Jethro Tull 5.1 (“Bursting Out” box set with Steven Wilson 5.1 mixes out in June 2024!)

[dr. simple]

Yeah, I'm holding out as well. I wasn't going to buy this at all at the going price, but for $76.78 I'll take the chance. If it never comes, it never comes! I'll listen to Dennis Mabry's copy.

For what it's worth, Import CDs now says, "On Sale: Yes, Sale Ends 02 Dec 2011", so apparently they're still taking new orders.

 

[wanners]

'Noncompressed' is always 'lossless'. So the 'lossless' there is redundant.

'lossy' and 'lossless' only serve to modify 'compressed'. Because a compressed audio file can be either lossy or lossless.

There two types of lossless, one is compressed the the other is noncompressed, so how can it be redundant? Just because all non-compressed files are lossless, doesn't mean all lossless files are or were non-compressed. Take a logic class dude.

 

[Bender]

ImportCds

Ordered mine on the 25th. I emailed them today asking when it should ship. Said they hoped to get it later this week or next.

I also have the Rush sets and Quadrophenia ordered from them. I have never ordered from them before.

Am I in trouble?

Did someone actually get one from them?

Any advice?

 

[wavelength]

There two types of lossless, one is compressed the the other is noncompressed, so how can it be redundant? Just because all non-compressed files are lossless, doesn't mean all lossless files are or were non-compressed. Take a logic class dude.

Wiki cites 3 types of audio formats:

Uncompressed audio
Lossless compressed audio
Lossy compressed audio
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Audio_file_format#Lossless_compressed_audio_formats

I can't find anything called uncompressed lossless or noncompresssed lossless.

So actually the terms uncompressed and lossless are not redundant - they are mutually exclusive. Lossless is a type of compression and therefore the term uncompressed can not be used to describe it.

 

[wanners]

Wiki cites 3 types of audio formats:

Uncompressed audio
Lossless compressed audio
Lossy compressed audio
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Audio_file_format#Lossless_compressed_audio_formats

I can't find anything called uncompressed lossless or noncompresssed lossless.

So actually the terms uncompressed and lossless are not redundant - they are mutually exclusive. Lossless is a type of compression and therefore the term uncompressed can not be used to describe it.

That's great, but if I said a file was lossless, how would you know if it was ever compressed or not? If you take an .mlp file and decompress it, yous would end up with some form of decompressed or "noncompressed" lossless file like .wav. Or it can decompress on the fly. It's a description, not a per se type of audio file. So what is a .wav file if it is not a noncompressed lossless audio file? to call it noncompressed lossless is to give more info about the file than simply lossless. Again .mlp--lossless compressed; .wav lossless non or not compressed. Seriously guys?

 

[wanners]

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/AIFF


Standard AIFF is a leading format (along with SDII and WAV) used by professional-level audio and video applications, and unlike the better-known lossy MP3 format, it is non-compressed (which aids rapid streaming of multiple audio files from disk to the application), and lossless. Like any non-compressed, lossless format, it uses much more disk space than MP3—about 10MB for one minute of stereo audio at a sample rate of 44.1 kHz and a sample size of 16 bit

 

[byrdman7]

It's really not like that here. I think you're fine and I'm guessing everyone else does too. We are a small group. We need the opinions to keep coming.

We'll only lambast your opinion if it's a really stupid one. seriously tho, I was only thinking we should keep the technical talk out of this thread.

Sorry wavelength, I was correct. There ARE some rude double standard a-holes on this forum. So Sad.

 

[stormchaser]

first impressions of the new SW Aqualung 5.1 on Blu-Ray. OMG. More later....
Wow.

 

[wanners]

We'll only lambast your opinion if it's a really stupid one. seriously tho, I was only thinking we should keep the technical talk out of this thread.

Sorry wavelength, I was correct. There ARE some rude double standard a-holes on this forum. So Sad.

You've got to be kidding?????? Are you an aspie--that was joke. I answered all your questions, then make a joke (note I said seriously in the next sentence after my sarcastic statement). And it wasn't even directed at you. You are an idiot and I'm shutting you out.

 

[byrdman7]

You've got to be kidding?????? Are you an aspie--that was joke. I answered all your questions, then make a joke (note I said seriously in the next sentence after my sarcastic statement). And it wasn't even directed at you. You are an idiot and I'm shutting you out.

First I am stupid, now I am a idiot with a college degree and the sheep skin hanging in my office. You sir?

