Gizmodo 
Enter your username and password.
Tip your editors:
Editorial Director:
Brian Lam | | Twitter
Editor:
Jason Chen
| AIM | Twitter
Features Editor:
Wilson Rothman
| Twitter
Senior Contributing Editors:
Jesus Diaz
| AIM | Twitter
Mark Wilson, Reviews
| AIM | Twitter
Contributing Editors:
Matt Buchanan
| AIM | Twitter
Adam Frucci
| Twitter
Sean Fallon
| Twitter
Jack Loftus
| Twitter
John Herrman
| Twitter
Dan Nosowitz
Chris Mascari
Danny Allen
| Twitter
Rosa Golijan
| Twitter
Chris Jacob
Columnist:
Brendan I. Koerner
Interns:
Don Nguyen
Kyle VanHemert
Comment Intern:
Nick Ellenoff |
Comment Account Questions:
Original material is licensed under a Creative Commons License permitting non-commercial sharing with attribution.
09/08/09
09/09/09
09/08/09
Reading the beyond-obsessive Beatles fans on Amazon forums, some maintain that the bestest knobs-at-11 sound would be to make new stereo mixes of the albums. This sounds like sacrilege, but George and Giles Martin have done it for the Yellow Submarine soundtrack, One album, and Love album. EMI could even consider 5.1 surround mixes on Blu-ray.
No doubt for some Beatles anniversary EMI will go for it. Meanwhile I bet fans will remix the Rock Band tracks as they did with Metallica. When people love songs this much, some will go to extreme lengths to get the "master tape" sound.
09/08/09
09/08/09
But the world is in stereo. We have two ears. Once engineers realized the second speaker wasn't just where you put the tambourine, creating stereo soundfields made reproduced music come alive.
The mono mixes may be historically important, but I'm betting the stereo remixes will sound way better.
09/08/09
09/09/09
09/08/09
If I can't purchase it from a store, I will have NO problem with downloading flac rips.
09/08/09
09/08/09
09/08/09
What matters on SACD is the attention to detail and quality of the masters, which are typically much more carefully done. But, once that careful mastering has been performed, a standard CD can reproduce it indistinguishably.
Of course, if you meant surround, then that's a different story, but I would question the benefit of introducing surround to this particular set of recordings.
[theaudiocritic.com]
09/08/09
09/08/09
It's easy to generate all sorts of results in studies, even nice ones.
My experience is that people can distinguish between 16 and 24 bit resolution, although the difference is less noticeable between 44.1 and 96 kHz. And of course, a better converter at a lower resolution can sound better than a crappy converter at a higher resolution.
09/08/09
Anyone know how to unwarp vinyl that's been left in an attic for a generation?
09/08/09
Here are two links, in fact they work for all of your questions.
* [lmgtfy.com]
* [justfuckinggoogleit.com]
09/09/09
The snark is strong in this one.
That was actually an off-hand question because I didn't think it was possible. I fear the person who tried this technique the first.
09/09/09
Furutech will gladly sell you their DVF-1 Record Flattener for $1480.
09/08/09
09/08/09
09/08/09
09/08/09
09/08/09
09/08/09
04/17/09
For Christ's sake, you're recommending listening to FLAC rips off freakin' VINYL! So the barely perceptible quality loss going from FLAC to a 320Kbps MP3 is unacceptable, but listening to a needle crudely scratch out all your songs is OK?! You guys are batshit.
04/17/09
07/21/09
Just sayin'.
04/17/09
04/17/09
04/17/09
04/17/09
04/17/09
04/17/09
04/17/09
04/17/09
The differences are distinct and at times dramatic.
04/17/09
04/17/09
04/17/09