Log in

No account? Create an account

Tower of Power

Posted on 2007.01.18 at 19:39


Tomas Gallucci
schpydurx at 2007-01-20 20:57 (UTC) (Link)
First of all, the word is however. Secondly, as a male, of course I would have wanted to see this marvel of science the Eric and photogoot built.
photogoot at 2007-01-21 01:06 (UTC) (Link)
I believe I have but one photograph of it, and its a polaroid. I shall keep an eye out for it and scan it in. I have to believe if Eric had an image he would have included it in this post. There is likely more video footage of it than anything else.

If memory serves me we counted the nobs and buttons, and it came in somewhere over 150. The thing was astonishing to look at, but to see and heare a movie at our place was just incredible.
Tomas Gallucci
schpydurx at 2007-01-21 08:11 (UTC) (Link)
Do not take offense, but knobs and buttons mean nothing. Functionally, what is the difference between a 2-channel mixing board and a 96-channel mixing board? Which looks more impressive? Bells and whistles aside, does the 96-channel board have more non-redundant capabilities then a 2-channel board? No.

/end minor clarification rant.
ehowton at 2007-01-21 15:48 (UTC) (Link)
Knobs and button's mean nothing? Perhaps. As usual, sir, you not only entirely miss the point, but you're also incorrect. Your 'mixing board' example is irrelevant. Let me explain.

You have one amp with two speakers. Your amp has four knobs. "Power," "Volume," Treble," and "Bass." Now, if you're the type of person who thinks even those last two buttons are overkill - you win. But not for the audiophile/music lover. Take those two buttons and multiply them by an entire piece of equipment to control those things with perfection. Now double that because your basic 2-speaker layout doesn't apply to our setup. Now add that amount of control to each and every component we had.

I think you may be beginning to understand that you sir, truly have, NO POINT OF REFERNCE.
Tomas Gallucci
schpydurx at 2007-01-21 19:48 (UTC) (Link)
What I'm saying is that the amount of knobs is irrelevant. If I wanted to, I could control everything via software providing one knob and make you cycle through the menu system to get to the control you want to adjust. The number of knobs means nothing to me, much like they mean nothing to the professional user.

Whereas you may walk into a professional recording studio and be impressed by how many knobs, buttons and sliders are available for play, it means nothing to me because it is redundant. The number of knobs does not indicate how useful a piece of hardware is, rather it's functionality does.
ehowton at 2007-01-21 20:04 (UTC) (Link)
You're not even listening to me.
Tomas Gallucci
schpydurx at 2007-01-21 20:41 (UTC) (Link)
No sir, you are continuing to make an argument that is in truth a non sequitur.
ehowton at 2007-01-21 21:18 (UTC) (Link)
Let me rephrase - you're not compreheding my words. Yes SoundBlaster makes a nice 24-bit audio card, and yes you can bring up Windows Media Player equalizer to adjust the sound of your Logitech's to play your compressed mp3's.

And someday they may be able to recreate multiple solid-state components pushing 800-total watts out of speakers as large as your Suzuki. But your current desktop is NOT going to recreate that, and no, you have no idea apparently of the type and quality of sound I'm talking about. That's ok - I'm not attacking you.
Tomas Gallucci
schpydurx at 2007-01-22 01:03 (UTC) (Link)
There are a few issues that need to be addressed here. First of all, I am not arguing that the lack of knobs or buttons is better or worse then the presence of knobs or buttons. I am simply stating that their mere existence is only a means to an end, i.e. the ability to tweak various parameters. By this reasoning, we can conclude that it doesn't matter how such tweaking is implemented, so long as the tweak can be performed.

If you wanted to make an argument about the most efficient way to tweak, I will concede that having a physical control for each parameter gives the most readily available ease of control. However, it should be noted that too much control could indeed exist. Consider a graphical equalizer (EQ) which would allow you to tweak every available frequency in the range of hearing. It would be impractical.

I do not use Windows Media Player, I use Winamp. Secondly, I prefer to use Digital Sound Processors or DSPs instead of graphical EQs. Lastly, your subtle scorn of MP3s is inconsistent with your behavior and we will address that topic shortly.

Sound is waves of energy in a specific frequency range, 20Hz to 20kHz. More to the point, sound is vibrations. This principal is the cornerstone to the recording industry. Microphones turn the kinetic energy of sound into electrical energy producing an electronic representation of the sound wave. This in an analog process; i.e. it is a continuous process. For the duration that a sound is made, the microphone will continue to produce the electrical version of the sound.

There have been various methods and mediums to record sound on over the years. I have chosen magnetic tape for our example. The current from the microphone eventually reaches the magnetic head in the tape recorder after the signal has passed through all of the signal processing devices the sound engineer chooses to pass the sound through, i.e. mixing consoles. The magnet reacts in accordance to the signal that it is being sent and writes a continuous stream of information on the tape. As you have noted previously in this post, tape hiss was one hurdle to overcome, hence digital technology.

As the name implies, an Analog to Digital Converter or ADC converts analog signals into digital ones. This, however, poses a problem: when recording onto a digital medium such as a CD, there is only so much data that can be put into a finite space. Specifically when addressing digital audio data, there is a loss of data when compared to the original analog signal. Hence, CDs are technically a lossy format, but due to Nyquist's Theory, this is a non-issue as perceived by the human ear.

Compact Discs or CDs sample one hundred forty four thousand times a second. Conversely, DVDs sample one hundred ninety-two thousand times a second, therefore capturing more data then CDs. Here is your inconsistency: you constantly complain that MP3s are vile because they are compressed and are lossy, but you do not complain that CD audio isn't as good as DVD audio. According to your logic, you should hold yourself to this highest standard, but you don't. Just because an MP3 has a low bitrate doesn't mean it's going to be a less the pleasant sound or that you will be able to hear the compression.

As to 's description, I realize now why he mentioned the number of controls: he is a photographer and is therefore thinking visually. While I'm sure that the Tower of Power was indeed aesthetic, the only point I have tried to make through this whole debacle is that the number of controls does not equate to the greatness of the conglomerate. Were that the case, the it would be a fact that War and Peace is the best novel in existence simply because it has the more words then any other novel, and that if one aspired to write the best novel on the planet, one need only write a novel that had one more word then War and Peace. But come sir, we know that this is a ridiculous conclusion much like it is an equally ridiculous conclusion that all of your controls is what made the Tower of Power great.

CeltManX, Devlin O' Coileáin
celtmanx at 2007-01-22 07:29 (UTC) (Link)

Tomas Gallucci
schpydurx at 2007-01-22 07:43 (UTC) (Link)
When will you stop your purile, adolecent games? You're a married man with kids. Grow the fuck up.
CeltManX, Devlin O' Coileáin
celtmanx at 2007-01-22 07:55 (UTC) (Link)
YOU ARE the ONE who told galinda822 you WANTED to SEE Eric's TOWER of POWER!!!
Tomas Gallucci
schpydurx at 2007-01-22 07:58 (UTC) (Link)
Thank you for proving to all of Eric's friends that you are nothing more then a sociopath. Do yourself a favor and stay off this blog to avoid future degradation.
danzigfried at 2007-01-23 23:44 (UTC) (Link)
I think we have all been able to sufficiently address who the 'knob' is...

It's funny, as far as entertainment value of blogs go, it only takes one...
photogoot at 2007-01-24 03:31 (UTC) (Link)
Excellent use of the "knob" reference. 10 points to Dan. :-)
Previous Entry  Next Entry