craigb

Got a pack of puns in an email this morning and, when I saw Bob's last effort among them, I figured I had to share the rest! ? Fungi puns are my yeast favorite; there's too mushroom for error... If you have to wear both a mask and glasses, you may be entitled to condensation. When you teach a wolf to meditate, he becomes aware wolf. Monsters don't like to eat ghosts because they taste like sheet! I was told not to steal kitchen utensils, but it's a whisk I'm willing to take! Water is heavier than butane because butane is a lighter fluid. I have a friend that wants to study burrowing rodents; I told him to gopher it! I'm reading a book called "Quick Money For Dummies" by Robin Banks. Nothing tops a plain pizza! When you said life would get back to normal after June, July'ed! Newsflash: "Lego Store Re-Opens After Lockdown! Folks Lined Up for Blocks!" Cosmetology student misses class, forced to make up makeup test! Be careful when you eat at Sam & Ella's diner! I pulled a muscle digging for gold; just a miner injury... I never finish anything! I have a black belt in partial arts. Ghosts like to ride in elevators because it lifts their spirits.

Black dog!

Welcome back Bub! Here's a bullet-point detail of what's new since you were last on: XXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXX XXXXXXXXXXXXXX XXXXXX XXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXX Some censorship. ?

?

One of my favorite Genesis songs that I had to work in here (listen to the lyrics and you'll hear plenty of "Sit Downs!").

Let me guess, you spent so much on the desk that you didn't have enough left to replace a few bulbs? ? (I still like the ambience of that room! The tilted wall actually adds to the effect. ?)

You use Daryl's staff members for your content? That could explain how you got so many posts! ?

Alternatives: ?

Out of my SoundBlaster, it's all crash in the loud speaker! ?

On the topic of fantasy, I'm surprised Wibbles hasn't posted another Kylie video! ?

Looks like Bruno's a fan of pop-rock, ya? ?? (That list is definitely reminding me of some stuff to play over the next week! ??)

Not bad, but I can still see patches of ceiling and walls... ? ?

Of course, even if you could get a perfectly flat response, it will always end up being played by others in multitudes of non-flat rooms...

Best legal prosecution team? Turner Brown & Ben Dover? I'll have to ask my lawyer, Justin Case...

That sucks. Personally, I really miss this:

Peter's Esoteric Name Is Sue?

Phrase Ensconcement Needs Inventive Structuring! ?

And... Bubbles is back!

Yoko's Greatest Hits? ?

My 2 cents (which means I'm probably due change ?). As I've posted before, back in 2003-4 I had a $4,000 stereo setup and tested .wav's and .mp3's at all sorts of resolutions. From an intellectual stance, I know a person can realize a much larger range than is usually specified (20 Hz to 20,000 Hz); I even have devices I used during my PhD work that go up to 100,000 Hz (like an Echofone Ultrasonic Listening System first created to attempt to communicate with dolphins). Although you may not consciously hear frequencies outside of the usual range, we found evidence that a person IS getting some benefits, primarily in the accelerated learning area. However, from a more realistic point of view, I had started importing all of my music to hard drives and the space usage for wave files was excessive! Back then, I had to have a multi-bay external hard drive just to hold a small portion of my collection. In the early 2000's, the largest hard drives typically available were only 250 GB and I had four of them for 1 TB total. For reference, here's one example of the file size differences: A quick calculation tells me that, if I had kept everything as .wav files, my current collection would require about 35 TB's to store! So, back to the tests. I created a sample .wav track that had short portions of several songs from different genres. I then converted that track into all the different file types and resolutions I wanted to test and appended these to the end of the original .wav file. I then put all of them into a playlist (I named each track to easily see what it was). I then shuffle played those so I wouldn't know what was being played ahead of time. As I listened, first without headphones, then with, I wrote down comments about the track before checking the file name. The results were interesting to me. I could easily hear the differences between the .wav reference track and all resolutions below 192 kbps, so I removed those and retested. Even with the decent gear I was working with, I really didn't notice anything that made me want to use a resolution above 192 kbps, so that's what I went with. While this information isn't an exact match to the topic because I'm talking about music I'm listening to, I thought it might be interesting. I should also note that whenever I'm creating a new audio track that I actually go in the other direction. I always use tracks and stems that are higher quality than what a resulting CD of 16-bit/44.1 kHz would be (typically 24-bit/96 kHz). This allows me to run them through things like effects processors without losing quality (like how the accumulation of rounding errors of old gear basically left you with something like a 14-bit song back in the day!). My thinking is that, if you start with the highest quality, you can always downgrade it. I use this same approach with graphics and video. YMMV! ?

Tanks! I've been having a tough couple of weeks and needed something. Heh, doesn't that first track remind you of certain other bands? Kind of like Joy Division meets Bauhaus.