If you can read this, either the style sheet didn't load or you have an older browser that doesn't support style sheets. Try clearing your browser cache and refreshing the page.

(Wired)   Laser-cut wooden records improve the timbre of music   (wired.com) divider line 54
    More: Cool, tree rings, Amanda Ghassaei, Instructables, laser cutter, lasers, additive manufacturing, plywood, music  
•       •       •

4067 clicks; posted to Geek » on 08 May 2013 at 5:15 PM (1 year ago)   |  Favorite    |   share:  Share on Twitter share via Email Share on Facebook   more»



54 Comments   (+0 »)
   
View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest

Archived thread

First | « | 1 | 2 | » | Last | Show all
 
2013-05-08 05:19:44 PM  
I wonder if you could use teak on a lathe?
 
2013-05-08 05:22:32 PM  
To get the most out of the sound, you need a wooden volume knob.
 
boingboing.net
 
2013-05-08 05:24:41 PM  
All of my music is recorded on disks handmade of obsidian by North Korean sweatshop kids.
 
2013-05-08 05:26:15 PM  
i'd like to see other materials. Maybe one or two that actually might help the sound instead of degrade it.
 
2013-05-08 05:26:43 PM  
My stock ticker is a hot riveter.
 
2013-05-08 05:36:16 PM  

viscountalpha: i'd like to see other materials. Maybe one or two that actually might help the sound instead of degrade it.


Silicon. As in silicon memory cards holding digital data.
 
2013-05-08 05:38:34 PM  

Russ1642: viscountalpha: i'd like to see other materials. Maybe one or two that actually might help the sound instead of degrade it.

Silicon. As in silicon memory cards holding digital data.


If I could punch you through the internet, I would right now.
 
Look at what I wrote and realize how farking stupid you are.
 
2013-05-08 05:40:51 PM  
Wooden records sound much better than vinyl records. Also they are green and prevent "Global Wharrming".
s15.postimg.org
 
2013-05-08 05:42:21 PM  

viscountalpha: Russ1642: viscountalpha: i'd like to see other materials. Maybe one or two that actually might help the sound instead of degrade it.

Silicon. As in silicon memory cards holding digital data.

If I could punch you through the internet, I would right now.
 
Look at what I wrote and realize how farking stupid you are.


I was just making fun of people for storing in analog when digital is so much better and has zero degradation with use.
 
2013-05-08 05:45:26 PM  
A good coating of shellac would help.
 
2013-05-08 05:47:36 PM  

SpdrJay: All of my music is recorded on disks handmade of obsidian by North Korean sweatshop kids.


Poser. I just have the kids perform the music live for me.
 
2013-05-08 05:58:13 PM  

viscountalpha: Russ1642: viscountalpha: i'd like to see other materials. Maybe one or two that actually might help the sound instead of degrade it.

Silicon. As in silicon memory cards holding digital data.

If I could punch you through the internet, I would right now.
 
Look at what I wrote and realize how farking stupid you are.


♪ It's like raaaaeeeaaaiiiin... ♪
 
2013-05-08 06:00:57 PM  
Proving once again that just because you  can,it doesn't mean you  should.
 
2013-05-08 06:02:42 PM  
Software Engineer Uses Laser Etching to Create a Vastly Inferior Copy of Something
 
2013-05-08 06:05:48 PM  
Hickory diskery, doc?
 
2013-05-08 06:07:02 PM  
Flintstones did it!
 
2013-05-08 06:13:51 PM  
isn't it heavier then vinyl? putting extra stress on your turntable?
 
2013-05-08 06:26:32 PM  

Russ1642: viscountalpha: i'd like to see other materials. Maybe one or two that actually might help the sound instead of degrade it.

Silicon. As in silicon memory cards holding digital data.


viscountalpha might disagree with you, but you're 100% right.
 
2013-05-08 06:31:31 PM  

viscountalpha: Russ1642: viscountalpha: i'd like to see other materials. Maybe one or two that actually might help the sound instead of degrade it.

Silicon. As in silicon memory cards holding digital data.

If I could punch you through the internet, I would right now.

Look at what I wrote and realize how farking stupid you are.


Wow. Who pissed in your Cheerios this morning?
 
