This has to be one of the most interesting and entertaining threads in quite some time.
 
Kudos to all !!!

"This parrot's DEAD!"
"No, it's just resting."
"Look, I know a dead parrot when I see one, and I'm looking at one right now."
"No, he's not dead. He's resting!"

P.S. Tom, being a German speaker is no excuse if you can't spell in German, either.

splunge?

bitflipper


"This parrot's DEAD!"
"No, it's just resting."
"Look, I know a dead parrot when I see one, and I'm looking at one right now."
"No, he's not dead. He's resting!"

P.S. Tom, being a German speaker is no excuse if you can't spell in German, either.

you can exactly see on this picture that the parrot is a bit stiff but ONLY sleeping

rhythminmind


32/96 pffft that BS.
This is where it's at.

 
you surely can get a great performance out of this thing if you connect it to  380.000 volt and use it at 128 times the regular speed ...

info@tomflair.com

yorolpal


splunge?
 

i thought it was "ministry of silly walks" not silly TALKS !! ;-)
 
c´mon folks - excluding me from communication via special words is racist ;-)
 
so keep in mind that there might be more germs here  that might even speak less english than me  ;-) *fishing for compliments*  ("oh - you english is sooo nice tom"...appreciated)
 
SAUERKRAUT

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3v0I4OQi7CQ
 

yorolpal

info@tomflair.com

yorolpal


splunge?
 

i thought it was "ministry of silly walks" not silly TALKS !! ;-)
 
c´mon folks - excluding me from communication via special words is racist ;-)
 
so keep in mind that there might be more germs here  that might even speak less english than me  ;-) *fishing for compliments*  ("oh - you english is sooo nice tom"...appreciated)
 
SAUERKRAUT

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3v0I4OQi7CQ
 

amazing - thanks for the link...gotta serch for my collectors box of 9 dvd with all the flying circuses :-)

Wiz

info@tomflair.com


but freddie - why get mad because of that question?
i also think that its a bit weird to post a video of doctor alban just because he is a friend of yours - actually i think most of us have some famous friends somwhere in the business - but unless it isnt specifically your track??
and btw...(and pleas dont get me wrong - cos i also did quite some commercial dance tracks) but dont you think that especially with the songs you posted, the whole discussion about bits, frequencies and stuff is overly exagerated - actually dancfloor - especially eurodance - doesnt in anyway exceed in "acoustical" or "musical" quality (and as i said: i released a few of tracks like those - but i never would have seen it as something very "elaborated" or very qualitative)
the whole gear frenzy discssion might be appropriate when you do live tracking of very good instrumetalists and vocalists - in a good environment and with a good idea -- but 4to the floor eurodance with melodyne (back inthe day antaresed i guess) vocals ??? c´mon freddie - thats like claiming that one has to eat spam from a golden plate to enjoy its taste...
i think that as a producer one should remain pretty down to earth and hunble - i recorded an album of classical music that sold well in japan (viennese horn ensemble) whit the solist horn player of the vienna philharmonics - but that doesnt mean a thing - cos he played and he is the star - not me - i was just the exchangable guy behind the desk, cutting and mixing the stuff...but that doesnt make me even a little of a philharmonic ;-)

take it easy

I was the person who asked to hear some of Freddies Work.

I took it in goodfaith, that he had either produced, engineered, mastered or wrote/co wrote those songs in the videos he posted.

I feel misled.

I too, have worked with some famous people over the years, or had a conversation and beer with them....I would not post their work as an example of my abilities.

it is simply wrong and misleading to do that.

I would like an apology from Freddie, and one to the group, and I would like to hear some work that he has engineered himself.

Wiz

well -  i wouldnt be so harsh to him, so i dont expect an apology  - but maybe (as we use to say here) he sort of "leaned himself a bit too wide out of the window"  ;-)
 
regards to downunder
 
 

drewfx1

Just repeating what Dan Lavry or Bob Katz (and I respect both of those guys), or whoever, once said is not good science (though, at least for those guys, it is probably based on good science).

Bob Katz is well, he's a mastering engineer who writes books but with all due respect when it comes to the subject of digital audio conversion, Dan's the man.  His converters are some of the best available at any price.  So yeah I'd feel very comfortable saying he's an authority who clearly outranks anybody here, myself obviously included.
 

At some point you actually have to look at the math, and if you don't like what it implies, point out where it's wrong. And you also need to confirm the thoery with empirical testing, or at least review the data from existing tests.

