xmatthamptonx
Apr 5, 08:53 PM
I'm currently recording with a MXL 991 condenser through my M-audio Fast Track Pro.
It seems to have a pretty weak built-in preamp as I have to turn the gain up around 90% to get a decent sound from it which is, of course, quite fuzzy.
I've also heard that the MXL 990 series are fairly low-output mics.
Any solutions?
Small, decent, affordable preamps?
anything
It seems to have a pretty weak built-in preamp as I have to turn the gain up around 90% to get a decent sound from it which is, of course, quite fuzzy.
I've also heard that the MXL 990 series are fairly low-output mics.
Any solutions?
Small, decent, affordable preamps?
anything
jrb363
Apr 4, 11:03 AM
there was supposed to be a mass exodus when the Verizon iPhone was reeased as well/ It was not as many as the analysts expected. I doubt there will be a mass exodus for this either becasue the majority of people are sheep. They might get mad for a moment, but eventually they will justify staying and that will be it. Making a stand is hard, conforming is easy.
There may not be a "mass exodus" but you can rest assured that my family (4 of us) will be switching to Verizon and joining my Dad (who currently is with Verizon) as of July 1st. :D
There may not be a "mass exodus" but you can rest assured that my family (4 of us) will be switching to Verizon and joining my Dad (who currently is with Verizon) as of July 1st. :D
Apple Corps
Apr 4, 11:42 AM
Do you have any proof that FT actually does sell email addresses?
Just because businesses wants your email doesn't equate to they'll sell your details...
Than why else do they want them? FT references their "business model" needing this "relationship". As other have said, I want their content NOT a relationship.
Just because businesses wants your email doesn't equate to they'll sell your details...
Than why else do they want them? FT references their "business model" needing this "relationship". As other have said, I want their content NOT a relationship.
kazaam93
Apr 28, 04:57 AM
I get the above message a lot now when on a website, mostly when I try to refresh hotmail.
It is annoying because it always ends up being that one website that stops working for a minute or so, and other websites work, so I know it isnt a problem with the wifi connection.
Anyone else experiencing this?
It is annoying because it always ends up being that one website that stops working for a minute or so, and other websites work, so I know it isnt a problem with the wifi connection.
Anyone else experiencing this?
more...
CaoCao
Apr 27, 09:32 AM
So cliche.
I guarantee those are the straight women, who actually have to spend time with men. ;)
Us lesbians don't have to deal with that crap. The man-hating lesbian was created by egotistical straight men who couldn't believe that a woman would choose another woman over a man.
I've actually met that kind of lesbian, at first I thought I was being trolled. The sane lesbians probably don't get seen because they are too busy being normal.
Something I like, times two.
Next question please.
Yes sir, you in the balcony, with your pants around your ankles.
Bruised egos? How quaint.
They aren't interested in you
I guarantee those are the straight women, who actually have to spend time with men. ;)
Us lesbians don't have to deal with that crap. The man-hating lesbian was created by egotistical straight men who couldn't believe that a woman would choose another woman over a man.
I've actually met that kind of lesbian, at first I thought I was being trolled. The sane lesbians probably don't get seen because they are too busy being normal.
Something I like, times two.
Next question please.
Yes sir, you in the balcony, with your pants around your ankles.
Bruised egos? How quaint.
They aren't interested in you
andre.rocha
Jul 21, 04:53 PM
please post a pic of your non-apple monitor you use with your mac. i mean, if you use a samsung, dell, nec, etc. monitors that are not apple, if you know what i mean:cool:.;)
is it the same as using an apple display?
is it the same as using an apple display?
more...
upinflames900
Apr 26, 01:36 AM
Can you attach an image, and not that I know of... take it to the apple store pronto.
saving107
Apr 6, 11:51 AM
12 Petabytes, is that all (Lame).
*Sarcastic Post
*Sarcastic Post
more...
jenzjen
May 3, 04:58 AM
Only Apple knows if they will replace it or repair it, but a replacement will be refurbished - these still appear in the online store.
Dagless
Sep 24, 07:38 PM
I wouldn't mind it. then again im not a parent, just 19 myself. but when my girlfriend turned 18, and i just a month before, my parents were really against my girlfriend (of 2 years at the time, i might add! so it was no slutty one night thing) sleeping in my room. though i think it was because of my sister being only 11. suppose they wanted to keep her innocent to the notion of me and my girlfriend having sex i suppose.
we sleep in the same room now but they think she sleeps on the spare bed :D
we sleep in the same room now but they think she sleeps on the spare bed :D
more...
rhett7660
Mar 31, 06:06 PM
Does anyone else think this is a desperate attempt by Adobe to stay in the tablet game?
They're making software for a device produced by a company that wants nothing to do with them.
Does the software use Adobe's AIR?
