'm a top.

(he likes being penetrated from below... reverse-cowboy?)

I use Winamp because Milkdrop

Almost all of the Milkdrop visualizations are retarded and boring. And none of them actually sync with the music properly.

Also: horribly poor taste in music.

Harsh As you wish guys, I like it

Don't get me wrong, I like the idea of visualizations, I just can't find any that work decently.

Transient wrote:Don't get me wrong, I like the idea of visualizations, I just can't find any that work decently.

To be honest, I never used Milkdrop until I started playing it on three screens. I don't use it on one screen, but it provides a pretty cool background when I have people over.

i just discovered this awesome audio software called winamp.

It really kicks the llama's ass.