 

[wavelength]

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/AIFF


Standard AIFF is a leading format (along with SDII and WAV) used by professional-level audio and video applications, and unlike the better-known lossy MP3 format, it is non-compressed (which aids rapid streaming of multiple audio files from disk to the application), and lossless. Like any non-compressed, lossless format, it uses much more disk space than MP3—about 10MB for one minute of stereo audio at a sample rate of 44.1 kHz and a sample size of 16 bit

I think the guys who write the Wiki entries need to get their act together. Yes I see the words non-compressed, lossless format used together but I think that lossless describes a compressed file. It is a type of compression. "Lossless audio compression produces a representation of digital data that can be expanded to an exact digital duplicate of the original audio stream." http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Audio_compression_(data)#Lossless_audio_compression Use of the word "expanded" infers that the file is compressed. So I don't know wanners. I see your point but I personally would not use the term uncompressed lossless unequivocally.

Update: I'm re-reading this and yes okay it's "I've uncompressed (expanded) a lossless file." So okay wanners that works for me. For now anyway.

 

[wanners]

I think the guys who write the Wiki entries need to get their act together. Yes I see the words non-compressed, lossless format used together but I think that lossless describes a compressed file. It is a type of compression. "Lossless audio compression produces a representation of digital data that can be expanded to an exact digital duplicate of the original audio stream." http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Audio_compression_(data)#Lossless_audio_compression Use of the word "expanded" infers that the file is compressed. So I don't know wanners. I see your point but I personally would not use the term uncompressed lossless unequivocally.

Don't take this the wrong way, but you're confused--that passage describes the decompression of lossless compressed data. Lossless does not describe a compressed file, it is a distinct and separate concept. Lossless can be both compressed and noncompressed. I'm done with this, would you believe it if Robert Loggia said it instead of me?

 

[quadstone]

This was the response today from Importcds regarding my query on the shipping status of my order (that I placed on Oct 25): "We are able to fill this order as soon as our stock comes in. Our previous stock was shipped based on a first come first serve basis. We have more on the way and should arrive next week or the week after but we cannot
guarantee this. As soon as we receive it we will fill your order." Kind of in limbo for a few weeks and unable to order elsewhere. Arrghh!

 

[wanners]

wavelength--It's also kind of amusing that after being shown concrete evidence, you say the wiki writers are sloppy. I've been describing what amounts to basic English language use, not even technical.

 

[Philip Spinner]

Just got a big box from Burning Shed. I wonder what it is. I'll find out when I get home.
Phil S.

 

[wanners]

This was the response today from Importcds regarding my query on the shipping status of my order (that I placed on Oct 25): "We are able to fill this order as soon as our stock comes in. Our previous stock was shipped based on a first come first serve basis. We have more on the way and should arrive next week or the week after but we cannot
guarantee this. As soon as we receive it we will fill your order." Kind of in limbo for a few weeks and unable to order elsewhere. Arrghh!

I wish I had kept my order with Amazon at 104 USD

 

[wanners]

Update: I'm re-reading this and yes okay it's "I've uncompressed (expanded) a lossless file." So okay wanners that works for me. For now anyway.

A wiki that describes a WAV and AIFF as both losseless and uncompressed still doesn't do the trick for you--holy scrongoly! For wavelenght's next trick, he disproves gravity. I think this phenomenon explains why 85% of the world is at war.

 

[Bob Squires Jr]

Got mine today via UPS from Amazon... paid $104 for it.
Nice set but still wish they'd have offered the BD separately.
I already have the quad LP, a 200 Gram LP and the reel.
The BD makes it all the better but now I have a 180 Gm LP I'll probably never play,
2 cds I know I won't play and a DVD that is only DVD-V. (at least it's DTS but who cares with lossless BD!)
which, why play it if you have the BD.
This is why I hate these box sets.
Funny, I'd have paid 100.00 for the BD alone.
90% of the set will sit in my closet.
Go figure.

-B

 

[cupboy]

I wish I had kept my order with Amazon at 104 USD

I had one in my gold box for $98 and passed on it. Now I'm waiting for it to re-appear so I can return my $150 one to Best Buy.

The price on Amazon keeps creeping up. Maybe it'll match the Best Buy price eventually.

 

[Bob Squires Jr]

The price on Amazon keeps creeping up. Maybe it'll match the Best Buy price eventually.

I imagine that it won't take long before it becomes one of those eBay shockers real soon.