Home |
Search |
Today's Posts |
#1
Posted to comp.os.linux.advocacy,rec.audio.pro
|
|||
|
|||
Audio Under Linux Sounds Terrible
I'm not sure what is going on with Linux and audio, but there is a
major difference between Linux and Windows playing the same files be it *.wav or mp3 files. Using xmms under Linux and foobar under Windows, I can hear a substantial difference in sound quality between Linux and Windows. Linux sounds compressed and lifeless and Windows sounds more open and full sounding. Any idea why this is happening? I am using Dynaudio BM15a and a RME soundcard if that matters. |
#2
Posted to comp.os.linux.advocacy,rec.audio.pro
|
|||
|
|||
Audio Under Linux Sounds Terrible
|
#3
Posted to comp.os.linux.advocacy,rec.audio.pro
|
|||
|
|||
Audio Under Linux Sounds Terrible
Charlie wrote:
On Tue, 22 Aug 2006 16:24:31 -0700, simply.lisa wrote: I'm not sure what is going on with Linux and audio, but there is a major difference between Linux and Windows playing the same files be it *.wav or mp3 files. Using xmms under Linux and foobar under Windows, I can hear a substantial difference in sound quality between Linux and Windows. Linux sounds compressed and lifeless and Windows sounds more open and full sounding. Any idea why this is happening? I am using Dynaudio BM15a and a RME soundcard if that matters. I've noticed the same thing. It almost seems like Linux is compressing everything. I have no idea why this is happening, but you can take any audio file and play it under Linux and then either Windows or a Mac and you will instantly hear the difference. Well, if you mention which of dozens of possible distributions, builds, upgrade levels, drivers, and applications, a Linux expert might be able to begin to try and track down the problem. geoff |
#4
Posted to comp.os.linux.advocacy,rec.audio.pro
|
|||
|
|||
Audio Under Linux Sounds Terrible
Charlie wrote:
On Tue, 22 Aug 2006 16:24:31 -0700, simply.lisa wrote: I'm not sure what is going on with Linux and audio, but there is a major difference between Linux and Windows playing the same files be it *.wav or mp3 files. Please. Stop the trolls, right now. Just stop it. There is no reason to reply to this stuff. Go away. There's nothing to see here. --scott -- "C'est un Nagra. C'est suisse, et tres, tres precis." |
#5
Posted to comp.os.linux.advocacy,rec.audio.pro
|
|||
|
|||
Audio Under Linux Sounds Terrible
Have you ever listened to audio under Linux Scott?
There is a major difference in quality. Yea, I know it sounds impossible, but it exists. Try it someday and draw your own conclusions. I can hear a difference between Winamp and Windows Media Player both of them on the Windows platform. WMP sounds terrible. I'm sure it's a codec thing. |
#6
Posted to comp.os.linux.advocacy,rec.audio.pro
|
|||
|
|||
Audio Under Linux Sounds Terrible
The racist, liar and software thief Charlie (flatfish) nymshifted:
snip flatfish droppings Oh, oh, "simply.lisa" aka "Charlie" or just "flatfish" You have neglected some basic stuff to hide your nymshifting You lately nymshifted to Abbie Diaz, Aftab Singh, Allen Cusimano, Allie Perkins, Allison Juergans, allison_hunt1969, Ana Thema, Anna Banger, anonymous, Archie, Archie Moss Bunker, Archie Watermann, Baba Booey, Babu Singh, Bill Thomson, Billy billy.the.kidd,bill.gates.loves.me, bison, Bjarne Jensen, BklynBoy, bonobo magilla, Boyce Mabri, BSEE, Buster, CBFalconer, Charles LeGrand, Charlie, Choppers McGee, Chris Thomas, Christine Abernathy, Claire Lynn, Clippy, Clock King, Collie Entragion, Colon Singh, common cold, compton.plaines_kid, Connie Hines, Corrie, corry.lebeu, Corrie Titlaand, Cory Dyvik, Curtis Wilson, Dana Bush, dbx_boy, Deadpenguin, Debbie, Devon Dawson, dismoqualifetch, Donn Carlsbad, Dr.Long John Jones, Elliot Zimmermann, Elwin Winters, Emmanuel Arias, Fawn Lebowitz, flatfish+++, foamy, frank boson, Franz Klammer, Fred Simmons, gabriele howorth, Gary Stewart, GayClod, George Cotton, George Littlefield, Gilbert, Gilbert Goiter, Gilbert Hochaim, gilligan, Greg Finnigan, Greg Laplante, Hans Kimm, Harry Hilton, Harvey Fogel, Heather, Heather69, Heather Trax, Heddy Seafield, hepcat, Hugh Himless, Ishmeal Hafizi, itchy balls, Ivan Mctavish, IvanaB, Jason, Jeff Szarka, Joe Josephson, John, John Shelton, Jorge Jorgensen, Jose Lopez, juke_joint, kaptain kaput, Karel Olish, Karla Snodgress, kathy_krantz, Kendra, Kenny Dugan, Kent Dorfman, Kristen, Kyle Cadet, L Didio, Laura Shillingford, Le Farter, Le Yammy, Leaking Onion, Leo Diaz, Les Cramer, Les Turner, Les Walton, Leslie Bassman, Lilly, Lindy, Linux Exposer, Lisa Shavas, Lisa Cottmann, Lois Hunt, Long, long_tong_ling, Lukumi Babalu Aye, Luna Lane, Major Mynor, Manny, McSwain, mista twista,Mogumbo, Moses, Mooshoo