Hi
I need help!!
I have just installed 64studio on a SATA disk (Hitachi 250 gig)
I have windoze on the first disk (HDA) and Ubuntu 32bit on the Secondary
Master HDC (?)
I did have an ide 150 gig but SMART informed me it was bad this originally
had 64studio on it.
I have removed the 150 and got
On Wed, January 24, 2007 10:20, Erik de Castro Lopo wrote:
> I'm not there yet, but I'm getting closer.
Great. Looking forward...
Bye,
--
Denis Sbragion
InfoTecna
Tel: +39 0362 805396, Fax: +39 0362 805404
URL: http://www.infotecna.it
Denis Sbragion wrote:
> and did you get it?
I'm not there yet, but I'm getting closer.
Erik
--
+---+
Erik de Castro Lopo
+---+
"We must not forget that Allah's rules have to be esta
Hello Erik,
On Tue, January 23, 2007 21:22, Erik de Castro Lopo wrote:
> The current algorithm (originally described by Julius O. Smith)
> has its limitations. Thats why I have spent a considerable
> amount of time trying to come up with something that has lower
> computational requirements as wel
Denis Sbragion wrote:
> Of course this is just academic, because I really doubt that the tiny
> artifacts introduced by SRC are audible at all, even in its current
> implementation. Just a matter of winning the race. :)
The current algorithm (originally described by Julius O. Smith)
has its limit
Hello Erik,
On Mon, January 22, 2007 22:53, Erik de Castro Lopo wrote:
> SecretRabbitCode was recently included in a test of a number of
> commercially available sample rate converters and while it wasn't
> the best, it certainly didn't disgrace itself either.
I once tried to further improve your
On Tue, Jan 23, 2007 at 02:31:45PM +, John Rigg wrote:
> On Tue, Jan 23, 2007 at 08:53:13AM +1100, Erik de Castro Lopo wrote:
> > Hi all,
> >
> > SecretRabbitCode was recently included in a test of a number of
> > commercially available sample rate converters and while it wasn't
> > the best,
Steve Harris wrote:
[snip]
Works fine with my 2.0.0.1 too.
I do all email and most Web surfing on my antique Omnibook running RH9,
PlanetCCRMA, Mozilla 1.7.13. The graphics selector works fine here.
And hey Erik, nice work ! :)
Best,
dp
On 23 Jan 2007, at 14:43, Paul Davis wrote:
On Tue, 2007-01-23 at 14:31 +, John Rigg wrote:
On Tue, Jan 23, 2007 at 08:53:13AM +1100, Erik de Castro Lopo wrote:
Hi all,
SecretRabbitCode was recently included in a test of a number of
commercially available sample rate converters and while
tisdag 23 januari 2007 15:31 skrev John Rigg:
> On Tue, Jan 23, 2007 at 08:53:13AM +1100, Erik de Castro Lopo wrote:
> > Hi all,
> >
> > SecretRabbitCode was recently included in a test of a number of
> > commercially available sample rate converters and while it wasn't
> > the best, it certainly d
On Tue, 2007-01-23 at 14:31 +, John Rigg wrote:
> On Tue, Jan 23, 2007 at 08:53:13AM +1100, Erik de Castro Lopo wrote:
> > Hi all,
> >
> > SecretRabbitCode was recently included in a test of a number of
> > commercially available sample rate converters and while it wasn't
> > the best, it cert
=== On Tuesday 23 January 2007 17:31, John Rigg wrote: ===
>
>Don't know if it's just me, but I can't get the images to change on
>the web page (using Firefox 1.0.4 with javascript turned on). The only
>way I can look at the results is to get the URLs for individual images
>from the page so
On Tue, Jan 23, 2007 at 08:53:13AM +1100, Erik de Castro Lopo wrote:
> Hi all,
>
> SecretRabbitCode was recently included in a test of a number of
> commercially available sample rate converters and while it wasn't
> the best, it certainly didn't disgrace itself either.
>
> The results are here:
Erik de Castro Lopo wrote:
> Hi all,
>
> SecretRabbitCode was recently included in a test of a number of
> commercially available sample rate converters and while it wasn't
> the best, it certainly didn't disgrace itself either.
I should also thank Ben Loftis of GWL (Harrison consoles)
for hooki
Paul Davis wrote:
> congrats Erik.
Thanks!
> as you said, not the best (r8brain ?)
r8brains was good as was iZotope, Wavelab/Crystal and a couple of
others.
> but compared to the
> stuff in some proprietary DAWs, pretty great. quite amazing how bad the
> ProTools and Sadie systems were ...
Pr
On Tue, 2007-01-23 at 08:53 +1100, Erik de Castro Lopo wrote:
> Hi all,
>
> SecretRabbitCode was recently included in a test of a number of
> commercially available sample rate converters and while it wasn't
> the best, it certainly didn't disgrace itself either.
congrats Erik. as you said, not t
Hi all,
SecretRabbitCode was recently included in a test of a number of
commercially available sample rate converters and while it wasn't
the best, it certainly didn't disgrace itself either.
The results are here:
http://src.infinitewave.ca/
This test gives me yet more incentive to continue
17 matches
Mail list logo
