Forgot your password?
typodupeerror

Comment: Re:Making music (Score 1) 424

No, that's not what I'm saying. Not just recording. If you're trying to mix audio using the onboard audio chip on a PC, you're not going to get good results. It would mean you're plugging a set of headphones into a mini-stereo plug. If you're trying to mix even eight tracks from a DAW, unless you're just just remixing audio samples of already created music (which is fine by the way) you still have to have some way to input the music.

The problem is not the computer's ability to handle the audio data. The problem is the monitoring and if you're inputting control data via MIDI controllers. The audio hardware on a PC is just not able to handle it without horrible lag. You'll end up listening to what your fingers just played a second ago. Try and see what you're Macbook pro's audio subsystem is going to do with 40+ tracks of Kontakt samples in real time.

Why is this hard to understand? You can get pro-quality USB outboard audio for less than $100. You're already going to need some outboard gear (speakers, headphones, midi controllers and control surfaces), why are you freaking over a little 24-bit/96kHz audio interface that can be had for less than the price of your headphones?

Next you're going to tell me that you can create professional music on an iPad without external hardware.

Comment: self-correcting (Score 1) 12

by PopeRatzo (#47430611) Attached to: These secular priests just keep slicing on the drive

Publisher SAGE announced it was retracting 60 papers from 2010–2014 in the Journal of Vibration and Control, which covers acoustics, all connected to Peter Chen of National Pingtung University of Education, Taiwan.

You will note from the article, that the papers with questionable provenance were retracted in a public way.

What was the last time there was a retraction of inaccurate or harmful material from the Bible?

Comment: Re:Making music (Score 1) 424

I know more than one producer who uses plain old audio. Most music software has a "Render to audio file" feature that bypasses the audio subsystem completely.

And how would someone producing music that "bypasses the audio subsystem completely" know what music he's making if he cannot hear it? If someone told you that they produce professional-quality music using only the onboard audio hardware on their Mac or PC, they must think you are very gullible.

I believe you're mistaken. If you can point me to one professional music producer who uses only the onboard audio on his PC or Mac, I will refrain from calling you stupid.

Comment: Re:Speaking of Tesla (Score 1) 66

finish off that bottle of Wild Turkey

Wild Turkey...please. Who's gonna drink that swill when I've got a few quarts of homemade slivovitza under my sink? That way, besides the buzz, I get all the vitamins and minerals from the plums. And, in a pinch, I can run my 1973 Mercedes diesel on the stuff.

If you were a real "thoughtful admirer" of Nikola Tesla, you'd know that. Hmph.

Comment: Speaking of Tesla (Score 3, Interesting) 66

I have a Yugoslavian one hundred billion dinar note from when there was hyperinflation in that country a few decades ago. It's got a nice picture of Tesla on the front.

His birthday is also the same as my wife's.

I'm posting this comment apropos of nothing. But Tesla was one bad ass. And was so cool that David Bowie played him in a movie. And I have no evidence of this, but I'm pretty sure that the huge explosion in Tunguska back in 1908 was caused by Tesla trying to build a time machine. Or something. Here, go read it yourself. I have the day off tomorrow, so I'm already half in the bag. Catch me in an hour or so, and I'll tell you my theory about Tesla actually being the immortal Count of St. Germain, who still lives today developing Android apps and smoking DMT.

http://www.teslasociety.com/tu...

Comment: Re:yes but...yes in fact. (Score 1) 301

by PopeRatzo (#47417643) Attached to: Wireless Contraception

Oh, and you are absolutely wrong about Hobby Lobby being "just like it was a sole proprietorship". A closely-held corporation is not like a sole proprietorship. They are granted a level of exemption to liability by the government that sole proprietorships are not. That means there is a "veil" between the individual and the corporation.

Apparently, the five (male) justices on the Supreme Court who comprised the majority in the Hobby Lobby case believed that the veil is impervious to all but the Judgement of the Lord God Jehovah, based upon absolutely nothing but their own religious beliefs in the Lord God Jehovah.

As I said, it will be looked back upon with embarrassment.

Comment: Re:yes but...yes in fact. (Score 1) 301

by PopeRatzo (#47417605) Attached to: Wireless Contraception

When I talk about "they" I am not talking about a corporation, but Mr. and Mrs. Green who own Hobby Lobby.

But Mr and Mrs Green are not the ones paying for the employees' health care. Rather, those checks are from the corporation.

People are acting like Hobby Lobby employees are somehow harmed by not having their employer pay for something they never paid for in the first place.

Maybe you don't understand how employer health care works. The reason an employer provides health care is because an employee works for them. So, in a very real way, the value of the health care has already been earned by the employee. Thus, it's not Mr and Mrs Green paying for the health care at all is it? It's the employees who pay for it, with their labor (and also direct deductions from their paychecks). Employer health care is not charity.

Hobby Lobby is this era's version of Plessy v Ferguson. In a relatively short time, it will be looked back upon with embarrassment.

Comment: Re:Nuclear Power (Score 1) 102

by PopeRatzo (#47417511) Attached to: How Japan Lost Track of 640kg of Plutonium

You will notice that while Dr Cohen offered to consume as much plutonium as you would caffeine, he never actually did so.

The annals of the history of science are littered with cranks.

Dr Cohen also said that he believed uranium to be a renewable resource. Unless he's figured out a way to grow uranium, I'm sure you'll agree there is a finite amount of the substance. Dr Cohen did not believe that the amount of uranium on Earth was finite.

Crackpot.

Comment: Nuclear Power (Score 0) 102

by PopeRatzo (#47414071) Attached to: How Japan Lost Track of 640kg of Plutonium

Clean, safe and too cheap to meter.

Anybody who tries to use a misplaced 640 kilograms of plutonium to spread FUD about 1950's Energy Source of Future is just a damn liar.

But you have to admit, Japan has a pretty remarkable record with nukes. They must have it in their blood. At least the ones whose grandparents lived in Nagasaki.

Regarding the lost 1410 lbs of the deadliest substance on Earth, I'm pretty sure it has something to do with that giant lizard marching toward Tokyo (and no, I'm not referring to Shinzo Abe's economic policy).

"Right now I feel that I've got my feet on the ground as far as my head is concerned." -- Baseball pitcher Bo Belinsky

Working...