Bong Singh, , nate_mcspook, okto_pussy, organ.creep, OSS KDE User, Paddy McCrockett, Patricia, Patty Poppins, percy samson, Peter Gluckman, Peter Kohlmann, Phil, Phillip Cornwall, phoung, phoung quoak, pickle_pete, **** Clam, Poopy Pants McGee, Quimby, Quinton Magee, Quizno Backer, Rich, Richard P. Johnson, Richie, Richie O'Toole, Richie Spano, Robert Strunk, rothstein_ivan, Sally Vadi, Sammy, Sammy Whalen, Saul Goldblatt, Schlomo Smykowski, Sharon Cackle, Sharon Hubbasland, Sean, Sean Fitzhenry, Sean Macpherson, Sewer Rat, sewer_clown, Sherlock Holmes , Schlomo Rabinowitz, Simon, simply.lisa, sista sledgehammer, slacker.mcspritze, Spammy_Davis, spanny_davis, Stefan Karstensen, Stephan Simonsen, Stephanie Mannerz, Stephen, Stephen Olsen, Stephen Townshend, stomach.pump, SuckyB, Sue, sue quinterra, SunnyB, Susan, Susan Bladder, Susan Lapinski, Susan Wong, Suzi Wong, Suzie Wong, Swampee, Ted Bennington, Terri Sorensen, The Beaver, Thorsten, Thorsten Thigpen, Timmy Luncford , Toby Rastus Roosovelt III, Tomas Bicsak, Tomas Dunton, Tomas Lucatorto, Tori, Tori Wassermann, Torre Stanslaand, Trace Dennison, Tracee, Traci, trailerpark, Trina Swallows, Trolly, Trudi Simpkins, Tryxie Lustern, Uday Shankar, victimizedb, victimizedbyms, Vince Fontain, Vladimir Yepifano, Walter Bubniak, Wang Mycock, Wasser, wendy, Wendy Duzz, Whizzer, Wilbur J, willy watkins jr, Willy Wong, Winnie Septos, Wobbles, Yanick Schmuley and zyklon_C. Plus many, many, many more. -- Microsoft Windows - The art of incompetence. |
#7
Posted to comp.os.linux.advocacy,rec.audio.pro
|
|||
|
|||
Audio Under Linux Sounds Terrible
Romeo Rondeau wrote: Have you ever listened to audio under Linux Scott? There is a major difference in quality. Yea, I know it sounds impossible, but it exists. Try it someday and draw your own conclusions. I can hear a difference between Winamp and Windows Media Player both of them on the Windows platform. WMP sounds terrible. I'm sure it's a codec thing. Very likely. Graham |
#8
Posted to comp.os.linux.advocacy,rec.audio.pro
|
|||
|
|||
Audio Under Linux Sounds Terrible
On 2006-08-23, Charlie wrote:
On Tue, 22 Aug 2006 20:38:50 -0400, Scott Dorsey wrote: Charlie wrote: On Tue, 22 Aug 2006 16:24:31 -0700, simply.lisa wrote: I'm not sure what is going on with Linux and audio, but there is a major difference between Linux and Windows playing the same files be it *.wav or mp3 files. Please. Stop the trolls, right now. Just stop it. There is no reason to reply to this stuff. Go away. There's nothing to see here. --scott Have you ever listened to audio under Linux Scott? I have. I have played the exact same media and compressed files from that media almost simultaneously on both Windows and Linux and seen none of these ill effects you like to allude to. This would be the whole "I would rather use Linux but I am forced to use WinDOS at the office" problem. So the notion that every single Linux Zealot here (down to a man) is not intimately familiar with how BOTH sound under the same identical conditions is simply assinine. There is a major difference in quality. Yea, I know it sounds impossible, but it exists. Try it someday and draw your own conclusions. Been "trying" it on a daily basis for over 10 years now. -- Negligence will never equal intent, no matter how you attempt to distort reality to do so. This is what separates ||| the real butchers from average Joes (or Fritzes) caught up in / | \ events not in their control. Posted Via Usenet.com Premium Usenet Newsgroup Services ---------------------------------------------------------- ** SPEED ** RETENTION ** COMPLETION ** ANONYMITY ** ---------------------------------------------------------- http://www.usenet.com |
#9
Posted to comp.os.linux.advocacy,rec.audio.pro
|
|||
|
|||
Audio Under Linux Sounds Terrible
Charlie (flatfish) nymshifted:
snip I am using PCLinuxOS .93 Thanks! We know that you are claiming that, flatfish -- The Day Microsoft makes something that does not suck is probably the day they start making vacuum cleaners. |
#10
Posted to rec.audio.pro
|
|||
|
|||
Audio Under Linux Sounds Terrible
This message was posted on Usenet, NOT JLAforums, & on Tue, 22 Aug 2006
20:38:50 -0400, Scott Dorsey wrote: Charlie wrote: On Tue, 22 Aug 2006 16:24:31 -0700, simply.lisa wrote: I'm not sure what is going on with Linux and audio, but there is a major difference between Linux and Windows playing the same files be it *.wav or mp3 files. Please. Stop the trolls, right now. Just stop it. There is no reason to reply to this stuff. Go away. There's nothing to see here. --scott simply.lisa is a lying troll, & crossposted to rec.audio.pro. rec.audio.pro now filtered out. -- I used to like a good joke. What happened? I thought there was a better way, so I stopped using Windows & switched to linux. |
