Jump to content

eugene

Members
  • Posts

    7,442
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Posts posted by eugene

  1. it's pretty amazing really, he quotes both toole and olive but simply doesn't understand the core of their arguments regarding proper sound reproduction. it seems he doesn't even understand the goal of a sound engineer.

  2. the sisters brothers - my reaction to it when it ended was "ummm, ok?". felt kinda hollow, lacking ambition or some kind of forward motion. it was going for something different with western as a genre being a sort of a vague form to fill in with different ideas about stuff, and not being too concerned about sticking to the western canon, but it just didn't work at all, those ideas simply didn't converge into a good film, lots of potentially interesting and amusing parts but no whole. it's also kinda hard to disentangle john c. riley from dr. steve brule, and his average-at-best acting didn't help in that regard.

  3. yeah, if you like to tweak your sound then do it with all kinds of dsp and eq, but don't get an permanent facial tattoo of sorts with some kind of screwy speakers or a tube amp that might sound fun in some very particular context and with some very particular record, but otherwise will trash your music.

  4. subjectively people tend to prefer accurate gear when they are put in controlled blind test conditions, ie when only the speakers are the only thing that's being tested, so taste isn't really a factor here.  (see research by floyd toole and sean olive for details)

    there's only one way to properly reproduce the recording, and it's via gear that doesn't distort it. if you don't like how something sounds via accurate gear (assuming the recording was made using such gear as well), then you simply don't like the artistic choices made, and this becomes a different issue entirely, and not a technical one.

     

    i mean you wouldn't go to a gallery wearing pink tinted glasses or something, so why distort the records of your favorite musicians using shitty gear..

  5. regarding spl, 105db spl peak is a common and acceptable thx standard. you DO want your speakers to reach those peaks without falling apart and crackling and clipping. live concerts, even classical music ones reach even higher levels.

     

     

    also, don't fetishize and romanticize old gear, it's mostly shit. audio reproduction is an exact science, and the path to high quality reproduction is picking out gear that performs well (=as linear as possible) objectively. that's unsurprisingly also the type of gear people prefer in blind tests (jbl/harman people do a lot of research in this field).

  6. use this first: http://myhometheater.homestead.com/splcalculator.html

    make sure you get about 110db spl at your listening position, it's unlikely that you'll need more than that. then, seek out a flat measuring (on and off axis) speaker that can reach that and an amp or a receiver that can provide the juice (the latter is usually cheaper while offering more due to being positioned in a different and a more competitive market). ignore all reviews that do not measure the stuff they allege to review, they're payola or just talk out of their ass (for example whathifi, cnet).

     

    some brands to pay attention to (not saying that everything they produce is great, but it's likely to be good): jbl, revel, genelec, neumann, adam, nht, canton, selah, psb, kef (though overpriced)

     

    shit to avoid: modern b&w, modern klipsch

     

    used speakers are also a very good idea, because decent speakers can last decades without any degradation.

  7. the house that jack built - a lot of it went over my head but nevertheless it's still a lot of fun to watch von trier go wherever the fuck he wants with his ironic misanthropy and depravity and juggle lots of interesting ideas along the way.

  8. i'm doing some hardcore mega time intensive premium deep european pc gaming recently.

     

    crusader kings 2 - this game is simply a masterpiece, immense depth and breadth within a living and highly complex and interconnected medieval world. for those unfamiliar with it, basically you manage a dynasty within a feudal system, grow and develop your character and the descendants, conquer and rule lands in many different  ways to deal with very different situations, deal with religious stuff, diplomacy and court intrigue. all of those elements affect each other, your reputation and many other parameters. it's sandboxy in its nature but very rich in content. currently i'm busy kicking musulmans off iberian peninsula, but my vassals are getting strong and often exploit my righteous wars to try to take over my kingdom or secede. one of my ruler characters got her face torn off by a sneaky vassal who pretended to take care of her cancer, she died shortly after and a pretty big civil war ensued during the regency that almost screwed my whole dynasty. some of the manners you lose in this game are extremely fun.

     

    x4 foundations - this is what elite dangerous was supposed to be, where the world is actually a world. it's very busy and there's a very well developed economic system.  there's a lot of shit to do, from exploring the galaxy in a tiny scout, trading (which is very dynamic and interesting due to the economic system) to  managing massive industrial complexes and leading wars with huge fleets. the sense of scale is really awesome in this game. it's pretty clunky and buggy at the moment and some design choices are pretty weird (there's really no reason for those massive and hollow stations you can traverse on foot), but the developer is very reliable when it comes to fixing and stuff as it was evident in previous x games.

  9. agree with Turb. despite the nostalgic nerdism around fallout 1 and 2, it was actually new vegas that was the best in series. it was vast and very well written all around. the quests, the locations, the nps, the setting and the atmosphere...all great, that is about after a year of patching or so, because i remember it being buggy as hell at the beginning.

  10. the last kingdom is still great with its 3rd season.  from the viking battle brutality and meatheadery to the interplay of court intrigue, politics and religion, all very well done and well written, the dialogues especially have a certain rhythm to them so that they never bore.

    production and score are very solid, the world looks and feels true, even if pretty small scale. the acting is kinda over the place though, from the great alfred the king to that new girl that plays the seer who's just godawful.

    so basically if you were into got in its early seasons before it went to shit and don't need its pomp, this should be on your radar. not to say it's a got wannabe though, it really does have its own thing when it comes to the general mood of the whole series, it's a bit campy, pulpy, witty, simple and down to earth at the same time, good stuff.

×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

We have placed cookies on your device to help make this website better. You can adjust your cookie settings, otherwise we'll assume you're okay to continue.