Jump to content


 


Register a free account to unlock additional features at BleepingComputer.com
Welcome to BleepingComputer, a free community where people like yourself come together to discuss and learn how to use their computers. Using the site is easy and fun. As a guest, you can browse and view the various discussions in the forums, but can not create a new topic or reply to an existing one unless you are logged in. Other benefits of registering an account are subscribing to topics and forums, creating a blog, and having no ads shown anywhere on the site.


Click here to Register a free account now! or read our Welcome Guide to learn how to use this site.

What Do You Consider To Be CD-transparency?


  • Please log in to reply
12 replies to this topic

Poll: What Do You Consider To Be CD-transparency? (2 member(s) have cast votes)

What Do You Consider To Be CD-transparency?

  1. Indistinguishable from CD quality by the human ear. (1 votes [50.00%])

    Percentage of vote: 50.00%

  2. The lowest quality possible to use while remaining indistinguishable from CD quality by the human ear. (0 votes [0.00%])

    Percentage of vote: 0.00%

  3. Voted The lowest quality possible to use while remaining commonly mistaken for CD qualilty by the human ear. (1 votes [50.00%])

    Percentage of vote: 50.00%

  4. not voting (0 votes [0.00%])

    Percentage of vote: 0.00%

AAC

  1. 48-64kbps (0 votes [0.00%])

    Percentage of vote: 0.00%

  2. 88-112kbps (0 votes [0.00%])

    Percentage of vote: 0.00%

  3. Voted 128-142kbps (1 votes [50.00%])

    Percentage of vote: 50.00%

  4. 150-172kbps (0 votes [0.00%])

    Percentage of vote: 0.00%

  5. 192-224kbps (0 votes [0.00%])

    Percentage of vote: 0.00%

  6. 256-320kbps (0 votes [0.00%])

    Percentage of vote: 0.00%

  7. not voting (1 votes [50.00%])

    Percentage of vote: 50.00%

HE-AAC

  1. 48-64kbps (0 votes [0.00%])

    Percentage of vote: 0.00%

  2. 88-112kbps (0 votes [0.00%])

    Percentage of vote: 0.00%

  3. 128-142kbps (0 votes [0.00%])

    Percentage of vote: 0.00%

  4. 150-172kbps (0 votes [0.00%])

    Percentage of vote: 0.00%

  5. 192-224kbps (0 votes [0.00%])

    Percentage of vote: 0.00%

  6. 256-320kbps (0 votes [0.00%])

    Percentage of vote: 0.00%

  7. Voted not voting (2 votes [100.00%])

    Percentage of vote: 100.00%

MP3

  1. 48-64kbps (0 votes [0.00%])

    Percentage of vote: 0.00%

  2. 88-112kbps (0 votes [0.00%])

    Percentage of vote: 0.00%

  3. Voted 128-142kbps (1 votes [50.00%])

    Percentage of vote: 50.00%

  4. 150-172kbps (0 votes [0.00%])

    Percentage of vote: 0.00%

  5. 192-224kbps (0 votes [0.00%])

    Percentage of vote: 0.00%

  6. 256-320kbps (0 votes [0.00%])

    Percentage of vote: 0.00%

  7. not voting (1 votes [50.00%])

    Percentage of vote: 50.00%

PCM (LossyWAV)

  1. Voted I'd speculate lower than 300kbps VBR would be (1 votes [50.00%])

    Percentage of vote: 50.00%

  2. 300-350kbps VBR (0 votes [0.00%])

    Percentage of vote: 0.00%

  3. 350-400kbps VBR (0 votes [0.00%])

    Percentage of vote: 0.00%

  4. 400-450kbps VBR (0 votes [0.00%])

    Percentage of vote: 0.00%

  5. Greater than 450kbps VBR (0 votes [0.00%])

    Percentage of vote: 0.00%

  6. not voting (1 votes [50.00%])