#11
Posted to comp.os.linux.advocacy,rec.audio.pro
|
|||
|
|||
Audio Under Linux Sounds Terrible
|
#12
Posted to comp.os.linux.advocacy,rec.audio.pro
|
|||
|
|||
Audio Under Linux Sounds Terrible
flatfish+++ wrote:
On Wed, 23 Aug 2006 02:00:11 +0000, Romeo Rondeau wrote: Have you ever listened to audio under Linux Scott? There is a major difference in quality. Yea, I know it sounds impossible, but it exists. Try it someday and draw your own conclusions. I can hear a difference between Winamp and Windows Media Player both of them on the Windows platform. WMP sounds terrible. I'm sure it's a codec thing. I hear a difference as well. It has to be the CODECS. I've been using foobar2000 as my player of choice these days. Light, simple and very low on resources. If you're playing an uncompressed .wav file, what is the codec doing that could possibly change the sound? --scott -- "C'est un Nagra. C'est suisse, et tres, tres precis." |
#13
Posted to rec.audio.pro
|
|||
|
|||
Linux and Harddisk-Recording
Just to let you know :
I followed one of Mike's suggestions to try Linux with audio hardware and audio applications and downloaded 'Agnula' which claims to be a Linux distribution for musicians. Mike said, it'll take another six month to get the distri stable to have a real use of it. After installing it (without problems, btw., just throwing in the CD and vooting from CD) on a 1.7 GHz (single CPU) system (256 MB RAM - I might need more than that) and playing around with it, I am not really happy. It'll remain a system to play with and to observe the developing of harddisk-recording with Linux. Since there is no problem of recording 8 tracks concurrently on (even) Win95 or an older MAC, I tried to stop all processes, that are not really needed to make music (like the printing system). The system often just hung or I wasn't able to switch between the applications. I'll try a multiprocessor system later, since the developers say, that this makes a lot of sense (the GUI is always responsive which is not the case when sharing GUI and Audio aka 'real-time' appliacations on one processor). My conclusion is, that Linux is not yet the way to go if you want to make music. But it's interesting how it will develop. Matthias P.S: Guess I just started my six months ........... |
#14
Posted to comp.os.linux.advocacy,rec.audio.pro
|
|||
|
|||
Audio Under Linux Sounds Terrible
Charlie wrote:
On Tue, 22 Aug 2006 16:24:31 -0700, simply.lisa wrote: I am using Dynaudio BM15a and a RME soundcard if that matters. I've noticed the same thing. Talking to yourself, flathead? Pathetic. *plonk* |
#15
Posted to comp.os.linux.advocacy,rec.audio.pro
|
|||
|
|||
Audio Under Linux Sounds Terrible
On 2006-08-23, Scott Dorsey wrote:
flatfish+++ wrote: On Wed, 23 Aug 2006 02:00:11 +0000, Romeo Rondeau wrote: Have you ever listened to audio under Linux Scott? There is a major difference in quality. Yea, I know it sounds impossible, but it exists. Try it someday and draw your own conclusions. I can hear a difference between Winamp and Windows Media Player both of them on the Windows platform. WMP sounds terrible. I'm sure it's a codec thing. I hear a difference as well. It has to be the CODECS. I've been using foobar2000 as my player of choice these days. Light, simple and very low on resources. If you're playing an uncompressed .wav file, what is the codec doing that could possibly change the sound? Perhaps he is attaching a set of CRAP speakers to the Linux machine and putting good stuff on the WinDOS box. If you put crap speakers on any sound systems (even a Bose) then you're going to get crap out of the whole thing. Linux with an appropriate speaker solution can generate as good of a result as you are going to get without seeing an act live. -- Apple: Because a large harddrive is for power users. ||| / | \ |
#17
Posted to comp.os.linux.advocacy,rec.audio.pro
|
|||
|
|||
Audio Under Linux Sounds Terrible
wrote in message
oups.com I'm not sure what is going on with Linux and audio, but there is a major difference between Linux and Windows playing the same files be it *.wav or mp3 files. Using xmms under Linux and foobar under Windows, I can hear a substantial difference in sound quality between Linux and Windows. Linux sounds compressed and lifeless and Windows sounds more open and full sounding. Any idea why this is happening? Probably, because Microsoft has put no little effort into making low bitrate MP3 files sound as good as possible under the latest version of Windows Media Player. |
#18
Posted to comp.os.linux.advocacy,rec.audio.pro
|
|||
|
|||
Audio Under Linux Sounds Terrible
I hear a difference as well.
