Skip to main content

View Post [edit]

Poster: Dupenhagen Moonbat Date: Mar 18, 2015 6:14pm
Forum: GratefulDead Subject: Re: how to improve the Beta version of the Dead Archive

One of the first things I'd do is to fix the Forums editing function so that when the original poster edits his post, the thread does not go to the top of the heap. Gods forbid, anyone should upset the precious mountain of shit which is the Dead forum, by committing such a sacrilege. Make the sacrilege impossible by design. Problem solved. Of course, the converse of this problem is that good, intelligent threads are routinely buried by lesser lights (he said, over-generously), spammers (who at least occasionally provide a modicum of entertainment), and hijackers who, having nothing of substance or originality to add, simply wreck what they can't understand. C'est la vie, mmm? Zee pghice of zee pghogghess, mon frere. Now for a bit of substance... We've begun a new millennium, so let's act like it and implement an Archive lossless audio player. The streaming audio player either plays Ogg Vorbis or mp3, both of which are lossy. I haven't checked either for whether they are variable or fixed, nor the rate, because I don't care enough. Lossy is lossy. Too often those too old to hear the difference claim lossy "is as good as" lossless -- to their ear, the objective observer should remind them -- then make the error of presuming no one else can hear the difference either. For a good graphical representation of lossless versus lossy audio, see Samizdat's thread. I have employed a couple of practices over the years to train my all but too superannuated ear. First, both clear or muddy-sounding shows which provide WAV and/or FLAC, I run through Audacity and check the frequency analysis (and spectral view thereof). Unfortunately, many of the audience recordings the Dead allow us, for instance, have little information above ten or fifteen kHz, and the Dead soundboards hereon are streaming-only, which is by definition lossy, as stated above. Second, when I do determine a source is lossless, only then will I listen by headphones, because the last thing I want is to start thinking lossy sounds good. I expect that by the time I'm too old to tell the difference without headphones, I'll be nearly ripe for induction into the I Can't Hear It, Therefore It Ain't There Club. Lastly, it's always good to know where one fits (currently) on the hearing scale, therefore Paul Lutus' excellent JSigGen Java applet (or the downloadable .jar file) comes in handy.
This post was modified by Dupenhagen Moonbat on 2015-03-18 20:04:54 anecdotal addendum: Wow. Testing my hearing just now using JSigGen, I could barely pick up the 9.5 kHz tone. Just three or four years ago, it was more like 13 kHz. Move over, deef geezers, another's about to join you!
This post was modified by Dupenhagen Moonbat on 2015-03-19 01:14:34

Reply [edit]

Poster: William Tell Date: Mar 18, 2015 8:15pm
Forum: GratefulDead Subject: Re: how to improve the Beta version of the Dead Archive

Excellent point; yes, a few things I've said here and regretted, and I would delete, but fear it would only draw attention to it, eh?

And, thanks for understanding, Chris U; I was joking about the Forum biz (ie, it being hard to find being a good thing for a twit like me that no one really needs to hear from yet again).

Reply [edit]

Poster: Chris U. Date: Mar 18, 2015 5:44pm
Forum: GratefulDead Subject: Re: how to improve the Beta version of the Dead Archive

"One of the first things I'd do is to fix the Forums editing function so that when the original poster edits his post, the thread does not go to the top of the heap."

Word.

I think the same should apply to the editing of previous submitted reviews of shows (at the very least make it an option).

Reply [edit]

Poster: craven714 Date: Mar 19, 2015 9:55am
Forum: GratefulDead Subject: Re: how to improve the Beta version of the Dead Archive

"Gods forbid, anyone should upset the precious mountain of shit which is the Dead forum, by committing such a sacrilege"
That's my fav post so far...
~ thank you for the patronizing, unnecessary, assface remark

Reply [edit]

Poster: SomeDarkHollow Date: Mar 19, 2015 1:20pm
Forum: GratefulDead Subject: Re: how to improve the Beta version of the Dead Archive

Hey, I happen to love this mountain of shit. I also have nothing but respect (or thinly veiled contempt...either or) for those brave souls who attempt to ascend this ever expanding pile of offal. Over the years we've lost a few good ones in various crap-alanches and shit-storms, but at least they expired doing what they loved...or what made the rest of us laugh at their expense.
This post was modified by SomeDarkHollow on 2015-03-19 20:20:06

Reply [edit]

Poster: direwolf0701 Date: Mar 19, 2015 11:39am
Forum: GratefulDead Subject: Re: how to improve the Beta version of the Dead Archive

i must admit - i am tempted to go back and revise a few of my posts from ancient threads (just to be an ass, naturally)

Reply [edit]

Poster: SomeDarkHollow Date: Mar 19, 2015 11:41am
Forum: GratefulDead Subject: Re: how to improve the Beta version of the Dead Archive

You, sir, are nothing if not a natural ass.





Sucks about Wilfork, but I can understand the reasoning.

Reply [edit]

Poster: direwolf0701 Date: Mar 19, 2015 12:11pm
Forum: GratefulDead Subject: Re: how to improve the Beta version of the Dead Archive

Wilfork AND our Secondary - I mean, seriously?????

oops, this may be looked upon as a hijack...... a multitude of apologies to those offended.

:)

Reply [edit]

Poster: SomeDarkHollow Date: Mar 19, 2015 12:16pm
Forum: GratefulDead Subject: Re: how to improve the Beta version of the Dead Archive

No need to apologize.

Just think of it as adding more layers upon Mount Feces.