C# or C++ ?

  • (2 Pages)
  • +
  • 1
  • 2

25 Replies - 6699 Views - Last Post: 04 August 2013 - 06:22 PM

#16 lordofduct  Icon User is offline

  • I'm a cheeseburger
  • member icon


Reputation: 2538
  • View blog
  • Posts: 4,641
  • Joined: 24-September 10

Re: C# or C++ ?

Posted 05 April 2012 - 08:01 AM

Vinyl has a larger audio range. This does not mean 'rich' as 'rich' isn't really a technical term, but instead a subjective term to describe what it is you like about a sound. Rich usually just means 'more pleasurable', as in "The sound of vinyl gives a more pleasurable [richer] experience".

Vinyl also has a lower fidelity, in that it introduces more 'noise' and 'distortion' to the audio. If I as a listener am looking for less noise or distortion, vinyl will not supply the 'rich' experience I'm hoping for.

Also note, if high audio range is what you're looking for. Vinyl only beats CD, there are several other recording formats that supply even higher audio ranges. They just aren't as popular. And with the onset of digital distribution some audio formats supply huge range with no need to change hardware.

And yet another thing, the highest possible audio range is determined by the master recording... if the master recording has CD-audio range... the vinyl will only have CD-audio range... you can't just pull sound out of the ether when writing to vinyl.

This post has been edited by lordofduct: 05 April 2012 - 08:04 AM

Was This Post Helpful? 1
  • +
  • -

#17 tlhIn`toq  Icon User is offline

  • Please show what you have already tried when asking a question.
  • member icon

Reputation: 5676
  • View blog
  • Posts: 12,208
  • Joined: 02-June 10

Re: C# or C++ ?

Posted 05 April 2012 - 08:07 AM

View Postturboscrew, on 05 April 2012 - 08:53 AM, said:

Quote

Or audiophiles that insist that vinyl is 'richer'.

Actually it is.
You can hear it if you listen to "TIM-prone" music.
(Lots of enharmonic high pitches) ;-)


But just like the C++ v. C# argument one has to ask "Is it worth it for all the negative aspects"?
  • You can hear it if you listen to that particular type of music.
  • If you are below the age of 35: After which you loose that range as part of the natural aging process.
  • If you having the capability to hear the difference at all: Not everyone is born with good singing capability. Not everyone is born with the same hearing features.
  • If you are in a nice 'music listening' environment. Makes little difference in a car or workplace with various background noise. Oh wait, can't realistically listen to vinyl in your car going down the road.
  • If you have the right headphones or speakers capable of producing it.
  • You have to take meticulous care of your vinyl, every time, all the time even for quick playing of party music (otherwise the damage causes hiss/pops destroying the richness): Just like C++ requires meticulous care of memory every time, all the time, even for quick run-up apps.


So is vinyl richer? Ok, I'll concede it; under the right conditions for the right person. Exactly the same answer as for comparing coding languages. Any language is the right language for the right person for a given set of conditions.

This post has been edited by tlhIn`toq: 05 April 2012 - 08:09 AM

Was This Post Helpful? 0
  • +
  • -

#18 lordofduct  Icon User is offline

  • I'm a cheeseburger
  • member icon


Reputation: 2538
  • View blog
  • Posts: 4,641
  • Joined: 24-September 10

Re: C# or C++ ?

Posted 05 April 2012 - 08:39 AM

I'll "concede" that my raw Nine Inch Nails master tracks digitally distributed in uncompressed wav format a few years back, when played over spdif, to my Marantz amplifier, pumping my 5 foot tall floor speakers...

that my experience is very "rich"

very rich in that it cost me a fuck ton of money to buy all that shit.






Though in the case of what Choscura had to say. I think that's exactly what he was saying. C++ can give one hell of an experience... it just requires a fuck ton of dedication and practice.

This post has been edited by lordofduct: 05 April 2012 - 08:41 AM

Was This Post Helpful? 2
  • +
  • -

#19 jon.kiparsky  Icon User is offline

  • Pancakes!
  • member icon


Reputation: 8027
  • View blog
  • Posts: 13,740
  • Joined: 19-March 11

Re: C# or C++ ?

Posted 05 April 2012 - 09:03 AM

View PosttlhIn`toq, on 05 April 2012 - 09:19 AM, said:

This reminds me of old-school photographers that refuse to accept digital and continue to insist that film is the only true photographic medium.


Hah. I guess you'd call me one of those. I don't see it as a matter of "accepting" though. I just look at digital photographs and what I mostly see is ugly artifacts. Subtle gradations get reduced to stripes and blotches, skin tone ends up looking like a skin condition, a smoothly varied blue sky becomes a flat blue field, that sort of thing. And no, I'm not talking about cheap cameras or bad equipment - you can see this on any digital print in any gallery you walk into. And no, you don't have to get busy with a microscope, it's generally visible at normal viewing distance. We're talking about gross distortions of the image, and to my eye they're not pretty ones.

I do understand that my 35mm film - my medium of choice - also produces artifacts, which are ones that I appreciate and manipulate when I take pictures, and that this is a matter of my personal preference, but there it is. Digital photography is ugly to me. It's a shame, because some great photographers have taken up the medium, and I have a hard time looking at their work without flinching.
And frankly, when I've had to explore C#, it's also pretty ugly, but that might have just been bad programming.
Was This Post Helpful? 1
  • +
  • -

#20 tlhIn`toq  Icon User is offline

  • Please show what you have already tried when asking a question.
  • member icon

Reputation: 5676
  • View blog
  • Posts: 12,208
  • Joined: 02-June 10

Re: C# or C++ ?

