38 replies to this topic

[Robbie333]

BiffSplitkins, on 15 March 2012 - 10:18 PM, said:

This is absolutely amazing! One of the coolest things I've ever seen.

          Biff, I am floored. This is one of the most if not the most amazing vid I have ever seen. Thank you much.

mushymopman, on 16 March 2012 - 04:53 PM, said:

Yes top video, but could some one please tell me where the stars are, their doesn`t seem to be any.

        Let the conpiracy begin, LOL

[CRIPTIC CHAMELEON]

'WOW' I wonder how it would look in 3D.

[KayZee]

Rolci, on 16 March 2012 - 11:55 AM, said:

Well, I only have the obvious comments... So now 854x480 qualifies at NASA as "ultra high quality". So what would be "high quality"? 640x480? You can't even watch this properly on a 1920p HDTV, let alone if I happen to have a TV set like the one on youtube.com/watch?v=9U7e_quvkPQ with a 7680x4320 resolution, this video will take up a whole 1%(!) of the screen. Ultra high quality? Maybe at NASA.
More to the point, this video points out how small of a piece of dust particle we live on, how unique it is, how vulnerable it is, and how easy it can be to destroy its atmosphere irrevocably with pollution in a few decades. And if you think about how a single species managed to divide it up into political autonomies called countries and suckering free human beings into becoming slave-minded "patriots" just because they happened to be born within the boundaries of one artificially made up country or another, having them move to another land and kill their brothers and sisters there just because they were born elsewhere... I just don't get it. One Planet. One species. One harmonious eco-system. And we're ruining it all because of arrogance and self-induced feelings of superiority over one another and nature itself. That's what I call evolution.

P.S.: Hey, NASA, I don't want to watch this full-screen on one of these: http://www.zdsparts....ges/ibm5151.jpg I want to watch it full-screen on one of these: http://www.intellige...arc-monitor.jpg But thanks for the effort!

[MedicTJ]

Video.....AWESOME

But enhanced sound?  It's more than enhanced sound.  There are sounds that are happening in the video (especially pre-launch) that are as fake as it gets.

If you're gonna try and embellish something, don't rip off the same sounds that Tom Scholtz used on the first three Boston albums with a Hammond B3 and a HELLUVA lot more ingenuity than these idiots did.

[Chrlzs]

Wonderful footage - what a ride!  Thanks for sharing this..


MedicTJ, at exactly what point in the 14 seconds of pre-launch footage in the video have you identified these 'ripped off' sounds?  And on what tracks and times do they appear on which Boston albums?   (It's spelled Scholz, by the way...)


Rolci, did you read about where this has come from?  That it's a sneak preview?  Why on earth should they release higher resolution footage until they are ready?  Plus it may be destined for commercial release..

Or did you just want to introduce an offtopic political rant and tell us all about your undoubtedly huge tv?

[BiffSplitkins]

Chrlzs, on 17 March 2012 - 02:11 PM, said:

Plus it may be destined for commercial release..

When that happens I sure hope they release an IMAX version. That would be epic!

[Still Waters]

Incredible video Biff. I enjoyed watching that, great find!.....Thank you  

[MedicTJ]

Chrlzs, on 17 March 2012 - 02:11 PM, said:

Wonderful footage - what a ride!  Thanks for sharing this..


MedicTJ, at exactly what point in the 14 seconds of pre-launch footage in the video have you identified these 'ripped off' sounds?  And on what tracks and times do they appear on which Boston albums?   (It's spelled Scholz, by the way...)


Rolci, did you read about where this has come from?  That it's a sneak preview?  Why on earth should they release higher resolution footage until they are ready?  Plus it may be destined for commercial release..

Or did you just want to introduce an offtopic political rant and tell us all about your undoubtedly huge tv?

I meant that they ripped off the idea.  The sounds at the beginning of the video....that is CLEARLY straight from a synth or keyboard.  Also, I'd like to find out how they get sound at the peak of the flight......when there's no atmosphere.  You need air and pressure to hear sound.  But, miraculously, it's there.

I sent the link to a friend of mine who is a professional audio engineer (something I'm studying as well) and he nearly fell out of his chair laughing at the notion that the sound is authentic.  

Forgive the expression, but it doesn't take a rocket scientist to hear that the majority of the "sound" in the video is manufactured, not live.

But again, cool video.

[Chrlzs]

MedicTJ, on 17 March 2012 - 04:33 PM, said:

I meant that they ripped off the idea.  The sounds at the beginning of the video....that is CLEARLY straight from a synth or keyboard.

Then why bring up some obscure Boston tracks?  And did you not read the question?  You made the claim, so WHEN on the video do you claim to hear synthesized sounds?  It's NOT a difficult question, and there are only ~14 seconds of pre-launch footage.

Quote

Also, I'd like to find out how they get sound at the peak of the flight......when there's no atmosphere.  You need air and pressure to hear sound.

???
Wrong - you need any MEDIUM to transmit sound.  Air works, and so does METAL and other construction materials.  What is the booster made of, and the microphone attached to?

Quote

But, miraculously, it's there.

There is no miracle, just very basic physics and common sense.

Quote

I sent the link to a friend of mine who is a professional audio engineer (something I'm studying as well) and he nearly fell out of his chair laughing at the notion that the sound is authentic.

O rly?  Please invite him over to discuss.  I am currently nearly falling out of my chair considering the notion that you think anyone believes you did any such thing.