Since when did Apple say they wanted nothing to do with Adobe. They didn't want support one piece of software on a mobile devices. I hardly think that qualifies as wanting nothing to do with them.
I think this is great and I am glad Adobe is doing more for the iPad and iPhone.
They're making software for a device produced by a company that wants nothing to do with them.
Does the software use Adobe's AIR?
Since when did Apple say they wanted nothing to do with Adobe. They didn't want support one piece of software on a mobile devices. I hardly think that qualifies as wanting nothing to do with them.
I think this is great and I am glad Adobe is doing more for the iPad and iPhone.
Ashwee
Mar 25, 02:02 PM
Just a hint:
http://maps.me.com/
http://maps.me.com/
more...
JoshBoy
Jan 28, 05:47 PM
Hi, I had a look through but can't find what I am after. I have just placed in over 900 books into my itunes. My challenge is that I like everything organised. I am trying to find the list of categories for books that have a nice category display picture and can not find this anywhere. For example, Science Fiction has a category cover and so does history and children's. Anyone that can help would be great.
AndrewR23
Mar 8, 05:53 PM
Just wondering, does anyone play online??? If you do, whats your VR??
Your character you always use along with bike/kart too.
Your character you always use along with bike/kart too.
more...
lPHONE
Jan 15, 01:33 PM
i got a 2G :(
MSD401
Jun 26, 04:02 PM
delete please!
more...
Hilmi Hamidi
Oct 4, 09:47 AM
Man that is awesome
maclaptop
May 1, 08:59 PM
.mac then mobile me, now castle.
Change, again. ugh. Let's hope it's free this time!
Steve will go on and on about how revolutionary it is, then inform us its only $29.00 per month on a one year contract.
First my address was @mac.com, then @me.com,
I'm not about to sign up for @screwed.com
Change, again. ugh. Let's hope it's free this time!
Steve will go on and on about how revolutionary it is, then inform us its only $29.00 per month on a one year contract.
First my address was @mac.com, then @me.com,
I'm not about to sign up for @screwed.com
shk718
Apr 28, 06:03 AM
apparently apple needs to educate the local news programs better. my local nbc news reporter in nyc just said that "the iphone does send tracking information back to apple".
Full of Win
Apr 25, 01:06 AM
I was beginning to worry about you. Your recent posts were not annoying in the least. Glad to see you're still you. :)
Reason it isn't a disgrace: The white enclosure apparently was causing trouble with the camera due to light leakage. You would most likely be calling that disgraceful if they had indeed released a 500$ phone with that rather huge flaw, so I guess they can't win.
I know the reason, or the supposed reason (who knows, Apple has been as tight lipped as ever on the issue) . If true, its a disgrace it made it to the keynote presentation, without the issue being identified or a reasonable fix found. I don't care how you square it - being 10 months late for a device who has an average life of 12 months is utter incompetence and hence disgraceful.
Hats off for Apple sticking to it, but that does not take away from the fact that they should never have made the promise w/o a better understanding of production issues. The iPhone 4 design has been around since at least January per spy shots of the iPad before release. So, its not as if the design was so new that they could claim there was no time to identify the issue until after the June 2010 keynote by Steve Jobs.
Reason it isn't a disgrace: The white enclosure apparently was causing trouble with the camera due to light leakage. You would most likely be calling that disgraceful if they had indeed released a 500$ phone with that rather huge flaw, so I guess they can't win.
I know the reason, or the supposed reason (who knows, Apple has been as tight lipped as ever on the issue) . If true, its a disgrace it made it to the keynote presentation, without the issue being identified or a reasonable fix found. I don't care how you square it - being 10 months late for a device who has an average life of 12 months is utter incompetence and hence disgraceful.
Hats off for Apple sticking to it, but that does not take away from the fact that they should never have made the promise w/o a better understanding of production issues. The iPhone 4 design has been around since at least January per spy shots of the iPad before release. So, its not as if the design was so new that they could claim there was no time to identify the issue until after the June 2010 keynote by Steve Jobs.
sm.wilson
May 2, 08:50 PM
its okay to disconnect when the device removes itself from itunes, and the computer says its ok.
FX4568
Apr 4, 10:24 PM
Phew. Thanks for clearing that up for us. Until you explained it so well I was really worried.
Well, this is macrumors and i try to stay away from economic theories, but you asked for it, so here we go:
Monopolies cause "allocative deadweight loss" (although its main argument applies towards state-owned enterprises)
What does that mean?
In a competitive market, producers dont have the freedom to set a price because the rival can always undercut them until the point where lowering the price will cause in a loss.
BUT the monopolist firm can decide the price it charges by varying the quantity it produces, so it will produce only up to the quantity where its profit is maximized. UNDER NORMAL CIRCUMSTANCES, the level of output is lower than the socially optimal one, which is where the max price a consumer is willing to pay is the same as the minimum price that the producer requires in order not to lose money.
