OK, this one's a bit tough to swallow- improving audio by reducing the Schumann Resonance. Fortunately, there's a $450 cure for your ailment.
What is the Schumann Resonance?
The "Schumann Resonance" is a resonance frequency that exists in the Earth's "electromagnetic" cavity; i.e. it exists between terrestrial surface and ionosphere. German physicist W.O.Schumann first detected the resonant properties of this terrestrial cavity in 1954.
It may be said that the Schumann Resonance is a breathing phenomenon of the Earth that is lasting from old time. The lowest-frequency and highest-intensity mode of the Schumann Resonance is at a frequency of approximately 7.83Hz.
Human and all animals and plants have been guarded by this frequency of 7.83Hz and lived for long time. But recently, many unnatural radio waves and electromagnetic waves disturb this frequency of 7.83Hz, it have caused wrong influence on our human bodies.We substantiate that there are many effects when the frequency of 7.83Hz is generated artificially.
http://www.acoustic-revive.com/english/rr77/rr77_01.html
Tuesday, April 8, 2008
Monday, April 7, 2008
9 Cents for Nothing
California Democrat wants to tax your downloads...
Bill would add tax to music downloads
By Edwin Garcia, Sacramento Bureau
Article Launched: 04/06/2008 10:50:40 PM PDT
Don't get too used to those 99-cent downloads from iTunes.
A Los Angeles-area lawmaker trying to help raise money to delete the state government's $8 billion shortfall thinks consumers should pay sales tax when buying from online music stores.
Some avid iTunes users - not to mention other state legislators and tax regulators - disagree.
"I think he's wrong - he should go find money somewhere else," said Fabiola Rojas, a 27-year-old graphic designer in Mountain View. "What iTunes charges now is enough."
The proposal by Assemblyman Charles Calderon, D-Industry, doesn't seek directly to tax music tracks, but instead would require the Board of Equalization to update a 75-year-old law that authorizes sales tax collections on tangible personal property.
Music, books and videos downloaded off the Internet aren't now considered tangible goods.
"The notion of taxing tangible, physical property is really an industrial-era construct when we made widgets and sold widgets," Calderon said Friday. "Now it's not about widgets, it's about information, and selling information and moving information."
If Calderon prevails, the 8.25 percent to 8.75 percent sales-tax rates in effect in most of the Bay Area would raise the cost of that 99-cent download to $1.07 or $1.08.
But his measure is being soundly criticized by Republicans who are opposed to any kind of tax increases to solve the deficit problem.
"One of the growing parts of our economy, tech online and Internet, is something we should encourage without having these types of taxes," said Assemblyman Guy Houston, R-Livermore.
It's unclear how much money the download tax would generate.
The Board of Equalization believes state and local revenues would increase by about $114 million a year, but Calderon's estimate, which he said includes pornography downloads, is about $500 million.
His bill, AB1956, comes at a time when Apple reports that its iTunes store has leap-frogged over Wal-Mart to become the top music retailer in the U.S. with more than 4 billion downloads sold.
Apple has not taken a position on the legislation, a spokesman said.
The measure moves to a tax and revenue committee hearing April 14, but already some members of the Board of Equalization, the regional commission that administers the state's tax programs, have denounced it.
By seeking to make the board to redefine downloads as tangible property, said member Michelle Steel, transactions would be subjected to an automatic tax not authorized by the Legislature, which could invite a legal challenge. Under current law, taxes proposed in the Legislature can be raised only with a two-thirds vote of the Senate and Assembly, which is nearly impossible because of Republican resistance.
Bill would add tax to music downloads
By Edwin Garcia, Sacramento Bureau
Article Launched: 04/06/2008 10:50:40 PM PDT
Don't get too used to those 99-cent downloads from iTunes.
A Los Angeles-area lawmaker trying to help raise money to delete the state government's $8 billion shortfall thinks consumers should pay sales tax when buying from online music stores.
Some avid iTunes users - not to mention other state legislators and tax regulators - disagree.
"I think he's wrong - he should go find money somewhere else," said Fabiola Rojas, a 27-year-old graphic designer in Mountain View. "What iTunes charges now is enough."
The proposal by Assemblyman Charles Calderon, D-Industry, doesn't seek directly to tax music tracks, but instead would require the Board of Equalization to update a 75-year-old law that authorizes sales tax collections on tangible personal property.
Music, books and videos downloaded off the Internet aren't now considered tangible goods.
"The notion of taxing tangible, physical property is really an industrial-era construct when we made widgets and sold widgets," Calderon said Friday. "Now it's not about widgets, it's about information, and selling information and moving information."
If Calderon prevails, the 8.25 percent to 8.75 percent sales-tax rates in effect in most of the Bay Area would raise the cost of that 99-cent download to $1.07 or $1.08.
But his measure is being soundly criticized by Republicans who are opposed to any kind of tax increases to solve the deficit problem.
"One of the growing parts of our economy, tech online and Internet, is something we should encourage without having these types of taxes," said Assemblyman Guy Houston, R-Livermore.
It's unclear how much money the download tax would generate.
The Board of Equalization believes state and local revenues would increase by about $114 million a year, but Calderon's estimate, which he said includes pornography downloads, is about $500 million.
His bill, AB1956, comes at a time when Apple reports that its iTunes store has leap-frogged over Wal-Mart to become the top music retailer in the U.S. with more than 4 billion downloads sold.
Apple has not taken a position on the legislation, a spokesman said.
The measure moves to a tax and revenue committee hearing April 14, but already some members of the Board of Equalization, the regional commission that administers the state's tax programs, have denounced it.