Quote

Forgive the expression, but it doesn't take a rocket scientist to hear that the majority of the "sound" in the video is manufactured, not live.

More correctly, it just takes someone with a smattering of education on sound waves to realise that you didn't quite think this through...

[mushymopman]

as wonderful as this video is, i still cant see any stars.

[Chrlzs]

mushymopman, on 18 March 2012 - 03:43 PM, said:

as wonderful as this video is, i still cant see any stars.

Please remember that the audience here ranges from competent and well-informed to...  er, well, anyway, please use smilies when joking.

[MedicTJ]

Chrlzs, on 18 March 2012 - 02:14 AM, said:

Then why bring up some obscure Boston tracks?  And did you not read the question?  You made the claim, so WHEN on the video do you claim to hear synthesized sounds?  It's NOT a difficult question, and there are only ~14 seconds of pre-launch footage.


???
Wrong - you need any MEDIUM to transmit sound.  Air works, and so does METAL and other construction materials.  What is the booster made of, and the microphone attached to?


There is no miracle, just very basic physics and common sense.


O rly?  Please invite him over to discuss.  I am currently nearly falling out of my chair considering the notion that you think anyone believes you did any such thing.


More correctly, it just takes someone with a smattering of education on sound waves to realise that you didn't quite think this through...

There is NO TECHNOLOGY that we or anyone else possesses that can record a launch via ambient microphone with THAT KIND OF SOUND QUALITY from a rocket booster....without destroying the diaphragm of the microphone....which would be destroyed less than a second after launch.

Now you can throw in all the physics lessons you want.  But now you're on MY turf.  I deal with recording sound on an every day basis.  

The video is one thing....but if you're trying to convince anyone that the sound is coming from a microphone attached to that camera....or ANYWHERE on board that booster.....you're insane.  It is NOT technologically possible.  There is simply way too much compression.  

Now, I'm NOT saying the sound couldn't be recorded.  What I am saying is that there is no way that the sound that you hear on the video is authentically live.  It just simply wouldn't sound like that.  It wouldn't even sound close to it.  The signal at the very least would have to be processed several times over....and....well....that's not authentically live.  That's adding to the sound on the video...which is exactly what I'm saying they did.

And as far as sound waves produced through metal and no air?  It doesn't work that way....and it most certainly wouldn't produce the sound that's on the video.

On top of that, you talk about silliness?

Anybody in their RIGHT MINDS can listen to that and tell that it isn't authentic!

GOOD FRIGGIN GRIEF!

[MedicTJ]

Oh one more thing.......

I found the video on youtube itself.....and it says right at the top, "With enhanced sound".

Do we need to go through the definition of enhanced now?

[Chrlzs]

MedicTJ, on 19 March 2012 - 12:18 AM, said:

There is NO TECHNOLOGY that we or anyone else possesses that can record a launch via ambient microphone with THAT KIND OF SOUND QUALITY from a rocket booster....without destroying the diaphragm of the microphone....which would be destroyed less than a second after launch.

That's just silly.  There are literally thousands of tiny delicate components on the boosters, in the shuttle itself, and it simply means you have to use appropriate mountings and shielding as necessary.  The sort of vibrations and stresses are very well known and can easily be dealt with by REAL sound engineers.  Your experience with your guitar is irrelevant.

Quote

now you're on MY turf.  I deal with recording sound on an every day basis.

Umm, no, that most certainly isn't your turf.  This isn't an every day situation, and you've already proved your lack of knowledge with the ridiculous sound-only-travels-in-air comment..  

Quote

It is NOT technologically possible.  There is simply way too much compression.

Compression?  What the heck are you talking about?  Mikes can be mounted in heavy duty casings with damping functions, sealed against the elements, etc.  I have a $230 underwater camera that has a mike that works just fine.  No, your voice mike won't work underwater, but that doesn't mean it can't be done.

Quote

Now, I'm NOT saying the sound couldn't be recorded.

But that's EXACTLY what you said earlier, and now you are just making it worse.

BTW, any recorded sound is 'enhanced', if only by the characteristics of the microphone/sensor, then of course it is amplified, equalised, adjusted..  The important thing in this case is to make the sound as authentic as possible.  I guess medictj thinks a 'direct-to-disc' recording or similar is 100% accurate...  Good grief indeed.

Anyway, medictj has used the old "I spoke to an expert and he said.." line WAY too many times here - he has clearly done no such thing and is just not worth spending more time on.

Anyone else here convinced by his assertions?

[MedicTJ]

Oh good lord.  Yes, we ARE on my turf.  I've got my own home recording studio complete with a Tascam 24 track, Pro Tools complete, $2500 electronic drum kit, and over twenty different types of microphones.....anything from condensers to uni-directionals like SM-57's.

And the professional I talked to.....(yes, I did talk to one)....can be found at www.endofstory.com

Skot Reed is the one who runs that band and has worked with Ty Tabor from Kings X on MULTIPLE projects.  He also produces and engineers several other projects.

I produce and engineer my own stuff at home as well, and have done so for well over 20 years, although only professionally for the past 10 or so.

And then you say an underwater mic (It's spelled mic....NOT Mike...and WOW on that one...Mr. Pro)....you say an underwater mic can't record a human voice?  YES, it CAN.  

But if you wanna keep this up, I'm ready.