On 05/09/2017 12:58 PM, Ola Fosheim Grøstad wrote:
>
>  Use a good headset (E.g. Sennheiser
> HD600 or better) and preferably use the same headset the audio engineer
> used... Loudspeaker in room -> not the same signal as on the CD.
>

You seem to know a thing or two about audio hardware (more than me anyway) - Any idea offhand where to find a good set of clip-style headphones? That's something I've been dying to find for years (I don't like "earbuds" - I find sticking thing inside my ears to be terribly uncomfortable, even compared to the occasion pinch of clip-style, and traditional are always just falling off in casual use).

I used to use Koss's clip-style (and loved the one with in-line volume control) since, despite being affordable, they were the only ones I'd ever found that didn't sound horrible (all the Sony ones of remotely comparable price sounded like complete trash no matter what the box claimed about its specs...and the Sonys are downright ugly to boot. Other brands didn't fare any better.)

Unfortunately, after a few years, both my Koss pairs crapped out (ie, no sound period out one or both speakers), and the non-free "warranty" replacements consistently crapped out the same way after about two months max (sounded good until then, though).

At this point, I don't care about cost, would just like to find a reliable good-sounding (ie, at least comparable to Koss's sound quality) clip-style. Any leads? Is there even such a thing has high-end, or even mid-range clip headphones?

On Tuesday, 9 May 2017 at 17:25:37 UTC, Nick Sabalausky (Abscissa) wrote:
> me anyway) - Any idea offhand where to find a good set of clip-style headphones?

Unfortunately not. I try to avoid headphones these days, too easy to crank up the volume without noticing, especially if you have good ones which can go up to 120db without distortion...

> That's something I've been dying to find for years (I don't like "earbuds" - I find sticking thing

Yeah, don't use consumer-earbuds, can easily damage your hearing.

> At this point, I don't care about cost, would just like to find a reliable good-sounding (ie, at least comparable to Koss's sound quality) clip-style. Any leads? Is there even such a thing has high-end, or even mid-range clip headphones?

I've kinda stopped consuming music when travelling, but I personally prefer large headsets that enclose the ear completely. Closed ones in non-silent environment so you don't crank the volume up too much. A bit clunky even if foldable of course... I used some from Ultrasone, not the best quality, but decent. I think personal taste and musical style kinda means that you have to test them in a store to make up your mind.

I guess you could ask at the https://www.head-fi.org/ forums, but not sure if that site is good anymore? It was a useful resource a decade ago, but seems to be rammed down with awful ads now? Unbearable.

Btw people say that one should keep new headset playing some heavy bass for 10? hours after purchasing before evaluating them, something about the coils needing to be run in. Well, they are mechanical so I guess that makes sense (tightening, friction or something). Maybe different for cans without coils...

On 5/9/2017 1:12 AM, Ethan Watson wrote:
> So, as Walter would say, "It's trivially obvious to the casual observer."

I was surprised to learn at DConf that "trivially obvious to the most casual observer" was an unknown expression. Googling it shows only around 10 hits, none predating 2005.

I learned it at Caltech in the 1970s, where it was applied to concepts and proofs that were exceptionally difficult to follow.

I suppose that from now on if you hear the phrase, you can conclude that the source is from the set of:

1. techers

2. D programmers

:-)

On Tuesday, 9 May 2017 at 02:13:19 UTC, Nick Sabalausky (Abscissa) wrote:
> On 05/08/2017 03:28 PM, Jack Stouffer wrote:
>> uncompressed audio.
>
> Uncompressed? Seriously? I assume that really means FLAC or something rather than truly uncompressed, but even still...

Nope, uncompressed. Seems some games they decided the small amount of time spent decompressing audio and textures was too high, which is why some of the games are 50Gb in size, because it's more important to have larger textures than trying to push the HD textures and 4k stuff, vs actually having hardware that can handle it, since the console hardware is seriously behind PC hardware.

On Tuesday, 9 May 2017 at 23:47:46 UTC, Era Scarecrow wrote:
> Seems some games they decided the small amount of time spent decompressing audio and textures was too high <snip> since the console hardware is seriously behind PC hardware.