Yes and no.  The math is well accepted but only germane if you're already in the digital domain...  you've got to get there first (and out again to hear anything).  So the design considerations and limitations of the AD and DA conversion circuits matters, beyond the math.  That's what Dan's saying.  These are electronic devices and they have limitations. 
 
As a parallel analogy, remember a few years back when over-clocking CPUs was the rage?  At some point we all hit a wall where the chips would damn near melt.  So designers stepped back and came up with multiprocessing, with a maximum processor speed around 3 Ghz.  This wasn't a math limitation it was a silicon one!  Otherwise we'd all be running our CPUs at 20 Ghz n'est-ce pas?
 
There are reverse sloping trends for AD and DA converters as SRs increase and the intersection of these slopes is the sweet spot which Dan estimates around 60 to 70 kHz.

j boy

drewfx1

Just repeating what Dan Lavry or Bob Katz (and I respect both of those guys), or whoever, once said is not good science (though, at least for those guys, it is probably based on good science).

Bob Katz is well, he's a mastering engineer who writes books but with all due respect when it comes to the subject of digital audio conversion, Dan's the man.  His converters are some of the best available at any price.  So yeah I'd feel very comfortable saying he's an authority who clearly outranks anybody here, myself obviously included.

Agreed. I will say, however, that my impression is Katz does his homework before he speaks, and I mentioned him because his and Lavry's names are the ones that always get brought into these things. But my point was really if you focus on who said things, instead of what they said, everyone starts arguing about the wrong thing - it becomes a he said/she said, "my expert is better than your expert" argument that just goes on forever, instead of talking about the relevant points.

 

At some point you actually have to look at the math, and if you don't like what it implies, point out where it's wrong. And you also need to confirm the thoery with empirical testing, or at least review the data from existing tests.

Yes and no.  The math is well accepted but only germane if you're already in the digital domain...  you've got to get there first (and out again to hear anything).  So the design considerations and limitations of the AD and DA conversion circuits matters, beyond the math.  That's what Dan's saying.  These are electronic devices and they have limitations. 

Yes, of course. But the same mathmatical formulas apply to analog filters and circuits as well as digital. And I did state that you need to do empirical testing, in order to verify the theory in the real world. A mathmatical proof doesn't mean anything if the empirical evidence contradicts it.

The main point was to get away from "I'm right!" "No, I'm right", and arguing about the flaws in different analogies, to actually talking about the points in question. 

drewfx

some of the esoteric "feel" stuff drives me nuts .... it reminds me of a debate in another forum where people were arguing about the sound difference between cables (yeah - that one) - brand x sounds brighter - brand y clears the mud from the bass ... brand z has poor mids ... etc .... LOL ... I asked very simply if anyone could show ANY PROOF in the form of waveform differences or anything to support their claims ... and then the shocker .... I was informed that "the ear can hear things that can't be measured"  ....

sigh ......

Freddie,
 
So you think I’m whining and making a fuzz when I ask for facts?
I think what people are looking for is honesty!
 
You wrote “Here some of the Artist/ Friends that I have worked with and some songs I produced and wrote...”.
 
If you claim something, you need to be able to back it up.
 
If you claim that you could hear above 20K at an age of 30+, OR when you claim you have perfect vision, I don’t really care to comment on that, even if I’m convinced that this is just rubbish. It’s your OPINION!
 
But if you claim that you have written and produced specified artist and even supply links to your work, you are stating FACTS, (if they are thru or not, it’s another matter) and it’s not your OPINION anymore.
 
Freddie, do you have any proof of that you have WRITTEN or RECORD ANY of the music that you earlier claimed that you have done?
 
If so, let us know!
 