It has to be the CODECS. I've been using foobar2000 as my player of choice these days. Light, simple and very low on resources. If you're playing an uncompressed .wav file, what is the codec doing that could possibly change the sound? I was talking about mp3's. I would never use either program for something serious. |
#19
Posted to comp.os.linux.advocacy,rec.audio.pro
|
|||
|
|||
Audio Under Linux Sounds Terrible
Lars Rune Nøstdal has brought this to us :
wrote: I'm not sure what is going on with Linux and audio, but there is a major difference between Linux and Windows playing the same files be it *.wav or mp3 files. No, there isn't. I'm using FLAC, and the sound is 100% perfect under Linux - Mp3 is just as good/bad as under Windows. What I have noticed is that cheapass toy-soundcards and drivers under Windows sometimes enable alot of effect-crap that might make it _seem_ that the sound is "better" for users with plastic-box-speakers and no ears whatsoever. These drivers and their software-frontends suck so bad that it is more or less impossible to disable these nasty effects/features under Windows. I've noticed that Linux rarely gets 'proper' support for most soundcards - all the AC97's (spit) cards under Linux sound terrible generally - distorting at 80% volume and sounding highly compressed compared to Windows. Even with something like a Creative soundcard its a bit of a crap-shoot as to how good it'll work in Linux.... but having said that Creative tend to be no better under Windows. |
#20
Posted to comp.os.linux.advocacy,rec.audio.pro
|
|||
|
|||
Audio Under Linux Sounds Terrible
On 2006-08-23, Arny Krueger wrote:
wrote in message oups.com I'm not sure what is going on with Linux and audio, but there is a major difference between Linux and Windows playing the same files be it *.wav or mp3 files. Using xmms under Linux and foobar under Windows, I can hear a substantial difference in sound quality between Linux and Windows. Linux sounds compressed and lifeless and Windows sounds more open and full sounding. Any idea why this is happening? Probably, because Microsoft has put no little effort into making low bitrate MP3 files sound as good as possible under the latest version of Windows Media Player. That could certainly account for all of the observations given. ...assuming you take the original troll at his word. I doubt that any of the Linux users mess with any of that low bitrate crap. -- Nothing today, likely nothing since we tamed fire, is genuinely new: culture, like science and ||| technology grows by accretion, each new creator / | \ building on the works of those that came before. Judge Alex Kozinski US Court of Appeals 9th Circuit |
#21
Posted to comp.os.linux.advocacy,rec.audio.pro
|
|||
|
|||
Audio Under Linux Sounds Terrible
On Tue, 22 Aug 2006 19:56:28 -0400, Charlie wrote:
I'm using a Motu and JBL 6328's. Linux sounds awful on this system. This is due to the fact that the only Motu devices ALSA currently supports are the MIDI boxes without audio i/o. I'd imagine that could possibly have some effect on the sound quality. Try using something with d/a converters and I promise that you will be amazed by the improvement. |
#22
Posted to comp.os.linux.advocacy,rec.audio.pro
|
|||
|
|||
Audio Under Linux Sounds Terrible
On Wed, 23 Aug 2006 15:26:49 -0500, JEDIDIAH wrote:
On 2006-08-23, Arny Krueger wrote: wrote in message oups.com I'm not sure what is going on with Linux and audio, but there is a major difference between Linux and Windows playing the same files be it *.wav or mp3 files. Using xmms under Linux and foobar under Windows, I can hear a substantial difference in sound quality between Linux and Windows. Linux sounds compressed and lifeless and Windows sounds more open and full sounding. Any idea why this is happening? Probably, because Microsoft has put no little effort into making low bitrate MP3 files sound as good as possible under the latest version of Windows Media Player. That could certainly account for all of the observations given. ...assuming you take the original troll at his word. I doubt that any of the Linux users mess with any of that low bitrate crap. Sarcasm on: Of course not. Why would Linux users like you for example want to poison that *great* Bose system you speak of, JEDIDIAH, with a low bitrate audio file. "Perhaps he is attaching a set of CRAP speakers to the Linux machine and putting good stuff on the WinDOS box. If you put crap speakers on any sound systems (even a Bose) then you're going to get crap out of the whole thing." http://groups.google.com/group/comp....93326c2?hl=en& Yep, the Linux zealot is right on the money once again. Why would anyone want to use Dynaudio or JBL when they can use a Bose system? Sarcasm off: |
