Showing posts with label My Computer. Show all posts
Showing posts with label My Computer. Show all posts

2011-04-20

Replay Gain sounds good

Just recently I converted all my music files to include Replay Gain. This now means that my music has been made "equal".

But allow me to explain just what is going on.

Have you ever noticed that one band/CD sounds "louder" than another? And that the "louder" music is actually newer? Well, welcome to the Loudness War.

Over the many years of the recording industry, bands and producers have had to make judgments over how loud music should be. Since increased volume comes at the expense of quality, earlier musicians tended to record their music at lower volume - even musicians and bands known for creating "loud" music. In the early 90s, however, the music industry discovered that albums/songs mixed at a higher volume stood out more on the radio and were more likely to sell. With the secret out of the bag, recorded music was released at higher and higher volume as the industry competed against each other to sound "better".

And those "remastered" CDs of classic albums from long past? They were simply made louder. That's all.

It occurred to me that something was up when one day I was listening to "Buy Me a Pony" by Spiderbait some years ago. The song is 1 minute and 36 seconds of searing, flammable rock'n'roll and was one of my more favourite JJJ songs back in the day. Following this song (on a compilation CD I had made of my own music collection) came "Anarachy in the UK" by The Sex Pistols. Back in 1976 this was an incendiary punk song but after listening to "Buy Me a Pony" it sounded pedestrian. More than that, it was soft. I knew that something was wrong. The same thing afflicted my Midnight Oil collection when played in comparison to Rage Against The Machine.

Numerous thoughts appeared in my head as to the explanation. One was that the recording techniques of newer bands were far superior to those from the past. Another was that the older music simply sucked more and the newer music was better. It came to a head when I bought Psychocandy by The Jesus and Mary Chain. I had heard that this was a seminal album, responsible for influencing all sorts of 90s grunge and alternative rock music. When I first began listening I was convinced that I had purchased a dud CD. The music was so soft that it sounded as though the band were playing underwater. I searched the internet, first to see if anyone else had bought a dud CD, then (once convinced that the CD was not a dud) anyone complaining of the bad mix. Nothing.

It was then I discovered the facts behind the loudness war, and I felt cheated. Increasing the volume on tracks made music unequal and made it appear "better" than what it was. Newer bands and musicians were "cheating" by not allowing their music to be listened equally to older music (though, to be fair, it was obviously record companies that were pushing this).

The workaround for this is simple: Turn it up. If I want to listen to Spiderbait and The Sex Pistols equally, then I turn down Spiderbait and turn up The Sex Pistols. If I want to listen to The Jesus and Mary Chain properly then I turn it up in comparison to other music. But of course this requires manual control - something not at all commendable in this day of digital music players. So. I thought. Surely there is a way for computer software to determine how loud a track should be and to simply add tags to the files, and have your music player adjust accordingly? Yes. Someone had thought it up years ago.

The first thing to do is to have software capable of analyzing the music files and then applying the Replay Gain tag to it. I have done this with easyMP3Gain, a free open source gui program that uses a variety of other programs with it to work (mp3gain, aacgain and vorbisgain). All I did was add the folders and tracks of my CD collection, analyze them and change them accordingly - a process that took quite a few hours but is now complete. Here's a screenshot of three tracks  I've already mentioned:



As you can see, "Buy Me A Pony" has a track gain of -10.10, which means that in order to make the track equal, the program has lowered the volume by 10 dB. This is not a "permanent" change to the sound - all it does is add a small tag to the file. If you listen to the file on equipment that uses Replay Gain, it will automatically lower the volume. If you turn Replay Gain off, or if your media player does not support Replay Gain, the song's volume will be unchanged. You can also see there that "Anarchy In The UK" and especially the song by "The Jesus and Mary Chain" have very low track gains, which mean that they would've sounded "soft" in comparison to "louder" tracks.

Of course if you're going to try this out you also need a media player capable of Replay Gain. I use Amarok on my PC and use Rockbox on my Sansa Fuze and both have Replay Gain. If your media player does not have this feature then, as I've pointed out, the sound of your media files will be unchanged even after having the tags added to the file.

So what's it like to listen to? It's great. Suddenly Bob Dylan is competing with Them Crooked Vultures and The Rolling Stones are competing with The Eagles of Death Metal. Dylan especially is doing well in grabbing my attention - something he always struggled to do.

At this point in time I have no desire to go back to what it was like before. I am enjoying very much the experience of listening to music that has been adjusted by Replay Gain.