Found an appropriate articles Regarding Titanfall (a few years ago), although that's for PC and the reason for giving a boost to 'underpowered PC's', although i could have sworn they did it for consoles more. Still ridiculous in my mind.

http://news.softpedia.com/news/Titanfall-Needs-50GB-of-Space-on-PC-Due-to-Uncompressed-Audio-Files-431586.shtml

http://www.pcworld.com/article/3128214/software-games/why-pc-game-downloads-are-so-damned-big.html

http://www.escapistmagazine.com/news/view/132922-Titanfall-Dev-Explains-The-Games-35-GB-of-Uncompressed-Audio

On 05/09/2017 07:47 PM, Era Scarecrow wrote:
> since the console hardware
> is seriously behind PC hardware.

Side nitpick: Console hardware is behind *gaming-PC* hardware. Important distinction.

Heck, my most powerful PC is a little behind PS3 (in terms of game performance, anyway) and does everything I need it to do and then some (including the vast majority of indie games, which I usually prefer anyway).

And ok, yea, that's just my own stuff but still, take a look at the laptop market: For anything that *doesn't* have Intel graphics, you're looking at easily around double the price. You can get a quite good latptop for $400 or less. But want one with an ATI or NVIDIA (and not their budget "comparable with Intel Graphics" lines)? Then you're looking at around $1,000. But what good does that ATI or NVIDIA chipset do (over an Intel) for anything other than 3D modeling/animation and non-indie gaming? Nada (but maybe suck the battery dry).

You could say "yea, well, that's for laptops, any serious gamer's gonna want a desktop". But then again you'd simply be talking "gaming PC" again. And these days, how much point is there really in a desktop (as opposed to laptop) for non-gaming, non-3dsMax/Maya purposes? Minimal.

Point being: There's a big difference between "PC" and "gaming PC". In the context of AAA gaming, it tends to get falsely assumed that all PCs are gaming-PC spec. Not so. Console hardware is only behind "high-end" PC hardware (what I mean by "high-end" in that sentence isn't so much "top of the line" but simply "costs more than the highest-end console available").

On 05/09/2017 02:14 PM, Ola Fosheim Grøstad wrote:
>
> I've kinda stopped consuming music when travelling, but I personally
> prefer large headsets that enclose the ear completely. Closed ones in
> non-silent environment so you don't crank the volume up too much. A bit
> clunky even if foldable of course... I used some from Ultrasone, not the
> best quality, but decent. I think personal taste and musical style kinda
> means that you have to test them in a store to make up your mind.

Hmm, regarding large over-the-ear ones, about a year or two ago I made the mistake of shelling out for one of Sony's "PlayStation Gold" headsets. Was initially thrilled with it (except they look hideous while they're being worn - like any Sony headset really), but then as with most other people who got them, it didn't take too long before I hit the infamous problem of its cheap plastic (on a $100 pair??? That's Sony I guess) cracking and breaking. :/

>
> I guess you could ask at the https://www.head-fi.org/ forums, but not
> sure if that site is good anymore? It was a useful resource a decade
> ago, but seems to be rammed down with awful ads now? Unbearable.

Thanks, I'll take a look.
>
> Btw people say that one should keep new headset playing some heavy bass
> for 10? hours after purchasing before evaluating them, something about
> the coils needing to be run in. Well, they are mechanical so I guess
> that makes sense (tightening, friction or something). Maybe different
> for cans without coils...

Interesting, first I've heard that. Good to know.

On Tuesday, 9 May 2017 at 23:47:46 UTC, Era Scarecrow wrote:
> Nope, uncompressed. Seems some games they decided the small amount of time spent decompressing audio and textures was too high, which is why some of the games are 50Gb in size, because it's more important to have larger textures than trying to push the HD textures and 4k stuff, vs actually having hardware that can handle it, since the console hardware is seriously behind PC hardware.

On Tuesday, 9 May 2017 at 23:58:13 UTC, Era Scarecrow wrote:
> Found an appropriate articles Regarding Titanfall (a few years ago), although that's for PC and the reason for giving a boost to 'underpowered PC's', although i could have sworn they did it for consoles more. Still ridiculous in my mind.

Yeah, you might want to actually read the entire thread before stating this stuff again.