When the amount produced is LESS than the socially optimal quantity, it means not serving some consumers who are perfectly willing to pay MORE than the minimum price that the producer requires but who are unwilling to bear the price at which the monopoly firm can max its profit. The unfulfilled desire of those neglected consumers is the social cost of monopoly.
So basically, monopolies will start losing more money when they start raising the price since consumers will either 1) not be able to access such services (since they will only make the MIN amount for MAX price and by using calculus, you would rather spend a little more in the amount produced and make a little less profit rather than having an EXACT amount although you would make the best profit IF you sold ALL items) or 2) consumers will just stop using it since cell phone devices are not a NECESSITY but instead a WANT. do you think you will pay whatever cellphone company if the price exceeds a certain comfort zone in your income bracket? you wont.
Furthermore, I will take it one more step. Monopolies can be good. If you look at the Mexican carrier, Telcel. The year Telcel was monopolized by Carlos Slim (riches man in the world now) coverage in Mexico grew more than it did in the hands of the state. According to the "monopoly=bad" argument, service in Mexico should have dropped in every other city that is not important in Mexico's economy while service should have exploded in cities such as Mexico City and Puebla. No, it exploded in the main cities while it also exploded with the whole country
In conclusion, monopolies are only dangerous IF the monopoly is a necessity based. i.e. lets say one man owned the whole united states food supply. Then yes, monopolies would be the worst. But not cell phone companies, cmon if monopolies were SOO good for the company why would Bell even break up his own company? just for the lulz? I dont think so. Because the government told him so? I certainly dont believe it since Bell probably would have had the power to lobby his way out and in case nothing worked he couldve just brought it up to the Supreme Court.
Anyways, enough with the economics jargon. Enjoy your economics class :P
Well, this is macrumors and i try to stay away from economic theories, but you asked for it, so here we go:
Monopolies cause "allocative deadweight loss" (although its main argument applies towards state-owned enterprises)
What does that mean?
In a competitive market, producers dont have the freedom to set a price because the rival can always undercut them until the point where lowering the price will cause in a loss.
BUT the monopolist firm can decide the price it charges by varying the quantity it produces, so it will produce only up to the quantity where its profit is maximized. UNDER NORMAL CIRCUMSTANCES, the level of output is lower than the socially optimal one, which is where the max price a consumer is willing to pay is the same as the minimum price that the producer requires in order not to lose money.
When the amount produced is LESS than the socially optimal quantity, it means not serving some consumers who are perfectly willing to pay MORE than the minimum price that the producer requires but who are unwilling to bear the price at which the monopoly firm can max its profit. The unfulfilled desire of those neglected consumers is the social cost of monopoly.
So basically, monopolies will start losing more money when they start raising the price since consumers will either 1) not be able to access such services (since they will only make the MIN amount for MAX price and by using calculus, you would rather spend a little more in the amount produced and make a little less profit rather than having an EXACT amount although you would make the best profit IF you sold ALL items) or 2) consumers will just stop using it since cell phone devices are not a NECESSITY but instead a WANT. do you think you will pay whatever cellphone company if the price exceeds a certain comfort zone in your income bracket? you wont.
Furthermore, I will take it one more step. Monopolies can be good. If you look at the Mexican carrier, Telcel. The year Telcel was monopolized by Carlos Slim (riches man in the world now) coverage in Mexico grew more than it did in the hands of the state. According to the "monopoly=bad" argument, service in Mexico should have dropped in every other city that is not important in Mexico's economy while service should have exploded in cities such as Mexico City and Puebla. No, it exploded in the main cities while it also exploded with the whole country
In conclusion, monopolies are only dangerous IF the monopoly is a necessity based. i.e. lets say one man owned the whole united states food supply. Then yes, monopolies would be the worst. But not cell phone companies, cmon if monopolies were SOO good for the company why would Bell even break up his own company? just for the lulz? I dont think so. Because the government told him so? I certainly dont believe it since Bell probably would have had the power to lobby his way out and in case nothing worked he couldve just brought it up to the Supreme Court.
Anyways, enough with the economics jargon. Enjoy your economics class :P
Blue Velvet
Feb 14, 12:37 PM
Just to let know everybody that i just sent my first complain about edesignuk as a moderator.
You're kidding... :confused:
If it's a joke, it's not funny.
If it isn't then it doesn't need to be made public.
You're kidding... :confused:
If it's a joke, it's not funny.
If it isn't then it doesn't need to be made public.
likemyorbs
Mar 19, 12:19 AM
Why not? We have been told that his actions may have endangered or caused the deaths of important operatives. If that is the case, why should it not be a capital crime?
Yeah, MAY have. That's hypothetical.
Yeah, MAY have. That's hypothetical.