Note: easyMP3Gain has a number of annoying bugs which I was able to work around. The key to using it is to never "scroll down". And that guy with the bass is Steve Queralt.

2010-07-31

Linux again

In 2003 I gave up on Microsoft Windows 98. It was old and I was frustrated at having the "Blue Screen of Death" (BSOD) and being unable to turn the thing off properly. 12 months previously I had a conversation with my brother and he introduced me to Linux and the whole open source philosophy. Although I have no background in programming (and still don't) I understood what he was going on about, namely that software which is open for anyone to contribute to is less likely to have security flaws or bugs and, if they do, then they are patched up quickly. Compared this to closed sourced proprietary software, where security flaws and bugs can go unnoticed for months or even years before virus writers begin to take advantage of them, and then being dependent upon the software owner to fix it (which they may not do since such actions might not be profitable and because keeping the bugs and flaws there might force people to buy their brand new software).

My first foray into Linux was Mandrake 9.1. 2003 was still early days for desktop Linux and I found it difficult to work on - which admittedly was also because I had newly migrated from Windows and had to learn a whole new set of tricks to use. While I enjoyed the change, Mandrake didn't suit me and I got frustrated enough to make a wholesale change to Kubuntu - Ubuntu using KDE - in 2006. In 2008 KDE 4 came out and I was one of those who decided to ditch it. I then discovered Xubuntu - Ubuntu running Xfce - and made that my new Linux desktop. Now I have migrated to the most popular Linux distribution - Ubuntu, which runs GNOME.

The great thing about Ubuntu and its various offshoots (Kubuntu, Xubuntu, etc) is that a new distribution is released every six months. So every six months there is an incremental improvement in the Ubuntu operating system - software becomes slightly better, slightly more user friendly, slightly less buggy, and always, always, reliable. The thing is that Linux started off as a creation of engineers - ugly but functional - but has evolved into an easy to use, user-friendly operating system without compromising its structural integrity.

The advantages are:
  1. Linux is free. Anyone can legally download and install and copy and modify it. While Linux is based upon the work of many volunteers, most of the work is done professionally by tech companies such as IBM, Sun Microsystems and Google (to name a few). Ubuntu itself was created by Canonical, an organisation created and funded by billionaire Mark Shuttleworth.
  2. Linux is widespread and thus reliable. While it is only running on 1% of desktops, Linux forms the backbone of the internet. Most web servers run a Linux/Apache system. All supercomputers run modified Linux operating systems. Even the London Stock Exchange has ditched Microsoft to run a Linux based trading system.
  3. Linux is secure. The idea that open source software is more secure than closed source may seem counter-intuitive, but those who program the code are not as affected by profit motives as programmers who work on proprietary software. Security and utility are more important than usability, a fact which kept Linux out of popularity but which has ensured a bullet proof reputation that has had usability built upon it as the years have gone by.
A new version of Ubuntu is ready every six months. The current version is 10.04. The number 10 represents the year, the 04 represents the month. The next version will be out in October, which will naturally be called 10.10. It will be followed by 11.04 next year, and on it will go.

I made the decision this year to delay my upgrade to 10.04. I kept running 9.10 for three months beyond the upgrade date. This was to ensure that when I finally did upgrade, I could also download all the software and security upgrades at once. The fact is that Ubuntu and Canonical are not perfect, and each new release brings a new set of problems - security holes, bugs that need to be fixed, and so on. Despite all the work they do in ensuring that the official release is workable, only once it is out being used by millions of people will the real issues begin to emerge. Since I had a few problems with my previous upgrade (from 9.04 to 9.10), I decided to delay the upgrade for three months. A few weeks ago I finally upgraded to 10.04 (I should call it 10.07 I suppose!).

And what has been the result? It has been a pleasure. I'm finding this the best Ubuntu version yet. The software is usable, there are no bugs annoying me, there are no things that stop me from doing what I used to do in the previous version. Of course it's not perfect and I'm certain that there are some out there who are unhappy, but not me. Moreover I think the choice to delay upgrading for three months has meant that most of the bugs have been ironed out (as soon as I installed Ubuntu, I downloaded a mass of software upgrades and bug fixes). I look forward to upgrading to 10.10 (once January 2011 comes around of course).

Here is a short list of free, open source software that I use on Ubuntu:
In short: consider moving to Ubuntu Linux. It really is a better alternative to Microsoft in my opinion.



