UNDERDOG of PERFECTION

And it’s not just type case.

As I’ve mentioned, I have taken a shine to Amazon MP3 as my primary source for music downloads now. Sorry, Apple. You know I love you, but Amazon’s just doing it better. Better selection, better prices, and usually better quality. Plus everything’s MP3, not AAC. And no DRM, ever.

And while I don’t anticipate ever switching media players (the iPod and iPhone have served me well, even if you’ve been stumbling a bit lately). My new car’s CD player supports MP3 (and, ugh, WMA) CDs, but not AAC. And yes, I keep an iPod nano in the car (note to potential thieves: no I don’t), but it’s still convenient to load up several albums’ worth of music onto a single CD and pop it in. No annoying cords or dangerous behind-the-wheel iPod fiddling.

So anyway… yeah, Amazon MP3. And MP3s in general.

I’ve ripped my entire CD collection multiple times. First, back in 2001 or so, I ripped it all as 128 kbps MP3s. Then I got to the jazz CDs and noticed how bad 128 kbps actually sounded on some music. So I re-ripped the whole collection as 192 kbps MP3s. That was the smallest size where I didn’t really notice bad audio artifacts.

Then in 2004 Apple introduced the iTunes Store, and with it everything was 128 kbps AAC, Apple’s own, semi-proprietary format. Better compression-to-quality ratio, so 128 kbps AACs sounded as good (to me) as 192 kbps MP3s, at 2/3 the size. So I went back through and started ripping my CDs again, this time as 128 kbps AAC format.

Then last year Apple introduced iTunes Plus, with 256 kbps AAC format. Sure, they’re twice the size, but now I really can tell almost no difference between the compressed versions and uncompressed CD quality. So I started ripping again, but honestly I could not tell the difference between 256 kbps AAC and 160 kbps AAC, but I could tell the difference between 128 and 160. So 160 was my new standard. I only made it through about a quarter of my CDs at this new level though.

Then this year we had the release of my own music on some download sites, and I went with 256 kbps MP3 for those. Combine that with my new embrace of Amazon and their use of 256 kbps MP3 as well, and that pretty much sealed it. 256 kbps MP3 is my new format of choice, and I’m going through my entire CD collection and ripping it yet again in this format.

Which brings me to the whole point of this post. When you put a CD in your computer, iTunes (or whatever ripping software you’re using) grabs CD track information from CDDB. This data is submitted by users. Sometimes if you insert a new release or a really obscure album into your computer, it will tell you that track info could not be found, and it presents you with the opportunity to submit information you’ve entered. Which means any typos or other idiosyncrasies in your own personal way of entering this information will now become what anyone else who inserts the same CD into their computer will see, provided they’re lazy enough not to fix your dumbass mistakes. I’ve grown accustomed to fixing band names, correcting spelling, normalizing title cases (You Don’t Capitalize Articles, Conjunctions or Prepositions in Titles, but It Is Correct to Capitalize Pronouns and Verbs, Even If They’re Only Two Letters Long, Thank You Very Much), etc.

But something I’ve noticed from time to time, and never quite got, really bothers me. First off, I think the BPM field is pretty much useless. Unless you’re a DJ and you actually know the tempo of the songs you’re working with, you have absolutely no need for this field. But sometimes I see it filled in, and with the same value for every track on an album. Highly unlikely. It’s just finally dawned on me over the past few days why this is, though, and it’s because I’ve only ever seen two values in that field: 128 or 192. The same idiots who can’t spell also can’t tell the difference between BPM and kbps.

So, let’s have a little acronym lesson, shall we?

BPM (Beats Per Minute): The “tempo” or, if your musical knowledge is severely lacking, “speed” of a piece of music. How many beats (you know, the part of the music that helps you dance) there are in a minute.

kbps (kilobits per second): This is the amount of data in the compressed (MP3, AAC, WMA or whatever) file per second of music. In other words, it’s the compression quality of the audio file, quantified.

And now you know… the rest of the story.

This morning while driving home from dropping off my son at kindergarten and SLP at work, I glanced at a pile of limestone blocks in a neighbor’s yard, part of some new landscaping they just put in this summer. At that first sidelong look, I thought I saw water dribbling down the rocks, and was surprised that it was actually a working fountain.

However, when I took a second look, I discovered it was not, in fact, a fountain. It was a cat sitting amongst the rocks. Vomiting profusely.

I’m just so glad I bothered to look more closely.

…in that it perfectly simulates ridiculously outdated technology.

Granted, if you weren’t a kid in the late ’70s or early ’80s, you probably aren’t interested in LED Football for the iPhone. But I had one of those old Mattel LED football games and, for some reason, I loved it. And I also love the developer’s sense of humor in the game description*:

Reach the end zone and you will hear the sweet sound of victory beeps. TOUCHDOWN! This is electronic sports at its best…. See the LED display, so bright and hi-tech.

*But I do not love the fact that iTunes doesn’t let you copy and paste description text. Boo!

I just read a couple of great articles on Alternet. Now before you (as a McCain supporter) go dismissing Alternet as liberal fringe media, I would ask you to just carefully read the following two articles.

First, a roundup of excerpts from newspapers and news magazines around the country calling the McCain/Palin campaign to task for some of the egregious lies they’ve been perpetuating lately, both against Obama and for themselves.

And second, a very well-thought-out article debunking conservative myths about national security. This brilliant article shows us what’s wrong with our current administration’s clumsy assumptions about the threat of Islamic terrorism, and also points out the things we should be worried about, but aren’t. (Or at least, aren’t worried enough about.)

Seriously, I may have a joking tone but I really do not think I could sit through Sarah Palin’s interview with Charles Gibson. As it is described in the New York Times, it is painful enough. I’m starting to have a visceral discomfort over the prospect of her winning the vice presidency. She is so obviously grossly unprepared for the job that it turns my stomach. Again I just have to ask, how can this even be close? If enough people choose to be willfully ignorant or just don’t care enough to pay attention, well then, they get what they deserve. But that leaves the rest of us with little option besides emigrating to Canada. Too bad I didn’t get my passport renewed already.