2056
mAAp Project / Re: 2.5 Map made with 2.8 Editor
« on: Friday, April 13, 2012, 22:12:28 PM »
didn't expect such a tiny map.
This section allows you to view all posts made by this member. Note that you can only see posts made in areas you currently have access to.
Is that the other thread just for broadcasted/official match talking? I see you kept that related posts only.It's for actually talking about sports, not arguing about whether they are good or not.
Indeed. Your mom's pussy that is.It's pretty sad if your standards are that low.
SPORTS SUCK!!!YOUR FACE SUCKS!!!
IT SOUNDS BETTER TO ME SO IT IS BETTER. That is his argument.Is that not all that matters though? Sure he can be spewing a bunch of misinformation all day, but in the end, the only thing that matters is how you like it, not how others like it.
Clean the thread up then Killa.But that would require effort...... I'll do it in a bit.
Well, 38 is ok too, the point is i won't have to pass SF trainingNone of the training works. You automatically have SF training.again
I'm wondering if there is my old account stats saved somehow in some old archives of battletracker, despite I didn't have an accout there. When I made a new accout several days ago it could be erased somehow. If it's too much time-consuming action, don't botherNext time i'll take some screenshots
Thanks in advance
Bucks lost to KnicksBy the looks of it, I doubt we're going to get any serious sports discussion done here without people throwing it off topic with stupid shit.I don't like the red/green uniforms anyway...
In other news, Brewers brewed and scrubs scrubbed. Looking for a sweep tomorrow.
LOL Killa you're funny. I would consider that a budget PA speaker. What else are you gonna buy for PA? It has to play loud and run for hours without destroying itself. In fact I would get rid of every other prefabricated PA speakers cheaper than this one because the chances are high that the cheap ones will work a few times or push out square waves.Oh I believe it, it is just that the words "budget" and $100 don't seem to go together in my head.
Oh and I didn't mention you have to buy a power amplifier which is another $100
Yeah lots of people use those for small parties or kareoke or whatever here. They're pretty good and easy to move around. Plus you can kick them hard and they still work.Budget speaker, $108. Fuck that shit.
These are really good budget PA speakers: http://www.parts-express.com/pe/showdetl.cfm?Partnumber=245-804
Here's my little rant on my opinion of audio tech globalization.What are you the encyclopedia on sound?
Oh btw in Guily's post, the woofers in those speakers look like a pair from Aurum Cantus.
The MP3 compression scheme adds a special type of high shelving filter to reduces the range of higher frequencies. Higher frequencies (that is frequencies above approx. 15,000 in most MP3 cases) impact the size of a file much more than lower frequencies. A single hi-hat can span between 15,000 and 20,000 hertz. While a bass note can literally be one sine wave. In the case of bass guitars, a single note has harmonics up to about 1,000 hertz (because you usually hear a quick pluck while the rest of the note is bass harmonics below 500 hertz in most cases). The important thing to note here is that because the way music/instruments is/are, there is much more high frequency information than low frequency information quantitatively. So for MP3's, high frequency information is lost to lower file size.
Okay cool, but then you can boost high frequencies to get it back just like creative does right? LOL NOPE. The MP3 codec has been in development for years to figure out the perfect filter to compress music so that humans have a hard time distinguishing between the original and compressed copies. It is a very complex formula and it's quite amazing how we can store music digitally at such low file sizes and still have acceptable quality. 128kbps is not acceptable quality depending on the material. But a variable bit rate V0 file is quite excellent quality and many will not be able to tell the difference. 320kbps is unnecessary between file size and performance. If you're gonna do a 320, you might as well have it in FLAC. A 320kbps file is the best example of the misleading "bigger is better" belief. Once you at the FLAC level you really only benefit from it by having very expensive speakers. There is the belief that frequencies above 20,000 affect the perception of sound even if we can't hear it. I agree, but this is only gonna be useful and valid for you if you're listening to music created by live instruments in an expensive studio and listening with expensive speakers with a huge range. Nobody I know, or anybody on this forum is at that level. Nobody has that kind of system. And if you did, you would be listening to vinyls.
These days nobody really pops in a tune, mixes some drinks, and listens to it. We're all mostly less than 3 feet from our computers listening through some cheap chinese/japanese sweat shop factory trash while companies will tell us, "HEY THIS IS THE BEST QUALITY BROOO". These days, our cheap equipment and cheap music is enough for us and thats perfectly okay. But it's nice to have that classic feel of live instruments recorded in a truly pro studio listening through some excellently engineered speakers at a distance with all the dynamics and everything.
And for the record, if you really wanted quality audio, it would come from a company you never heard of that never advertises because it caters to an elite level that doesn't need to be told what is the best. There's nothing hipster about that statement.
Well written post. I have a lot of reasons to not have FLAC on my desktop, mainly having to download all of my music over again, but 10x larger. It would be a nightmare.
But on your desktop or laptop, there's no reason not to have FLAC. I have some FLAC songs that are 100MB each
Also, I don't have the sound equipment to enjoy FLAC any more than 320kbps mp3.
It's just a matter of sound quality across the line from the source to the output peripheral of choice, if you have something that can render out a Flac in a faithful way, then you would notice the difference, otherwise you wouldn't notice a huge difference between that and a 160hz sampled mp3.Yeah, that's kinda my point. I don't plan on buy a sound card or amp and an expensive pair of headphones just to enjoy FLAC files. It's not worth it for the price I would have to pay.
On the other hand it also matters what kind of music you listen of course.