#23
Posted to comp.os.linux.advocacy,rec.audio.pro
|
|||
|
|||
Audio Under Linux Sounds Terrible
On Wed, 23 Aug 2006 08:04:14 -0700, Lars Rune Nøstdal wrote:
wrote: I'm not sure what is going on with Linux and audio, but there is a major difference between Linux and Windows playing the same files be it *.wav or mp3 files. No, there isn't. I'm using FLAC, and the sound is 100% perfect under Linux - Mp3 is just as good/bad as under Windows. As long as a SPDIF loopback under Linux is bit accurate, I trust the same soundcard's converters are getting the right data. With the few cards I've tried it works ok. What I have noticed is that cheapass toy-soundcards and drivers under Windows sometimes enable alot of effect-crap that might make it _seem_ that the sound is "better" for users with plastic-box-speakers and no ears whatsoever. These drivers and their software-frontends suck so bad that it is more or less impossible to disable these nasty effects/features under Windows. Some people like that kind of thing. Other people just want a master volume control. Ain't choice great? Unfortunately the same thing is happening with low end soundcards as happened with (win)modems. As computers get faster manufacturers are removing as many hardware features as possible and replacing them with software emulation. So we get fixed 48K sample rate and src in software. No more hardware sample playback, eq's, effects, dolby decoding etc. It's possible that the people hearing a difference between Linux and Windows on low end sound cards are hearing different software sample rate converters. I'm not sure the noise floor on them will be low enough for it to make much difference. |
#24
Posted to comp.os.linux.advocacy,rec.audio.pro
|
|||
|
|||
Audio Under Linux Sounds Terrible
flatfish+++ wrote:
On Wed, 23 Aug 2006 15:26:49 -0500, JEDIDIAH wrote: On 2006-08-23, Arny Krueger wrote: wrote in message egroups.com I'm not sure what is going on with Linux and audio, but there is a major difference between Linux and Windows playing the same files be it *.wav or mp3 files. Using xmms under Linux and foobar under Windows, I can hear a substantial difference in sound quality between Linux and Windows. Linux sounds compressed and lifeless and Windows sounds more open and full sounding. Any idea why this is happening? Probably, because Microsoft has put no little effort into making low bitrate MP3 files sound as good as possible under the latest version of Windows Media Player. That could certainly account for all of the observations given. ...assuming you take the original troll at his word. I doubt that any of the Linux users mess with any of that low bitrate crap. Sarcasm on: Of course not. Why would Linux users like you for example want to poison that *great* Bose system you speak of, JEDIDIAH, with a low bitrate audio file. "Perhaps he is attaching a set of CRAP speakers to the Linux machine and putting good stuff on the WinDOS box. If you put crap speakers on any sound systems (even a Bose) then you're going to get crap out of the whole thing." http://groups.google.com/group/comp....93326c2?hl=en& Yep, the Linux zealot is right on the money once again. Why would anyone want to use Dynaudio or JBL when they can use a Bose system? Sarcasm off: :-( The sarcasm on this one flew right over my head. ??? -- Where are we going? And why am I in this handbasket? |
#25
Posted to comp.os.linux.advocacy,rec.audio.pro
|
|||
|
|||
Audio Under Linux Sounds Terrible
In comp.os.linux.advocacy flatfish+++ wrote:
Sarcasm on: Of course not. Why would Linux users like you for example want to poison that *great* Bose system you speak of, JEDIDIAH, with a low bitrate audio file. "Perhaps he is attaching a set of CRAP speakers to the Linux machine and putting good stuff on the WinDOS box. If you put crap speakers on any sound systems (even a Bose) then you're going to get crap out of the whole thing." http://groups.google.com/group/comp....93326c2?hl=en& Yep, the Linux zealot is right on the money once again. Why would anyone want to use Dynaudio or JBL when they can use a Bose system? As I've mentioned before, I run a very small studio type pro-gear setup here, which includes Genelec active monitors: http://www.genelec.com/products/8040a/8040a.php A Mackie DFX-6 mixer: http://www.mackie.com/products/dfx6/index.html A Behringer Ultragraph Pro FBQ1502: http://www.behringer.com/FBQ1502/index.cfm?lang=ENG and an M-Audio Delta 1010LT: http://www.m-audio.com/products/en_u...10LT-main.html And I've run it all under both windows xp and ubuntu linux. And here's what I have to say: With identical codecs, windows and linux sound exactly the same. That said, the best codec for mp3s is the LAME ACM codec, and you can use it on any operating system you want. More information concerning the topic of this thread is he http://www.rjamorim.com/test/mp3-128/results.html -----yttrx -- http://www.yttrx.net |