2013-05-08 06:40:11 PM  
Anything that will degrade the sound of Radiohead from the original is ALL WIN.
 
2013-05-08 06:52:59 PM  
These are great when you're listening to old 70s groups -- like ELM.
 
2013-05-08 06:54:25 PM  

HindiDiscoMonster: Russ1642: viscountalpha: Russ1642: viscountalpha: i'd like to see other materials. Maybe one or two that actually might help the sound instead of degrade it.

Silicon. As in silicon memory cards holding digital data.

If I could punch you through the internet, I would right now.

Look at what I wrote and realize how farking stupid you are.

I was just making fun of people for storing in analog when digital is so much better and has zero degradation with use.

well... you are half right anyway... I'll let you figure out which half.


Perhaps you don't understand how digital works.  There are formats that do not use compression so they are a true representation of the music, but will be limited by the quality of your sound equipment, primarily your speakers.   There are other formats, e.g. mp3, that uses compression that attempt to find a happy ground between quality and size.

If the former, then it will always be superior to any analog format you could hope to find short of having the music played live.

If you are arguing that digital is never better than analog, they you are an uneducated, hipster moran.
 
2013-05-08 07:20:23 PM  
This is interesting in a William Basinski "Disintegration Loops" way, but that's about it.
 
2013-05-08 07:45:31 PM  
I was going to make a snide remark, but I actually kind of enjoy how proof-of-concept projects for machining techniques frequently get way the fark out of hand.
 
2013-05-08 07:45:42 PM  
Don't take any wooden Nickelback
 
2013-05-08 08:03:03 PM  
OgreMagi

In theory you are wrong...  analogue is better than digital in principle.  ALL digital is sampled.  The idea with digital is that if you sample it enough, you can't tell there are gaps between the bits.  With analogue those gaps are filled, and ALL of the original information can be transmitted.  This is independent of any compression (or not).  The downside is that it more or less has to be stored on physical media, and read that way too, which means its nearly impossible not to have degradation with use.

In practice though...  when we're sampling hundreds or even thousands of times faster than our nerves and brains can process, anyone who claims they can hear the difference in quality (between high end uncompressed digital, and super high end, perfectly transcribed analogue) is probably full of shiat.
 
2013-05-08 08:11:33 PM  

Russ1642: viscountalpha: Russ1642: viscountalpha: i'd like to see other materials. Maybe one or two that actually might help the sound instead of degrade it.

Silicon. As in silicon memory cards holding digital data.

If I could punch you through the internet, I would right now.
 
Look at what I wrote and realize how farking stupid you are.

I was just making fun of people for storing in analog when digital is so much better and has zero degradation with use.


How about if you digitally store a 3D model of the analog record, and then just print a new one when the old one wears out? Maybe even recycle the material Wouldn't THAT be awesome?
 
2013-05-08 08:19:16 PM  

foxy_canuck: OgreMagi

In theory you are wrong...  analogue is better than digital in principle.  ALL digital is sampled.  The idea with digital is that if you sample it enough, you can't tell there are gaps between the bits.  With analogue those gaps are filled, and ALL of the original information can be transmitted.  This is independent of any compression (or not).  The downside is that it more or less has to be stored on physical media, and read that way too, which means its nearly impossible not to have degradation with use.

In practice though...  when we're sampling hundreds or even thousands of times faster than our nerves and brains can process, anyone who claims they can hear the difference in quality (between high end uncompressed digital, and super high end, perfectly transcribed analogue) is probably full of shiat.


Oh Jesus H Christ....

http://people.xiph.org/~xiphmont/demo/neil-young.html
 
2013-05-08 08:24:21 PM  
I was just listening to Jakob Dylan on Maron's podcast and they got to talking about the pitfalls of being an audiophile (money, scientific precision, preciousness) and Jakob said something which I think is appropriate here, "Sometimes I just want to listen to the music. And it might be more convenient as an mp3 when I'm not at home."
 
2013-05-08 08:51:22 PM  

foxy_canuck: OgreMagi

In theory you are wrong...  analogue is better than digital in principle.  ALL digital is sampled.  The idea with digital is that if you sample it enough, you can't tell there are gaps between the bits.  With analogue those gaps are filled, and ALL of the original information can be transmitted.  This is independent of any compression (or not).  The downside is that it more or less has to be stored on physical media, and read that way too, which means its nearly impossible not to have degradation with use.