2007-11-12

My dumb computer

If you've been visiting this blog lately you would have noticed that I haven't been posting often enough, and that things like nice images seem to be missing from my posts.

Well, the problem is that I have been attempting to upgrade my computer. Everything was going well until I was unable to restart my operating system - Kubuntu. Finally I decided on reinstalling the whole thing but, since bad luck seems to follow bad luck, this was impossible.

Why? Because my brand new 320gb Western Digital Hard Drive decided to die on me.

Primary Master Hard Disk Fail says the message during POST. So, until I get a new one delivered to me under warranty, I have to use one of my old hard drives.

2005-07-18

Throwing away infected PCs

Matt Richtel and John Markoff from The New York Times have written an interesting article about the increasing practice of PC owners to throw away their PCs and purchase new ones. Why? Because they are infected with Spyware and Adware.

When I first read the article I was startled to discover that, rather than spend the time to clean out the PC and remove the offending software, or even save the important files, wipe the hard-drive clean and re-install, that many people were simply throwing out their old machines and buying new ones. When you can buy a decent PC in America for about US$500, this option is increasingly seen as realistic.

Of course for me there is no such option. Lack of $ means that such an action would be stupid. My current PC is a Pentium 3-450 overclocked to run at 504mhz. I should know - I was the one who put the CPU in and did the overclocking. I have two hard drives - a 40gb and a 10gb. One contains my Linux system and the other contains my Windows 98 system (which never touches the internet). I installed my own CD-RW and DVD-RW drivers. I have a 17" monitor and I still use the old ISA Sound Card from my 1998 ACER computer. In short- I built my own computer from a combination of new and second hand parts. I installed Linux (Mandrake 10.1) myself and it is the Operating system I choose to use simply because it is very, very difficult to get it infected with Malware. Since viruses are written for Microsoft Windows in mind, I have no viruses to speak of either.

I have been using Linux since April 2003. It has been frustrating and annoying - but all OSes have their particular quirks and although Linux can be quite painful sometimes it very rarely lets me down. It does demand a higher level of IT expertise for the user, but I felt that I would learn as I went along - which I have done.

The most annoying thing my Win-98 system ever did was to refuse to shut down. I would hit the "Start" button, click on shutdown... and then get the Blue Screen of Death or a lot of dots all over the screen. Of course it would refuse to turn off. With Linux I can hit "Shutdown" and it shuts down - all the time every time.

If you ever consider switching to Linux, make sure you do the research. There are many distributions such as Suse, Debian, Fedora and my own preference Mandrake (now Mandriva). A lot of software from Windows will not work on Linux, although Linux has a lot of its own software that can read Windows files. An example of this is the Word Processor OpenOffice (which many people think is superior to Microsoft Word). OpenOffice saves its files as .sxw files, which Word can't open. But OpenOffice can read (and edit) .doc files, and can even save them in the .doc format.

When surfing the Internet I use Firefox instead of Internet Explorer. Click on the link to the right of the page to find out what that's all about. I also use Thunderbird to send and recieve emails. I have had no problems with any of them - they are both very secure and work well.

Linux and its many programs are considered Open Source because they allow anyone to view and modify the source code. This means, firstly, that if there are any security problems in the software, someone will find it very quickly and patch it up quickly. Secondly, it means that the software is free and you can install it on any PC if you choose to - there is no money to pay.

Linux and Open Source Software has a lot of indirect costs - and certainly there is software out there that is superior to open source (example - I prefer listening to CDs on my Windows 98 CD player than on the Linux KsCD player). Games, for example, are far superior on Windows than on Linux. But the daily "Meat and Potatoes" software that you need to run your PC - Operating system, Office Sotware, Web Browser, Email - Linux is up there with Windows.


From the usr/bin/oso Department



© 2005 Neil McKenzie Cameron, http://one-salient-oversight.blogspot.com/
This work is licensed under the Creative Commons Attribution-NoDerivs License.
To view a copy of this license, visit http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nd/2.5/ or send a letter to Creative Commons, 559 Nathan Abbott Way, Stanford, California 94305, USA.

You are free:
* To copy, distribute, display and perform this work.
* To make commercial use of this work.
Under the following conditions:
* By attribution. You must give the original author credit.
* No derivative works. You may not alter, transform or build upon the work.
* For any reuse or distribution, you must make clear to others the license terms of this work.
Any of these conditions can be waived if you get permission from the author.