The tube thing is only valid if you drive the amp until it clips - and sure, a tube amp clips nicer than an op-amp based system. But why are you driving your amp to clipping in the first place? Just turn the damn thing down a bit, and it'll sound fine.

When you 'ripped' the songs from vinyl, you passed them into an ADC and subsequently compressed the data into an MP3, right?

Was that a studio-quality ADC? Or a cheap USB ADC that came built into a cheap record player? Highs sounding too 'bright' sounds like it might be poor filtering in the ADC, and possibly even aliasing effects.

Apologies if you undertook the whole enterprise using professional equipment, but I'd imagine that most people who use those 'USB turntables' probably get equally disappointing results.

That's just not true. Most DACs generate an output voltage from a digital input. Many DACs don't even know the sampling rate that they're being driven at, you just send them samples at some rate, and they change their output as fast as they're able to. Normally you put some filtering after that, and you're done. A higher-quality DAC system will up-sample in software and run the actual DAC at a much higher rate - resulting a much higher-quality output. I guess that up-sampling might use sinc or something, I don't know - perhaps that's what you meant?

What about phase?

Modern high quality DACs will perform this signal reconstruction in software, and upsample to 192kHz. The analog filter stages after that point are almost unnecessary, and the signal will be spot on. It is not erroneous to claim that the stair-steps don't exist, they most certainly don't exist in signal reconstruction theory, and only exist when you attempt to physically realise a DAC system.

Oops that should have had a strikeout in it.

Anyway - Idiocracy is obviously not a documentary, and it's central premise, that the stupid reproduce more, is as much a load of shit as it always was.

Thomas Malthus thought along similar lines. He was wrong too.

you should check out the documentaryhateful diatribe against the poor Idiocracy.

I expect he'll find a way.

EVERYTHING you can do in life boils down to a) taking actions b) saying words c) sleeping. There's nothing more that you, as a human, can do with your life.

Now, I'm not totally sure what point you were trying to make, and I certainly don't intend to discuss it with you any further, but a funny thing happens when you 'boil things down'; You lose what it was you were talking about in the first place. Boiled down to dust like that, nothing has any meaning, and discussion ceases to be possible or profitable for either party.

And this attitude is part of the whole problem - not that having to use professionally-designed operating system UI's is a problem of course, but it's not free. I do very smart things with my computers thank you very much, but wrestling with their configuration to make them actually work does not number amongst them.

Apple has a bug reporting tool, and one that actually gets responses too. If you use OS X Server you even get an email address for problems, and they even reply - it's astonishing. Most of the commercial software that I've actually bought (which is normally pretty cheap software to be honest) also had pretty responsive support. Now if you buy Microsoft software, or Adobe software, or whatever, then sure - they don't listen but they do collect crash reports & so-on (if you let them). I'm not sure that they qualify as 'most software' though, I suppose it depends on how you count it.

Well, Windows 95 & 98 sure - everything prior too. But I've not seen a lockup bug in Windows since then, and I use the damn thing every day at work. Hell, OS X locks up more than Windows, and I've only ever had that happen when I was doing bad things to the graphics driver while writing openGL code.

The implication of this statement is that not only do you know what these bugs are, but you are able to reproduce them and are maybe even willing to share the details on them. I'd like to find out what they are, if only to cause my workmate's machines to lock up when they're out getting coffee...

Or right click if you use a regular mouse (I never could get the hang of Apple mice), or two-finger click/tap on a trackpad, or just Cmd-C.

Yosemite has somewhat solved this, but the menu in most applications is more of a lookup for the keyboard shortcut than something you actually use. In Yoseimite you get a menu and a dock on every monitor, and it's better, but it's not perfect. I do wonder about that top menu bar, but at the same time it's nice being able to glance to the top of the screen to see what application is active. And of course, it's really easy to hit with a mouse.

http://www.sonnettech.com/prod...

You're mounting that mac wrong.

Linux is for embedded, and for servers. It excels in both areas, and should rightly be admired for what it has achieved. Linux on the desktop though, is an exercise in futility. The reason is that a desktop user interface is at least an order of magnitude more complex and nuanced that writing a server OS. Not to mention the fact that building a coherent desktop user experience requires pretty solid leadership - something the Open Source community necessarily lacks.

Sorry guys, but that's just how it is. Carry on playing with your desktops, and your Unity and your Pulseaudio and all that. I'm sure it's fun, and I'm sure that I'd have been pretty into it when I used to write code as a hobby. But it's probably best if you just stop trying to pretend that what you're building is in any way comparable to either Windows or OS X.