[USELESS] Hard attack against HA's style

Topic: [USELESS] Hard attack against HA's style (Read 4529 times) previous topic - next topic

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

[USELESS] Hard attack against HA's style

2004-02-15 10:04:15

I've just readed this post at the Exact Audio Copy official forum:

Quote

Choices are good. Centralized planning is bad.

And no amount of JS/preset hijacking will force me to hear my MP3s with your ears. I'm listening for things the HA crowd is not; I don't listen to serioustrouble and 2nd_vent_clip, and I'm totally disinterested in teaching the know-it-all arrogant HA crowd anything, because they already know it all (just ask them) by their own concensus. Part of that arrogance is that they mistakenly believe that 1)they're the only ones who've invested time in listening tests (which is how they justified remaining 3 versions behind the latest stable release for the past year) and 2)only their listening tests are valid for everyone else.

I read the link you asked us to:

> 3. The --alt-presets do not, by design, make any
> sacrifice in regards to stereo image to keep bitrate down.
> Anyone who tells you this has no idea what they are
> talking about. I should know since I actually wrote the
> code and designed the presets.

Nonsense! JS is no free lunch. And if it's not used "to keep bitrate down", what the hell is it doing in a compressor? Once it's used so sparingly that (you feel) it does not make "any sacrifice" to the stereo image, that means it's often barely being used at all. SO LET US TURN IT THE HELL OFF WITHOUT COSTING US THE SERIOUS PRESET SPEED PENALTY!!!!! (I'd sometimes much rather have a faster compressor, one that is not wasting resources checking each and every frame to see what part of each channel's information can be combined with the other's without most people noticing.) A user ought to be able to use the settings to control LAME to suit the USER's preferences -- otherwise why have them?

If the HA crowd were not so full of themselves, they would realize that they can ABX fool themselves on music without using JS. But that might lead them to consider how arrogant they're now being, and we couldn't have that, now, could we?

The covert hijacking of settings reeks of arrogance and is why I will not be adopting 3.95.1 either.

The way things are going, the arrogant one-way-suits-all know-it-all HA crowd will wake up one day to find "modified" (recompiled/nonstandard/hijackerless) versions of LAME floating around the internet...

Also, Dibrom's "OT" JPG links are broken. (Figures.)

Any comment?

[USELESS] Hard attack against HA's style

Reply #1 – 2004-02-15 10:12:19

I don't know what to say...

[USELESS] Hard attack against HA's style

Reply #2 – 2004-02-15 10:32:52

Nice to see he has the courage to sign it!!

[USELESS] Hard attack against HA's style

Reply #3 – 2004-02-15 10:33:08

I don't know what this guy is talking about ... he is free to use any setting he wishes to use ... e.g. Full Stereo 320 kbps CBR if he wants to go for speed without harming his beloved "stereo image".

I still believe that loudspeaker channel crosstalk has a far greater impact on stereo imaging that the question whether to use JS or not ... and I, by the way, never experienced any problems with JS.

[USELESS] Hard attack against HA's style

Reply #4 – 2004-02-15 10:38:23

I sense projection on the part of the author of the quote. Perhaps the arrogance was on his side of the fence.

He probably came here claiming to know more than he did, and had his pride bruised when he realized that there were actually people who were members here before he came, that these members actually had experience with psychoacoustic audio encoding, and that many of them knew more than he did on the subject.

Choices are good, indeed. But how is "centralized planning" bad?

People with the skills and technology come together to make an encoding format better, and they share their knowledge and the fruits of their labor in this forum.

And implying that choices have been somehow "restricted"? How? You can have the most beautiful mile-long LAME command line that your heart can desire, with any version of the codec (as far as I know), and it will encode your MP3's exactly as you "tell it" to.

All we ask after someone makes a claim of having a "more efficient" way of encoding, for instance, is proof. The --alt-presets have been accepted by many people here as being very efficient encoder settings. And easy to use, as well, not having to remember a dozen parameters to encode with.

I, for one, have never seen supported evidence of a better approach with the MP3 format. But maybe I've missed something that this person hasn't?

[USELESS] Hard attack against HA's style

Reply #5 – 2004-02-15 11:25:32

Quote

I still believe that loudspeaker channel crosstalk has a far greater impact on stereo imaging that the question whether to use JS or not ... and I, by the way, never experienced any problems with JS.

Yes, JS is proven not to have any problems. It is well-known that let's say Xing's implementation was at least bad but that's not the case here.

However, let's not have the hardware channel crosstalk as an argument. I prefer to have crossfeeding for headphones or have the room/speaker interaction do it for me.

[USELESS] Hard attack against HA's style

Reply #6 – 2004-02-15 12:16:03

hehehe. if we were all full of ourselves there'd be no room for ABX.

there are some problems with HA mentality as far as "science-dogma crosstalk" goes, but this is usually fairly stomped on on this turf...

science can appear arrogant, but only because a scientific thinker will know when they are right, and refuse to be told they are not if they patently are. no amount of ranting will dissuade a devil's advocate, after all (ever hear an argument between a creationist and an atheist? it's the funniest thing you'll ever see).

hehe. maybe people just can't handle being proven wrong. instead of saying "well, you've got me there. i can't argue with that", they bugger off and spread crap about the people who proved them wrong in the first place. it's really quite funny to see people disappear from one forum only to reappear on another with an irrational hatred of the previous forum (and it's members). but lies and FUD can be harmful. ah well. free speech is a double-edged sword, yada yada yada.

[USELESS] Hard attack against HA's style

Reply #7 – 2004-02-15 12:21:47

One thing apparent through the entire quote, is "envy". I can't be bothered to analize this post further, as long as such primitive intentions are so obvious throurough his message.

- Lyx

[USELESS] Hard attack against HA's style

Reply #8 – 2004-02-15 12:24:09

People have their right to their own opinions. He apparently has his opinion set. That's fine.

What i don't understand is the point of copy&pasting between different forums. You could atleast have just linked it? what if he decides to edit his post later on?

Let the man have his opinion. He is entitled to it. Everyone doesn't agree with everyone, and if they did, it would be a very boring world to live in.

This kind of behaviour remind me of old ladies, and their sowing clubs.. where the person with the most rumours/news about others, is the coolest. Ridiculous.

[USELESS] Hard attack against HA's style

Reply #9 – 2004-02-15 12:34:37

'uninteresting', my vote for this topic is -> recycle bin. (making arrogant faces)

[USELESS] Hard attack against HA's style

Reply #10 – 2004-02-15 12:39:04

Quote

'uninteresting', my vote for this topic is -> recycle bin. (making arrogant faces)

I agree. I stopped caring about things like this.

[USELESS] Hard attack against HA's style

Reply #11 – 2004-02-15 12:46:00

Quote

'uninteresting', my vote for this topic is -> recycle bin. (making arrogant faces)

Agreed.

Notice