#26
Posted to comp.os.linux.advocacy,rec.audio.pro
|
|||
|
|||
Audio Under Linux Sounds Terrible
On Wed, 23 Aug 2006 20:19:21 -0400, flatfish+++ wrote:
Bose blows. No highs, no lows, must be Bose. etc..... Bose are excellent at marketing and very little else. Cerwin Vegas for people with more money than sense. Give me Polk Audio over Bose any day of the week. -- Tom Wilson: Who hasn't posted here since 2002 and sees that nothing really has changed |
#27
Posted to comp.os.linux.advocacy,rec.audio.pro
|
|||
|
|||
Audio Under Linux Sounds Terrible
In comp.os.linux.advocacy Tom Wilson wrote:
On Wed, 23 Aug 2006 20:19:21 -0400, flatfish+++ wrote: Bose blows. No highs, no lows, must be Bose. etc..... Bose are excellent at marketing and very little else. Cerwin Vegas for people with more money than sense. Give me Polk Audio over Bose any day of the week. I'll take Infinity over Polk, and B&W over Infinities. If we're just spending money here that is. Hell, if we're just spending money, I'll take these: http://www.stereoexchange.com/catalo...bcategoryid=32 -----yttrx -- http://www.yttrx.net |
#28
Posted to comp.os.linux.advocacy,rec.audio.pro
|
|||
|
|||
Audio Under Linux Sounds Terrible
On Wed, 23 Aug 2006 20:36:22 -0400, Tom Wilson wrote:
On Wed, 23 Aug 2006 20:19:21 -0400, flatfish+++ wrote: Bose blows. No highs, no lows, must be Bose. etc..... Bose are excellent at marketing and very little else. Cerwin Vegas for people with more money than sense. Give me Polk Audio over Bose any day of the week. Bose are for people with no sense at all. Take the speakers out of a TV set, wrap them in two dollar plastic cubes, and then sell them for a thousand dollars. Don't forget to include a twenty watt amp, and a subwoofer built around a 4" driver that only produces one frequency. Add twenty dollars worth of marketing hype and you've got bose. |
#29
Posted to comp.os.linux.advocacy,rec.audio.pro
|
|||
|
|||
Audio Under Linux Sounds Terrible
In comp.os.linux.advocacy flatfish+++ wrote:
How do you like the 8040? I haven't heard them, but I have heard the 8050's and like them a lot. Theyre incredible. I auditioned dozens of monitors a while back, and kept coming back to the 8040s because of their size and accuracy. And as you know, monitors (particularly powered monitors) like very much to be played loud. These things could break a rib. However, they're not for very quiet use, again being monitors. Their frequency rolloff is a bit more pronounced at very low sound pressures, particularly on the low-end, so that's something to keep in mind. Luckily my apartment has concrete walls. I'm using a set of Event ASP8's and also a pair of Adam S2a. I use a set of KrK's for my "boombox compatibility" testing. Ah, nice. If you're already using gear like that, the expense of Genelecs isnt horribly higher, though my 8040s were a pretty big chunk of change. And you won't have an easy time finding them in the states---I got mine after I'd auditioned them at a pro-gear place that it turns out was out of them--at the stereo exchange here in NYC. A Mackie DFX-6 mixer: http://www.mackie.com/products/dfx6/index.html I have a Soundcraft Ghost http://www.soundcraft.com/product_sh...product_id=144 Sweet. I certainly don't need anything that extensive for my current home use, and the mackie was actually a really great deal. Plus, you can stomp on it and it won't break. I'm using the original Delta 1010 on one system and a Delta 66 on the other. I was using the audiophile 192, but I found its linux support lacking. And I've run it all under both windows xp and ubuntu linux. And here's what I have to say: With identical codecs, windows and linux sound exactly the same. I agree. Something is wrong with the OP's system. I think so too. By all rights, they should sound precisely the same. -----yttrx -- http://www.yttrx.net |
#30
Posted to comp.os.linux.advocacy,rec.audio.pro
|
|||
|
|||
Audio Under Linux Sounds Terrible
In comp.os.linux.advocacy flatfish+++ wrote:
Hell, if we're just spending money, I'll take these: http://www.stereoexchange.com/catalo...bcategoryid=32 -----yttrx Holy ****!!! Looks like those Dominator speakers in that Ruthless People movie!! I've had the great pleasure of auditioning them live at the stereo exchange, and I'll tell you... They sound even better than they look. I could actually hear chairs creaking in an orchestra, a cellist (I think) dropping a bow, and I've never heard my favorite rendition of the allegro of the fourth movement of beethoven's ninth sound like that. I daresay it's better than being there. -----yttrx -- http://www.yttrx.net |
