On Sat, 09 Mar 2013 01:00:51 +0100 Hartmut Noack <zettberlin@xxxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > Am 08.03.2013 11:02, schrieb Ben Bell: > > On Thu, Mar 07, 2013 at 07:28:46PM +0100, Jeremy Jongepier wrote: > >> On 03/07/2013 06:45 AM, david wrote: > >>> Yah, but which one sounds better - Windows or Linux? ;-) > >> Linux of course if you have to believe the audiophile forums. > > > > Well obviously. Anyone with ears can tell you that. > > > > More importantly, does a vintage kernel sound better than a more recent one? > > I've been doing some testing and the results are pretty clear, not that > > they should surprise anyone who knows anything about recording: > > > > 1) Older kernels sound much warmer than newer ones. > > > > 2) Kernels compiled by hand on the machine they run on sound less sterile > > than upstream distro provided ones which also tend to have flabby low > > end response and bad stereo imaging. > > > > 3) As if it needed saying, gcc4 is a disaster for sound quality. I mean, > > seriously if you want decent audio and you use gcc4 you may as well be > > recording with a tin can microphone. > > The compiler alone can improve any audio-software a lot. > But remember, that the chain is only as strong as its weakest segment. > Try to make sure, that the source code for your apps and drivers is > written in vi, if possible with code-highlighting switched off. > > Highlighted code will inevitable cause artifacts in your audio > (everybody knows pink noise OK?). Code written in Emacs may or may not > make the driver sound sterile. To be sure you could print the code > (vintage needle printers are your best choice) and retype it without > highlighting in vi (vim and other compromised derivatives of vi cannot > be trusted either). > > > 4) Kernels sound better after they've been worn in a bit. Don't expect your > > newly built 2.4 kernel to have that warm sound until you've run with it > > for a few weeks, but for a really classy sound here's a trick: compile the > > kernel and then put it somewhere safe (ext2 partition, obviously) to mellow > > for a month and then boot into it at the last minute before you start > > recording an important session. Your clients will thank you. > > > > Ben Without wishing to be critical, you're all rather failing to see the elephant in the room. The biggest corrupter of sonic purity is worn and dirty electricity. Think of it. The electricity you're using today was quite likely being squirted through a heavy industrial processing plant yesterday. It may even have passed through a sewage works. Yes I know that's pretty disgusting but we have to face the facts. Now, I know that you can apply mains filters and proper on-line UPS units and that will clean the electricity up a lot, but don't you think all that scrubbing only makes it even more worn and takes some of the 'sharpness' out of the sound you make with it? No, the only answer is to use a rotary converter. By its mechanical action, this will actually use the stale electricity to create brand new electricity. You will be amazed at the improvement. The clarity will be so stunning you will even be able to tell the point number of the kernel your OS is using, and it has been said that under these conditions some people are able to detect the nuances of the different formulations of the hard disk surface. -- Will J Godfrey http://www.musically.me.uk Say you have a poem and I have a tune. Exchange them and we can both have a poem, a tune, and a song. _______________________________________________ Linux-audio-user mailing list Linux-audio-user@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx http://lists.linuxaudio.org/listinfo/linux-audio-user
