I'll wait for 3 things:
1) .WAV format
2) WAAAAAY lower pricing
3) Confirmed licensing
Til then I remain Luddite
| Karaoke Scene's Karaoke Forums https://mail.karaokescenemagazine.net/forums/ |
|
| SC library off topic to sound quality https://mail.karaokescenemagazine.net/forums/viewtopic.php?f=1&t=25182 |
Page 1 of 2 |
| Author: | JoeChartreuse [ Thu Sep 13, 2012 3:32 pm ] |
| Post subject: | SC library off topic to sound quality |
I'll wait for 3 things: 1) .WAV format 2) WAAAAAY lower pricing 3) Confirmed licensing Til then I remain Luddite
|
|
| Author: | Lonman [ Thu Sep 13, 2012 3:38 pm ] |
| Post subject: | Re: SC library to be included on cloud |
Bazza wrote: simpmech wrote: They are also working on a drive similar to the chartbuster drive (potentially out in 6-8 mths). NOW your talking! I would be all over this if it gives me ala-carte "KJPro" type delivery of SC songs not already on the GEM set. This would be the only way i'd get on board. Don't need the cloud - if becomes the absolute only way to get new music for the show, then I might have to reconsider, but at this time absolutely not. .wav doesn't matter as long as they are ripped in 320, over a good system/sound card, you wouldn't be able to tell the difference anyway. I have been running my laptop with Alpha along side with my discs - no audible difference when comparing the same songs, same levels, same eq settings - and that was with a 192 kma/wma file. |
|
| Author: | JoeChartreuse [ Thu Sep 13, 2012 3:48 pm ] |
| Post subject: | Re: SC library to be included on cloud |
Lonman wrote: .wav doesn't matter as long as they are ripped in 320, over a good system/sound card, you wouldn't be able to tell the difference anyway. I have been running my laptop with Alpha along side with my discs - no audible difference when comparing the same songs, same levels, same eq settings - and that was with a 192 kma/wma file. To avoid another round of slop, how about we agree that a host should feel free to run their business the way they see fit, and let it go at that....
|
|
| Author: | Micky [ Thu Sep 13, 2012 5:57 pm ] |
| Post subject: | Re: SC library to be included on cloud |
JoeChartreuse wrote: Lonman wrote: .wav doesn't matter as long as they are ripped in 320, over a good system/sound card, you wouldn't be able to tell the difference anyway. I have been running my laptop with Alpha along side with my discs - no audible difference when comparing the same songs, same levels, same eq settings - and that was with a 192 kma/wma file. To avoid another round of slop, how about we agree that a host should feel free to run their business the way they see fit, and let it go at that.... Agree... but keep in mind that an mp3 file can be converted to wave Personally, I can clearly hear the difference between a wma file at 192k versus a wave file, and I'm surprised Lonman can't hear it 
|
|
| Author: | Lonman [ Thu Sep 13, 2012 6:21 pm ] |
| Post subject: | Re: SC library to be included on cloud |
Micky wrote: JoeChartreuse wrote: Lonman wrote: .wav doesn't matter as long as they are ripped in 320, over a good system/sound card, you wouldn't be able to tell the difference anyway. I have been running my laptop with Alpha along side with my discs - no audible difference when comparing the same songs, same levels, same eq settings - and that was with a 192 kma/wma file. To avoid another round of slop, how about we agree that a host should feel free to run their business the way they see fit, and let it go at that.... Agree... but keep in mind that an mp3 file can be converted to wave Personally, I can clearly hear the difference between a wma file at 192k versus a wave file, and I'm surprised Lonman can't hear it The difference is so minute that I would challenge anyone to tell over a good PA system in a noisy bar. |
|
| Author: | KaraokeIan [ Thu Sep 13, 2012 8:17 pm ] |
| Post subject: | Re: SC library to be included on cloud |
Lonman wrote: Micky wrote: JoeChartreuse wrote: Lonman wrote: .wav doesn't matter as long as they are ripped in 320, over a good system/sound card, you wouldn't be able to tell the difference anyway. I have been running my laptop with Alpha along side with my discs - no audible difference when comparing the same songs, same levels, same eq settings - and that was with a 192 kma/wma file. To avoid another round of slop, how about we agree that a host should feel free to run their business the way they see fit, and let it go at that.... Agree... but keep in mind that an mp3 file can be converted to wave Personally, I can clearly hear the difference between a wma file at 192k versus a wave file, and I'm surprised Lonman can't hear it The difference is so minute that I would challenge anyone to tell over a good PA system in a noisy bar. Agree, plus not to mention that a WAV file can take up to 12 times the hard drive space. It's why the MP3 was invented. |
|
| Author: | JoeChartreuse [ Thu Sep 13, 2012 11:19 pm ] |
| Post subject: | Re: SC library to be included on cloud |