MQ

Wiz

info@tomflair.com


but freddie - why get mad because of that question?
i also think that its a bit weird to post a video of doctor alban just because he is a friend of yours - actually i think most of us have some famous friends somwhere in the business - but unless it isnt specifically your track??
and btw...(and pleas dont get me wrong - cos i also did quite some commercial dance tracks) but dont you think that especially with the songs you posted, the whole discussion about bits, frequencies and stuff is overly exagerated - actually dancfloor - especially eurodance - doesnt in anyway exceed in "acoustical" or "musical" quality (and as i said: i released a few of tracks like those - but i never would have seen it as something very "elaborated" or very qualitative)
the whole gear frenzy discssion might be appropriate when you do live tracking of very good instrumetalists and vocalists - in a good environment and with a good idea -- but 4to the floor eurodance with melodyne (back inthe day antaresed i guess) vocals ??? c´mon freddie - thats like claiming that one has to eat spam from a golden plate to enjoy its taste...
i think that as a producer one should remain pretty down to earth and hunble - i recorded an album of classical music that sold well in japan (viennese horn ensemble) whit the solist horn player of the vienna philharmonics - but that doesnt mean a thing - cos he played and he is the star - not me - i was just the exchangable guy behind the desk, cutting and mixing the stuff...but that doesnt make me even a little of a philharmonic ;-)

take it easy

I was the person who asked to hear some of Freddies Work.

I took it in goodfaith, that he had either produced, engineered, mastered or wrote/co wrote those songs in the videos he posted.

I feel misled.

I too, have worked with some famous people over the years, or had a conversation and beer with them....I would not post their work as an example of my abilities.

it is simply wrong and misleading to do that.

I would like an apology from Freddie, and one to the group, and I would like to hear some work that he has engineered himself.

Wiz

Wiz!
I have not misled you my friend---check my Name---> Freddie Hogblad and you will see that I telling you all the truth!
It is some one else here at this FORUM that should apologize to me instead that made all this the confusions about all this in the first place! 
 
can we please stop now, and go on with the subject!!
 
Best Regards
Freddie Hogblad 

j boy

drewfx1

Just repeating what Dan Lavry or Bob Katz (and I respect both of those guys), or whoever, once said is not good science (though, at least for those guys, it is probably based on good science).

Bob Katz is well, he's a mastering engineer who writes books but with all due respect when it comes to the subject of digital audio conversion, Dan's the man.  His converters are some of the best available at any price.  So yeah I'd feel very comfortable saying he's an authority who clearly outranks anybody here, myself obviously included.

All this is true but as far as I am concerned it actually goes further than that. I understand what I am writing and have done numerous tests to confirm my understanding. I am not just parroting what I have read. I am sure there are others participating that also understand what they are saying.

The thing about these kind of discussions is that not every opinion is as valid as others. Often a lack of knowledge can give people the wrong understanding of a subject. That is OK. Getting better informed usually clears that up. Pollux demonstrated that in this thread.

And then there are the people that refuse to accept that they could possibly be wrong. Either because they have overconfidence in their perception and sensory memory or because they have overconfidence in their intellect. dmmi is a good example of the latter. They either are incapable of understanding the topic because it is too complex for them or they are just stuck due to ego problems which blinds them. (Or a combination of both).

Some things are obviously correct even after deep scrutiny and testing. Some things are clearly incorrect and do not stand up to scrutiny. Alas not everybody is capable of telling the difference. That is why I posted the link to the video describing the Dunning-Kruger effect. Some people are lost cases by their own choice.

At some point you actually have to look at the math, and if you don't like what it implies, point out where it's wrong. And you also need to confirm the thoery with empirical testing, or at least review the data from existing tests.

Agreed.

 
There are reverse sloping trends for AD and DA converters as SRs increase and the intersection of these slopes is the sweet spot which Dan estimates around 60 to 70 kHz.

Not just Dan Lavry. Paul Frindle, Buno Putzney, JJ Johnston to name a few also agree with this. 64 Khz would make alot of sense.

UnderTow

UnderTow

 
There are reverse sloping trends for AD and DA converters as SRs increase and the intersection of these slopes is the sweet spot which Dan estimates around 60 to 70 kHz.

Not just Dan Lavry. Paul Frindle, Buno Putzney, JJ Johnston to name a few also agree with this. 64 Khz would make alot of sense.

But I think a pertinent question here is what exactly are they talking about? From reading Lavry's argument against measuring inaccuracies at higher SR's, I always assumed he was talking about straight/non-oversampled PCM at 60-70kHz being ideal. Does anyone disagree with this interpretation?

If he does mean non-oversampled, we have to be careful that someone doesn't quote him as the voice of God, when he says something like, "60-70kHz is ideal, but 88.2 or 96kHz is the best real world choice", and present it as meaning oversampled AD/DA is better at 96kHz. With oversampled, the only potential advantage I see at the converter level is the higher cutoff frequency of the decimation/interpolation filters, which is not what I think Lavry was talking about.

drewfx