In practice though...  when we're sampling hundreds or even thousands of times faster than our nerves and brains can process, anyone who claims they can hear the difference in quality (between high end uncompressed digital, and super high end, perfectly transcribed analogue) is probably full of shiat.


I was right.  You don't understand digital at all.
 
2013-05-08 08:53:32 PM  
/sees what subby did there
 
2013-05-08 08:57:22 PM  
None of this makes a bit of difference without Monster Cable. See, it's like pushing the audio signal through a garden hose (regular speaker wire) vs. a fire hose (Monster Cable speaker wire). You can really hear the difference on all frequency ranges. Ahem.
 
2013-05-08 09:07:29 PM  

Quantum Apostrophe: foxy_canuck: OgreMagi

In theory you are wrong...  analogue is better than digital in principle.  ALL digital is sampled.  The idea with digital is that if you sample it enough, you can't tell there are gaps between the bits.  With analogue those gaps are filled, and ALL of the original information can be transmitted.  This is independent of any compression (or not).  The downside is that it more or less has to be stored on physical media, and read that way too, which means its nearly impossible not to have degradation with use.

In practice though...  when we're sampling hundreds or even thousands of times faster than our nerves and brains can process, anyone who claims they can hear the difference in quality (between high end uncompressed digital, and super high end, perfectly transcribed analogue) is probably full of shiat.

Oh Jesus H Christ....

http://people.xiph.org/~xiphmont/demo/neil-young.html


OOooh... very cool stuff on there, thanks!
 
2013-05-08 09:17:49 PM  

OgreMagi: foxy_canuck: OgreMagi

In theory you are wrong...  analogue is better than digital in principle.  ALL digital is sampled.  The idea with digital is that if you sample it enough, you can't tell there are gaps between the bits.  With analogue those gaps are filled, and ALL of the original information can be transmitted.  This is independent of any compression (or not).  The downside is that it more or less has to be stored on physical media, and read that way too, which means its nearly impossible not to have degradation with use.

In practice though...  when we're sampling hundreds or even thousands of times faster than our nerves and brains can process, anyone who claims they can hear the difference in quality (between high end uncompressed digital, and super high end, perfectly transcribed analogue) is probably full of shiat.

I was right.  You don't understand digital at all.


Please elaborate, for us not among the vinyl master race. Or are cassettes the hip thing now?
 
2013-05-08 09:20:33 PM  

OgreMagi: I was right. You don't understand digital at all.


There seem to be people stuck on the simple-minded "stair step" graphics you can find on superstitious sites. Never mind that the amount of steps you can count on the graphics would indicate about 3 bits of resolution, or that instantaneous steps* don't exist in the real world... Or that even if steps made it out the filter you'd need a pretty special scope setup** to resolve microvolts riding on volts of signal... Even then, even if you could see them, they still wouldn't make it out the speaker, which would mechanically filter them out.

Even if the speakers didn't, the air would.

* One of my hobbies a while back was making 10ps steps. Still not instant.
** Scopes really don't have the dynamic range to measure microvolts like that, you need a special amp front-end. Plus usually the volts send the scope inputs into overload.


NateAsbestos: OOooh... very cool stuff on there, thanks!


Enjoy.
 
2013-05-08 09:21:09 PM  

rustypouch: Please elaborate, for us not among the vinyl master race. Or are cassettes the hip thing now?


Reel to reel.
 
2013-05-08 09:25:43 PM  

Quantum Apostrophe: rustypouch: Please elaborate, for us not among the vinyl master race. Or are cassettes the hip thing now?

Reel to reel.


4-track, biatch!
 
2013-05-08 09:41:20 PM  

Quantum Apostrophe: rustypouch: Please elaborate, for us not among the vinyl master race. Or are cassettes the hip thing now?

Reel to reel.


I want to see a hipster carrying around a reel to reel.
 
2013-05-08 09:49:28 PM  

Quantum Apostrophe: rustypouch: Please elaborate, for us not among the vinyl master race. Or are cassettes the hip thing now?

Reel to reel.