Micky wrote: [ Agree... but keep in mind that an mp3 file can be converted to wave Not exactly. Yes, one can convert an MP3 to .WAV, but one cannot replace the information lost in the original MP3 conversion. Changing to .WAV doesn't put it back. .WAVs are only "lossless" files if the conversion is made to them in the first place. That being said, it's all about personal choice. Let it lay..... |
|
| Author: | Bazza [ Fri Sep 14, 2012 6:14 am ] |
| Post subject: | Re: SC library to be included on cloud |
JoeChartreuse wrote: ...one cannot replace the information lost in the original MP3 conversion. Changing to .WAV doesn't put it back. .WAVs are only "lossless" files if the conversion is made to them in the first place. Correct...and a clarification. You can't hear the "lost pieces" as they are obfuscated by other frequencies. Google "Psychoacoustics". Simply because it is a "lossy" format, does not mean anyone can actually hear the loss so whether they are there or not is moot. |
|
| Author: | JoeChartreuse [ Fri Sep 14, 2012 12:47 pm ] |
| Post subject: | Re: SC library to be included on cloud |
Lonman wrote: Micky wrote: JoeChartreuse wrote: Lonman wrote: .wav doesn't matter as long as they are ripped in 320, over a good system/sound card, you wouldn't be able to tell the difference anyway. I have been running my laptop with Alpha along side with my discs - no audible difference when comparing the same songs, same levels, same eq settings - and that was with a 192 kma/wma file. To avoid another round of slop, how about we agree that a host should feel free to run their business the way they see fit, and let it go at that.... Agree... but keep in mind that an mp3 file can be converted to wave Personally, I can clearly hear the difference between a wma file at 192k versus a wave file, and I'm surprised Lonman can't hear it The difference is so minute that I would challenge anyone to tell over a good PA system in a noisy bar. I should point out that most of my venues are upscale restaurant lounges, and that I usually work at a lower volume than in these more quiet places....Just an observation. Why continue a discussion that always ends with subjective points of view remaining unchanged? To each host his/her own.... |
|
| Author: | doowhatchulike [ Fri Sep 14, 2012 1:22 pm ] |
| Post subject: | Re: SC library to be included on cloud |
Since I was not in on the sound format discussion, maybe I can be the one to get the last word in, since I don't care about such trivial things... 
|
|
| Author: | Lonman [ Fri Sep 14, 2012 1:24 pm ] |
| Post subject: | Re: SC library to be included on cloud |
It was brought up - by you with the wav statement! And even in a quiet restaurant setting, over a good PA at LOWER volumes the difference is even going to be less. PA speakers are not exactly the best for accurate reproduction like a studio monitor or audiophile speaker. |
|
| Author: | Lonman [ Fri Sep 14, 2012 1:25 pm ] |
| Post subject: | Re: SC library to be included on cloud |
doowhatchulike wrote: Since I was not in on the sound format discussion, maybe I can be the one to get the last word in, since I don't care about such trivial things... It's just one of those things, kind of like certain words. |
|
| Author: | johnny reverb [ Fri Sep 14, 2012 2:11 pm ] |
| Post subject: | Re: SC library to be included on cloud |
JoeChartreuse wrote: [ To avoid another round of slop, how about we agree that a host should feel free to run their business the way they see fit, and let it go at that.... [/quote]And what fun would that be.....are you trying to shut down the forum?...  last word, so far |
|
| Author: | Smoothedge69 [ Fri Sep 14, 2012 2:18 pm ] |
| Post subject: | Re: SC library off topic to sound quality |
In wav format the cloud would have to be a Cumulonimbus cloud. It certainly couldn't be a nice fluffy cumulus cloud. |
|
| Author: | Lonman [ Fri Sep 14, 2012 3:05 pm ] |
| Post subject: | Re: SC library off topic to sound quality |
Smoothedge69 wrote: In wav format the cloud would have to be a Cumulonimbus cloud. It certainly couldn't be a nice fluffy cumulus cloud. That's a fact. Be one of towering thunder clouds. |
|
| Author: | doowhatchulike [ Fri Sep 14, 2012 3:17 pm ] |
| Post subject: | Re: SC library off topic to sound quality |
I wouldn't mind taking on that much musical cloud substance...would that make me a "meatier-ologist"??? 
|
|
| Author: | Cueball [ Fri Sep 14, 2012 3:47 pm ] |
| Post subject: | Re: SC library off topic to sound quality |
doowhatchulike wrote: I wouldn't mind taking on that much musical cloud substance...would that make me a "meatier-ologist"??? ... Or maybe just full of vapor.   Whose turn is it for the last word? |
|
| Author: | Paradigm Karaoke [ Fri Sep 14, 2012 4:52 pm ] |
| Post subject: | Re: SC library off topic to sound quality |
mine 
|
|
| Author: | Cueball [ Fri Sep 14, 2012 5:14 pm ] |
| Post subject: | Re: SC library off topic to sound quality |
cueball wrote: Paradigm Karaoke wrote: Whose turn is it for the last word? mine ... OOPS
|
|
| Author: | earthling12357 [ Fri Sep 14, 2012 9:29 pm ] |
| Post subject: | Re: SC library off topic to sound quality |
zyz·zy·va [ziz-uh-vuh] noun Any of various South American weevils of the genus Zyzzyva, often destructive to plants. |
|
| Page 1 of 2 | All times are UTC - 8 hours |
| Powered by phpBB® Forum Software © phpBB Group https://www.phpbb.com/ |
|