#31
Posted to comp.os.linux.advocacy,rec.audio.pro
|
|||
|
|||
Audio Under Linux Sounds Terrible
In comp.os.linux.advocacy, yttrx
wrote on Thu, 24 Aug 2006 00:40:01 GMT : In comp.os.linux.advocacy Tom Wilson wrote: On Wed, 23 Aug 2006 20:19:21 -0400, flatfish+++ wrote: Bose blows. No highs, no lows, must be Bose. etc..... Bose are excellent at marketing and very little else. Cerwin Vegas for people with more money than sense. Give me Polk Audio over Bose any day of the week. I'll take Infinity over Polk, and B&W over Infinities. If we're just spending money here that is. Hell, if we're just spending money, I'll take these: http://www.stereoexchange.com/catalo...bcategoryid=32 Evidently these are for those individuals who like the "LOUD" part of a loudspeaker. :-) (Not to mention impressively expensive.) -----yttrx -- #191, Windows Vista. Because it's time to refresh your hardware. Trust us. |
#32
Posted to comp.os.linux.advocacy,rec.audio.pro
|
|||
|
|||
Audio Under Linux Sounds Terrible
In article , flatfish+++ wrote:
Bose are excellent at marketing and very little else. Aren't they pretty good at public address systems? I recall reading about some company, which I think was Bose, that had very good software for modeling how a proposed public address system would sound, so that they could figure out where to place the speakers so that they would be audible all over the space that needed to be covered, without interfering with each other. -- --Tim Smith |
#33
Posted to comp.os.linux.advocacy,rec.audio.pro
|
|||
|
|||
Audio Under Linux Sounds Terrible
I think the long gone Coke/Pepsi/Dr Pepper (I don't remember) festival in
NYC was using Bose and from my somewhat foggy memory, they were flying a ton of 802's over the crowd and it sounded decent. They must have had one hell of a rack of power amps though because Bose not only suck, but they consume power like mad to get decent SPL. I saw Three Dog Night several years ago, they were running a BIG stack of Bose 802's, sounded phenomenal. Who woulda guessed? |
#34
Posted to comp.os.linux.advocacy,rec.audio.pro
|
|||
|
|||
Audio Under Linux Sounds Terrible
Once upon a midnight dreary, while The Ghost In The Machine pondered weak
and weary over many a quaint and curious volume of forgotten lore...: In comp.os.linux.advocacy, yttrx wrote on Thu, 24 Aug 2006 00:40:01 GMT : In comp.os.linux.advocacy Tom Wilson wrote: On Wed, 23 Aug 2006 20:19:21 -0400, flatfish+++ wrote: Bose blows. No highs, no lows, must be Bose. etc..... Bose are excellent at marketing and very little else. Cerwin Vegas for people with more money than sense. Give me Polk Audio over Bose any day of the week. I'll take Infinity over Polk, and B&W over Infinities. If we're just spending money here that is. Hell, if we're just spending money, I'll take these: http://www.stereoexchange.com/catalo...bcategoryid=32 Evidently these are for those individuals who like the "LOUD" part of a loudspeaker. :-) (Not to mention impressively expensive.) -----yttrx Give me a set of these: http://www.audioreview.com/cat/speak...6_1594crx.aspx I did have a cutout of an Italian granite* cabinet with 10 bass drivers, 8 midrange and 3 tweeters (and a 3kW amp!) from an audio magazine from around 2000, that had a pricetag of only £10k each. The above site details a speaker that retails for a quarter million USD(!!) per cabinet on another page, but having actually /heard/ a set of B&W Nautilus in action, I've got to say, there is no other speaker. Top of any audiophile's list of things to own before you die. *By granite, I don't mean formica laminate on MDF. I do mean, carved from a single block of Italian black granite or white marble (these things are built to order) and weighing well over four hundred pounds a cabinet. These are not toy speakers. I suppose for now I'll make do with my JBL floorstanders, my AR7 bookshelf monitors and the Cambridge subwoofer. And the Diamond Loudmouse I 2.1 set on my bike. -- http://dotware.co.uk You never change things by fighting the existing reality. To change something, build a new model that makes the old model obsolete. - R. Buckminster Fuller |
#35
Posted to comp.os.linux.advocacy,rec.audio.pro
|
|||
|
|||
Audio Under Linux Sounds Terrible
Tim Smith wrote:
In article , flatfish+++ wrote: Bose are excellent at marketing and very little else. Aren't they pretty good at public address systems? I recall reading about some company, which I think was Bose, that had very good software for modeling how a proposed public address system would sound, so that they could figure out where to place the speakers so that they would be audible all over the space that needed to be covered, without interfering with each other. You're referring to the Bose Modeller, which was some of the first raytracing software out there. It actually worked pretty well (and it could be used to model radiation patterns of other speakers, not just Bose products), but it was fairly expensive and limited. It's since been pretty much superseded by more modern raytracing systems like EASE. --scott -- "C'est un Nagra. C'est suisse, et tres, tres precis." |
#36
Posted to comp.os.linux.advocacy,rec.audio.pro
|
|||
|
|||
Audio Under Linux Sounds Terrible
On 2006-08-23, GreyCloud wrote:
flatfish+++ wrote: On Wed, 23 Aug 2006 15:26:49 -0500, JEDIDIAH wrote: On 2006-08-23, Arny Krueger wrote: wrote in message legroups.com [deletia] ...assuming you take the original troll at his word. I doubt that any of the Linux users mess with any of that low bitrate crap. Sarcasm on: Of course not. Why would Linux users like you for example want to poison that *great* Bose system you speak of, JEDIDIAH, with a low bitrate audio file. Using Unix is about demanding quality. The fact that Linux can be had for free rather than the $400 than Solaris x86 used to go for is just a bonus. "Perhaps he is attaching a set of CRAP speakers to the Linux machine and putting good stuff on the WinDOS box. If you put crap speakers on any sound systems (even a Bose) then you're going to get crap out of the whole thing." It's amazing what car audio salesmen will try and perpetrate on poor unsuspecting customers who ask for ipod integration options. http://groups.google.com/group/comp....93326c2?hl=en& Yep, the Linux zealot is right on the money once again. Why would anyone want to use Dynaudio or JBL when they can use a Bose system? Sarcasm off: :-( The sarcasm on this one flew right over my head. ??? -- NO! There are no CODICILES of Fight Club! ||| / | \ That way leads to lawyers and business megacorps and credit cards! Posted Via Usenet.com Premium Usenet Newsgroup Services ---------------------------------------------------------- ** SPEED ** RETENTION ** COMPLETION ** ANONYMITY ** ---------------------------------------------------------- http://www.usenet.com |
#37
Posted to comp.os.linux.advocacy,rec.audio.pro
|
|||
|
|||
Audio Under Linux Sounds Terrible
flatfish+++ wrote:
On Wed, 23 Aug 2006 16:55:58 -0600, GreyCloud wrote: flatfish+++ wrote: On Wed, 23 Aug 2006 15:26:49 -0500, JEDIDIAH wrote: On 2006-08-23, Arny Krueger wrote: wrote in message glegroups.com I'm not sure what is going on with Linux and audio, but there is a major difference between Linux and Windows playing the same files be it *.wav or mp3 files. Using xmms under Linux and foobar under Windows, I can hear a substantial difference in sound quality between Linux and Windows. Linux sounds compressed and lifeless and Windows sounds more open and full sounding. Any idea why this is happening? Probably, because Microsoft has put no little effort into making low bitrate MP3 files sound as good as possible under the latest version of Windows Media Player. That could certainly account for all of the observations given. ...assuming you take the original troll at his word. I doubt that any of the Linux users mess with any of that low bitrate crap. Sarcasm on: Of course not. Why would Linux users like you for example want to poison that *great* Bose system you speak of, JEDIDIAH, with a low bitrate audio file. "Perhaps he is attaching a set of CRAP speakers to the Linux machine and putting good stuff on the WinDOS box. If you put crap speakers on any sound systems (even a Bose) then you're going to get crap out of the whole thing." http://groups.google.com/group/comp....93326c2?hl=en& Yep, the Linux zealot is right on the money once again. Why would anyone want to use Dynaudio or JBL when they can use a Bose system? Sarcasm off: :-( The sarcasm on this one flew right over my head. ??? Bose blows. No highs, no lows, must be Bose. etc..... Bose are excellent at marketing and very little else. I know Bose is expensive, but didn't know that their audio range was that poor. I never owned Bose, so wouldn't know. -- Where are we going? And why am I in this handbasket? |
Reply |
Thread Tools | |
Display Modes | |
|
|
Similar Threads | ||||
Thread | Forum | |||
It's amazing what you can find when you look. | Audio Opinions | |||
Just for Ludovic | Audio Opinions | |||
Topic Police | Pro Audio | |||
DNC Schedule of Events | Pro Audio |