Oh man, had a friend in SF who was way into retro synth gear and just had to get himself one of those. Roped me and another friend into carrying it up to his apartment. It was like moving a refrigerator.
 
2013-05-08 10:09:32 PM  

fusillade762: Quantum Apostrophe: rustypouch: Please elaborate, for us not among the vinyl master race. Or are cassettes the hip thing now?

Reel to reel.

Oh man, had a friend in SF who was way into retro synth gear and just had to get himself one of those. Roped me and another friend into carrying it up to his apartment. It was like moving a refrigerator.


Must have been a 1 inch machine. Home or "prosumer" units don't weigh more than 70ish pounds.

audioklassiks.de
 
2013-05-08 11:08:29 PM  
Songs from the wood?

www.freecodesource.com
 
2013-05-08 11:30:12 PM  

Chevello: How about if you digitally store a 3D model of the analog record, and then just print a new one when the old one wears out? Maybe even recycle the material Wouldn't THAT be awesome?


Record in analog.
Digitally master it.
Produce ultra heavy vinyl LP of it
Laser scan the LP into a digital format
3D print the LP
Uses a laser instead of a needle to read LP for playback!

Profit!

//True music lovers simply hire their favorite band to follow them around and play live when desired.
///The extra-true one know that they will be the only ones to have the band hired as everybody else has never heard of them...

FLAC rips of CDs work fine for me...
 
2013-05-08 11:42:15 PM  
Digital recordings sound bad because of shiatty mastering such as the loudness war. If you plugged the preamp output of your $50,000 turntable into an A/D converter and burned that bit stream onto a CD, you wouldn't be able to tell the difference between the CD and the original turntable in a blind listening test.
 
2013-05-08 11:45:53 PM  

Quantum Apostrophe: fusillade762: Quantum Apostrophe: rustypouch: Please elaborate, for us not among the vinyl master race. Or are cassettes the hip thing now?

Reel to reel.

Oh man, had a friend in SF who was way into retro synth gear and just had to get himself one of those. Roped me and another friend into carrying it up to his apartment. It was like moving a refrigerator.

Must have been a 1 inch machine. Home or "prosumer" units don't weigh more than 70ish pounds.

[audioklassiks.de image 850x566]


More like this:

museumofmagneticsoundrecording.org

Thing weighed at least a hundred pounds.
 
2013-05-08 11:48:11 PM  

common sense is an oxymoron: Songs from the wood?


Glad someone said it.
 
2013-05-09 12:08:29 AM  
Hey, subby:

images.t-nation.com
 
2013-05-09 12:54:19 AM  

Dragonflew: To get the most out of the sound, you need a wooden volume knob.
 
[boingboing.net image 314x169]


It's useless without knowing the numbers on the amp. How will you know if it goes to 11?
 
2013-05-09 01:21:24 AM  
Quantum Apostrophe:

Oh Jesus H Christ....

http://people.xiph.org/~xiphmont/demo/neil-young.html


Well, that tied me up for a couple hours. Clearly I picked the wrong day to be dyslexic.

Seems like I recall hearing about audible harmonics from inaudible frequencies. Is that not a thing? Isn't that how the LRAD sound cannon works? Wouldn't audible harmonics be a benefit of a wider frequency range?

Not that it matters to me personally; Motorhead trashed my ears a long time ago. Just curious.
 
2013-05-09 01:58:42 AM  

foxy_canuck: ALL of the original information can be transmitted


No. Even ignoring noise in the environment (things like heat, etc.) and the limitations of the pre-media portions of the recording system, only the information represented in the recording mechanism can be stored, and only to the resolution allowed by the physical quantization inherent in all known materials. It's not "all" the sound information any more than an analog photograph has infinite spacial resolution.

If you're going to talk about "perfect" analog signals without regard for physical limitations you might just as well talk about "perfect" digital signals with infinite sample density.
 
2013-05-09 02:39:32 AM  
Analog obsessed audiophiles are much like homeopathy advocates.  When basic audio engineering explanations defeat their mantras, they start talking about inaudible harmonics and other magical elements.
 
Displayed 50 of 54 comments

First | « | 1 | 2 | » | Last | Show all

View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest


This thread is archived, and closed to new comments.

Continue Farking
Submit a Link »






Report