The Altera Centauri collection has been brought up to date by Darsnan. It comprises every decent scenario he's been able to find anywhere on the web, going back over 20 years.
25 themes/skins/styles are now available to members. Check the select drop-down at the bottom-left of each page.
Call To Power 2 Cradle 3+ mod in progress: https://apolyton.net/forum/other-games/call-to-power-2/ctp2-creation/9437883-making-cradle-3-fully-compatible-with-the-apolyton-edition
Originally posted by KrazyHorse
Compressed bitrate != sampling rate.
Samples contain 16*2 bits of information on a CD
so adding smileys proves your point about what now?
anywho, i made my point and you can go eat a dick
"I hope I get to punch you in the face one day" - MRT144, Imran Siddiqui
'I'm fairly certain that a ban on me punching you in the face is not a "right" worth respecting." - loinburger
You don't even understand the terms you're using. The Nyquist theorem doesn't allow you to assign a maximum bitrate without knowledge of the sample size in addition to sampling frequency.
Do you understand that there are two components to a CD's bitrate? There's the number of samples and the number of bits per sample. 44.1 kbps != 44.1 kHz sampling. Not even close. ALL YOUR AMPLITUDE INFORMATION IS LOST. All frequency components can only be given a single bit of information at that rate: on or off.
where did i say 44.1 kbps!!! where?! i said 44.1khz sampling rate. amplitude information is where hte bits come in. 2^16 possible combinations! WOOWOO! ROUND AND ROUND WE GO!
"I hope I get to punch you in the face one day" - MRT144, Imran Siddiqui
'I'm fairly certain that a ban on me punching you in the face is not a "right" worth respecting." - loinburger
where did i say 44.1 kbps!!! where?! i said 44.1khz sampling rate. amplitude information is where hte bits come in. 2^16 possible combinations! WOOWOO! ROUND AND ROUND WE GO!
So what does the 44.1 kHz have to do with asking why we use MP3s with higher bitrates than 96 kbps?
non sequitar, i didnt make a point about that. you did.
"I hope I get to punch you in the face one day" - MRT144, Imran Siddiqui
'I'm fairly certain that a ban on me punching you in the face is not a "right" worth respecting." - loinburger
BTW, if you're talking about recording music on a different format than CDs at sampling rates of greater than 96kHz, then your point about CD players being a bottleneck is the nonsequitur. CD players can't be a bottleneck if you're playing using a different DAC
Where are we recording at greater than 96k then, son?
Are we somehow putting 96 kHz samples on CDs which are only sampled by CD players at 44.1? And somehow that adds to music quality?
it had to do with recording. and why people record at 96khz 24 bit in professional music requirements enviroments. to capture more audio data per second and yield a higher resolution of sound.
"I hope I get to punch you in the face one day" - MRT144, Imran Siddiqui
'I'm fairly certain that a ban on me punching you in the face is not a "right" worth respecting." - loinburger
Originally posted by KrazyHorse
BTW, if you're talking about recording music on a different format than CDs at sampling rates of greater than 96kHz, then your point about CD players being a bottleneck is the nonsequitur. CD players can't be a bottleneck if you're playing using a different DAC
well until dvda becomes the standard for audio then what measure do we have?
"I hope I get to punch you in the face one day" - MRT144, Imran Siddiqui
'I'm fairly certain that a ban on me punching you in the face is not a "right" worth respecting." - loinburger
It's very simple: unless you're interested in outputting to a device with greater resolution than the resolution of your recording device then complaining about the resolution of your recording device is ridiculous.
Of course human hearing can't be simply modelled as hearing nothing above 20 kHz. There are other effects. But if there's a bottleneck in your DAC at 44.1 kHz then recording above 44.1 kHZ is ridiculous.
it had to do with recording. and why people record at 96khz 24 bit in professional music requirements enviroments. to capture more audio data per second and yield a higher resolution of sound.
If they then put it on a CD then the extra info is useless
If you've got a better DAC then it's not necessarily useless.
Where are we recording at greater than 96k then, son?
Are we somehow putting 96 kHz samples on CDs which are only sampled by CD players at 44.1? And somehow that adds to music quality?
you know just as well as i do there are algorhythms that convert from 96k to 44.1. but im telling you from experience, that recording at a higher sampling rate makes a difference in the intelligability of what you hear.
like i said, you rely on numbers to say whats wrong, i rely on experience to say whats right.
"I hope I get to punch you in the face one day" - MRT144, Imran Siddiqui
'I'm fairly certain that a ban on me punching you in the face is not a "right" worth respecting." - loinburger
Comment