Dusty Chalk

Yeah, I actually have quite a few of those (all but one or two of the Hafler Trio disks, Jack Dangers, Coil, Bass Communion, etc.) -- definitely on the experimental side of things. There's some great ambient stuff there, though, if you're into that. I actually considered collecting them, I liked them so much, but when I looked them up, found about 90% of what I didn't have was out of print, so said, "fuck it". Might have to start following them again, starting with this sale.

You ought also like Opeth. Try Blackwater Park. But you are starting with the cream of the crop -- Gojira is a recent fave, and my friend Dave (the one you met) likes Meshuggah a lot, and tends to reject mediocrity.

No, it definitely looks more compressed than any of the other three, but I see what you mean about the shape of the first one. As to what the intentions are of the original artists, I don't know. The middle two -- especially 1993 -- look more dynamic. Follow, for example, the largish (loudish) lump in the middle of the song.

You so random.

Not likely, I get the impression he actually designs these things. The UE11 (from his former company) already had dual subwoofer drivers, so the fact that his new company is picking up where his old company left off tells me that it's him.

Bananas, tea, orange juice, eclair, cat food.

Pardon my contrarianism, but that doesn't look so bad, especially the first three. "Louder" isn't necessarily worse, especially if it's the exact same signal, only less attenuated. The way I would spin this is, "they more fully utilize all 16 bits of bit depth". "2000" is beginning to get visibly compressed, but I have no idea based on the images whether or not the other three are fundamentally different, other than overall amplitude.

That may or may not be, but it's supposed to be music, which it is not.

"I <3 goat titty beer."

It's probably the country you're in -- incompatible encryptions. You probably have the "correct" version of your browser for outside the US, and they're probably trying to use US. Or vice versa. Or something like that.

What? Does it seem like you're going to "the competition"? 'cause you're not -- they're probably largely a "middleman" as it were, between consumers and products. And besides -- who's going to sneer at a little side business? Or any, for that matter?

It's the other way around -- they couldn't figure out how to get the volume to go all the way off, so they're trying to spin it as a feature rather than as a bug. That'd be my guess.

Actually, the main thing is to hook it up directly -- you don't necessarily need to bring anything of yours in. I wouldn't, but mostly because I'm lazy that way. Also, if you do put them through that much trouble, you really should purchase from them. I mean, think about it, if we put all the local stores out of business, you soon won't have that option (of seeing it before buying it).

What are you doing at the time this occurs? PS (I have no idea, I'm just asking the first question that occurs to me.)

I don't know about low-quality/compressed, but yes, I agree -- that has a lot to do with why they look all the same: something is wrong. Personally, I think it's the video distribution system -- they probably go through switches and amps and cheap cables and whatnot, and that's a seriously weak link in chain stores. :rimshot:

Nope. You like what you like, and you do what you gotta do to get that sound you're after. Being afraid to fuck with what ain't broke is perfectly natural.

It's not wrong if it's an opinion -- I'm severely negatively affected by digital picture artifacts (to the point where I delayed entry into DVD for years, and invested heavily into laserdisc), so to me it's more important than it is to you. Seeing how many people look at blotchy screens (this was especially obvious in the CRT era, when screens needed regular demagnetizing, and most didn't), I have come to believe that most laypeople wouldn't notice.

Just to be clear -- it has nothing to do as to whether or not it offends, it's just that if there were someone else at work peering over our shoulder, that's not something we'd want them to accidentally see and potentially offend. We just want that extra click so that we can look at it later when we know "the coast is clear".

Happy Birthday, Mr. Peanuts.

Merged 'em. Feel free to bookmark this one, we can always merge others later.

Well...at least you figured out what it was. Yes, the sushi was, indeed, superb. I usually get really good sushi, I had forgotten how long it had been since I had really excellent sushi. I ended up not drinking the homebrew right away, but I don't want to let it sit around for too long, correct (the bottling thing)? Or is this one of those cases where the longer I let it sit around the better (fermenting)? Interestingly, there was zero drinking and zero talk of alcoholic beverages.

Easily. Oh yeah, sure, now you agree, but back when I said it, you had to sound like you were arguing with everything I said ...

Alas, no. I'd be hanging out in the mall and grinning like an idiot if it were.

No, I didn't say that. I just said it's the best place for the single biggest improvement -- the implication being "...all other things being equal". Have you even really seen that? Have you even made the comparison for yourself? Yes, even lighting is important, but it's fairly ubiquitous in the brands we've been discussing. If you jump from 60 Hz to 120 Hz (what I cited as my second most important criteria -- and there's no reason you can't have both), fast refresh comes along for the ride automatically. But 60 Hz is already pretty fucking fast, especially if you have a pretty good upsampler (usually meaning whatever is in your DVD player, anyway). And final snarky answer: so you'd prefer to statistically validate everyone else's opinion rather than coming up with your own? Okay, sheeple.