Posted 05 April 2012 - 09:26 AM

View Postjon.kiparsky, on 05 April 2012 - 10:03 AM, said:

Subtle gradations get reduced to stripes and blotches, skin tone ends up looking like a skin condition, a smoothly varied blue sky becomes a flat blue field, that sort of thing.


Sadly compression is widely over used. I know many professional photographers that still use .jpg as the setting on their camera instead of RAW. This immediately destroys smooth gradients and creates all sorts of artifacts. Yah it means having a few 32gig cards for my camera instead of just one, and people don't like spending the money. Sure I go through a lot of drive space when all my photos are 18mb each on HDD, but they look good.

Over use of the 'auto' setting comes in to play often. Then you have people that think because it is digital they can be sloppy in their shooting and fix it in Photoshop (and this includes those gallery guys that are more about Photoshop than photography). So they don't buy filters, don't make an effort to actually learn photographic principals. Don't understand White Balance or lighting or even know what ISO means. If you don't do the best you can in-camera then you can't expect your best output. Garbage in, garbage out.

Most output houses still want jpg below a given size. jpg is universally accepted and doesn't require their in-house IT people to be able to handle Canon's CR2 RAW, Nikon's raw format, Olympus raw format etc. Clients sending large files for output via email then get limited to 10mp in many cases. So that means they either compress the file or cut 80% of the output houses out and only use those that do FTP. Like anyone, artists often look for ways to cut costs. If output house 'A' will do a 90x90 print for $5,000 and house 'B' will do it for $1,000 but it means a degradation that average Joe Citizen doesn't notice they will save the money.

PS: I always enjoy getting on topics like this one with you Jon. You articulate your thoughts and preferences and try to be fair to both sides of the discussion. Its such a welcome change from the kiddies that want to yell at someone for being 'wrong' just because they have a different perspective/opinion. It gives me hope that there are still some people out there that understand conversation and not just blogging and texting.

This post has been edited by tlhIn`toq: 05 April 2012 - 09:23 AM

Was This Post Helpful? 1
  • +
  • -

#21 jon.kiparsky  Icon User is offline

  • Pancakes!
  • member icon


Reputation: 8027
  • View blog
  • Posts: 13,740
  • Joined: 19-March 11

Re: C# or C++ ?

Posted 05 April 2012 - 09:58 AM

Interesting. I've never spent any time with digital photography, so issues like "white balance" are pretty foreign to me. My photography has always been like my brewing: try stuff, and when it works, do it some more. This has always worked well for me with film, but it seems it would fail brilliantly in digital. I wonder if this might be why I see so much awful out there?

I'd still like to see the digital image that would change my mind. As I say, I've seen great compositions shot in digital, but none of them that I'd really want to look at for very long.

Quote

PS: I always enjoy getting on topics like this one with you Jon
.
Thanks, and much the same backatcha. I'm afraid one of the pitfalls of online communication is that it's difficult to maintain a stance of civil disagreement, but that's always been the case. As long as I've been on the net, social fora have been mostly split between "me, too" and war to the knives, with little room between.
It's unfortunate, because I find I get very little out of flame wars or mutual stroke fests, but most of what I've learned has come from having to ask myself why I believe a certain thing, and whether I might be wrong.
Was This Post Helpful? 0
  • +
  • -

#22 taozen  Icon User is offline

  • New D.I.C Head

Reputation: 0
  • View blog
  • Posts: 1
  • Joined: 30-April 12

Re: C# or C++ ?

Posted 09 November 2012 - 06:44 PM

View Postlordofduct, on 05 April 2012 - 07:07 AM, said:

false - mono brings C# to most modern operating systems.


For Macs, CrossOver can be recommended too. It can also handle the webBrowser object, which mono currently can't.
Was This Post Helpful? 0
  • +
  • -

#23 heinbau  Icon User is offline

  • New D.I.C Head

Reputation: 4
  • View blog
  • Posts: 22
  • Joined: 08-November 12

Re: C# or C++ ?

Posted 10 November 2012 - 11:34 PM

I have found the C# was a really good language to start with! I'm sure that C++ will be a very fun language when I get there, but there are some things that I thought would make it more of a pain to start with (i.e. Pointers, multiple inheritance, memory managemnt).

They're all overcomable, but simple for the first language seems good!

Nick
Was This Post Helpful? 0
  • +
  • -

#24 WinkyCode  Icon User is offline

  • D.I.C Head
  • member icon

Reputation: 9
  • View blog
  • Posts: 155
  • Joined: 23-February 11

Re: C# or C++ ?

Posted 14 November 2012 - 12:00 PM

I find this thread very interesting to read. Thank all for your input.

:genius:
Was This Post Helpful? 0
  • +
  • -

#25 kwontum  Icon User is offline

  • New D.I.C Head

Reputation: -20
  • View blog
  • Posts: 19
  • Joined: 24-July 13

Re: C# or C++ ?

Posted 04 August 2013 - 06:07 PM

01001100.01100101.01100001.01110010.01101110.00100000.01100010.01101001.01101110.01100001.01110010.01111001.00100000.01100110.01101001.01110010.01110011.01110100.00100000.00111101.01010000.
Was This Post Helpful? -6
  • +
  • -

#26 macosxnerd101  Icon User is online

  • Self-Trained Economist
  • member icon




Reputation: 10814
  • View blog
  • Posts: 40,309
  • Joined: 27-December 08

Re: C# or C++ ?

Posted 04 August 2013 - 06:22 PM

Please avoid pointless necroposting.
Was This Post Helpful? 0
  • +
  • -

  • (2 Pages)
  • +
  • 1
  • 2