By seeking to make the board to redefine downloads as tangible property, said member Michelle Steel, transactions would be subjected to an automatic tax not authorized by the Legislature, which could invite a legal challenge. Under current law, taxes proposed in the Legislature can be raised only with a two-thirds vote of the Senate and Assembly, which is nearly impossible because of Republican resistance.
Sunday, April 6, 2008
Digital Video Quality
Another in the interesting series from Broadcast Engineering...
http://broadcastengineering.com/test_measurement/digital-video-quality-control-0406/
http://broadcastengineering.com/test_measurement/digital-video-quality-control-0406/
Saturday, April 5, 2008
LA Times Anti-Disney Editorial
Amazing to see a home town paper take on Disney; something we've never seen before this one!
(Emmaco project managed the Audio/Video/Show Control/Ride Control system installation for Soarin' Over California while subcontracted to Audiotek.)
Disney, we are not amused
California Adventure has fizzled, proving that consumers don't like to be taken for a ride.
April 5, 2008
The first question about Disney’s California Adventure was so obvious that it seemed downright stupid: Why would anyone pay Disneyland prices to go there?
When the park opened seven years ago, its deficits were clear even to the children who visited. One fabulous ride -- "Soarin' Over California" -- was buttressed by a small array of standard county-fair attractions, albeit given a Disney gloss: the ubiquitous flume ride, a Wild Mouse coaster, centrifugal-force swings, a giant Ferris wheel. Compared with Disneyland, where delights are tucked into every corner, California Adventure seemed barren, low on rides and big on restaurants and souvenir shops.
Mainly, it seemed as if the Imagineers had taken the day off to go to Knott’s Berry Farm.
Somehow, Disney's marketing gurus and sales mavens failed to notice what so many others did: California Adventure didn't give the customer his money's worth. Maybe they missed the value issue because they didn't have to pay the admission price -- which has reached $66 per person, even for kids as young as 10. Maybe they figured working stiffs were too dumb to know when they'd been had.
Over the years, though, the park gave off periodic distress signals. Two restaurant operators pulled out because of low attendance. California Adventure installed a "Twilight Zone"-themed ride to draw thrill-seekers. It opened kiddie rides to draw families. It yanked Disneyland's old Electrical Parade back from retirement, and it lowered prices temporarily.
Finally, late last year, Disney announced a $1.1-billion overhaul -- more than it had invested in California Adventure in the first place.
Even on a recent sunny Sunday, though Disneyland was so crammed that the regular parking lot was full, California Adventure was relatively empty. The only line -- a mere 15 minutes -- was, predictably, for "Soarin' Over California."
Visitors wandered back and forth among the attractions, riding each several times. Many said they were annual pass holders for the two parks and would come to California Adventure when they got tired of the lines at Disneyland. Sad commentary, when an amusement park's best attribute is that it's something of a dud.
But the fizzle of California Adventure is encouraging in its way. Too often, consumers have been snookered into killer mortgages or expensive cholesterol medicines that are no more effective than dirt-cheap generics. It's nice to know there are times when the law of giving people their money's worth prevails, and when the stupid question is, in fact, the right one.
(Emmaco project managed the Audio/Video/Show Control/Ride Control system installation for Soarin' Over California while subcontracted to Audiotek.)
Disney, we are not amused
California Adventure has fizzled, proving that consumers don't like to be taken for a ride.
April 5, 2008
The first question about Disney’s California Adventure was so obvious that it seemed downright stupid: Why would anyone pay Disneyland prices to go there?
When the park opened seven years ago, its deficits were clear even to the children who visited. One fabulous ride -- "Soarin' Over California" -- was buttressed by a small array of standard county-fair attractions, albeit given a Disney gloss: the ubiquitous flume ride, a Wild Mouse coaster, centrifugal-force swings, a giant Ferris wheel. Compared with Disneyland, where delights are tucked into every corner, California Adventure seemed barren, low on rides and big on restaurants and souvenir shops.
Mainly, it seemed as if the Imagineers had taken the day off to go to Knott’s Berry Farm.
Somehow, Disney's marketing gurus and sales mavens failed to notice what so many others did: California Adventure didn't give the customer his money's worth. Maybe they missed the value issue because they didn't have to pay the admission price -- which has reached $66 per person, even for kids as young as 10. Maybe they figured working stiffs were too dumb to know when they'd been had.
Over the years, though, the park gave off periodic distress signals. Two restaurant operators pulled out because of low attendance. California Adventure installed a "Twilight Zone"-themed ride to draw thrill-seekers. It opened kiddie rides to draw families. It yanked Disneyland's old Electrical Parade back from retirement, and it lowered prices temporarily.
Finally, late last year, Disney announced a $1.1-billion overhaul -- more than it had invested in California Adventure in the first place.
Even on a recent sunny Sunday, though Disneyland was so crammed that the regular parking lot was full, California Adventure was relatively empty. The only line -- a mere 15 minutes -- was, predictably, for "Soarin' Over California."
Visitors wandered back and forth among the attractions, riding each several times. Many said they were annual pass holders for the two parks and would come to California Adventure when they got tired of the lines at Disneyland. Sad commentary, when an amusement park's best attribute is that it's something of a dud.
But the fizzle of California Adventure is encouraging in its way. Too often, consumers have been snookered into killer mortgages or expensive cholesterol medicines that are no more effective than dirt-cheap generics. It's nice to know there are times when the law of giving people their money's worth prevails, and when the stupid question is, in fact, the right one.
Wednesday, April 2, 2008
Tuesday, April 1, 2008
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