    Percentage of vote: 50.00%

Vorbis

  1. 48-64kbps (0 votes [0.00%])

    Percentage of vote: 0.00%

  2. 88-112kbps (0 votes [0.00%])

    Percentage of vote: 0.00%

  3. Voted 128-142kbps (1 votes [50.00%])

    Percentage of vote: 50.00%

  4. 150-172kbps (0 votes [0.00%])

    Percentage of vote: 0.00%

  5. 192-224kbps (0 votes [0.00%])

    Percentage of vote: 0.00%

  6. 256-320kbps (0 votes [0.00%])

    Percentage of vote: 0.00%

  7. not voting (1 votes [50.00%])

    Percentage of vote: 50.00%

WMA

  1. 48-64kbps (0 votes [0.00%])

    Percentage of vote: 0.00%

  2. 88-112kbps (0 votes [0.00%])

    Percentage of vote: 0.00%

  3. Voted 128-142kbps (1 votes [50.00%])

    Percentage of vote: 50.00%

  4. 150-172kbps (0 votes [0.00%])

    Percentage of vote: 0.00%

  5. 192-224kbps (0 votes [0.00%])

    Percentage of vote: 0.00%

  6. 256-320kbps (0 votes [0.00%])

    Percentage of vote: 0.00%

  7. not voting (1 votes [50.00%])

    Percentage of vote: 50.00%

WMA Professional

  1. 48-64kbps (0 votes [0.00%])

    Percentage of vote: 0.00%

  2. 88-112kbps (0 votes [0.00%])

    Percentage of vote: 0.00%

  3. Voted 128-142kbps (1 votes [50.00%])

    Percentage of vote: 50.00%

  4. 150-172kbps (0 votes [0.00%])

    Percentage of vote: 0.00%

  5. 192-224kbps (0 votes [0.00%])

    Percentage of vote: 0.00%

  6. 256-320kbps (0 votes [0.00%])

    Percentage of vote: 0.00%

  7. not voting (1 votes [50.00%])

    Percentage of vote: 50.00%

Musepack

  1. 48-64kbps (0 votes [0.00%])

    Percentage of vote: 0.00%

  2. 88-112kbps (0 votes [0.00%])

    Percentage of vote: 0.00%

  3. 128-142kbps (0 votes [0.00%])

    Percentage of vote: 0.00%

  4. 150-172kbps (0 votes [0.00%])

    Percentage of vote: 0.00%

  5. 192-224kbps (0 votes [0.00%])

    Percentage of vote: 0.00%

  6. 256-302kbps (0 votes [0.00%])

    Percentage of vote: 0.00%

  7. Voted not voting (2 votes [100.00%])

    Percentage of vote: 100.00%

Opus

  1. 48-64kbps (0 votes [0.00%])

    Percentage of vote: 0.00%

  2. 88-112kbps (0 votes [0.00%])

    Percentage of vote: 0.00%

  3. Voted 128-142kbps (1 votes [50.00%])

    Percentage of vote: 50.00%

  4. 150-172kbps (0 votes [0.00%])

    Percentage of vote: 0.00%

  5. 192-224kbps (0 votes [0.00%])

    Percentage of vote: 0.00%

  6. 256-320kbps (0 votes [0.00%])

    Percentage of vote: 0.00%

  7. not voting (1 votes [50.00%])

    Percentage of vote: 50.00%

Vote Guests cannot vote

#1 Guest_hollowface_*

Guest_hollowface_*

  • Guests
  • OFFLINE
  •  

Posted 26 December 2014 - 02:52 AM

What do you consider to be CD-transparency for: AAC, HE-AAC, MP1, MP2, MP3, Vorbis, WMA,, WMA Professional, PCM (LossyWAV), Musepack, and Opus. Due to poll size limitations MP1 & MP2 aren't included in poll, but you can still comment on them.

 

What is your prefered audio codec?

 

What is your prefered audio container?

------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

I'll get things started....

 

While I haven't personally tried all of these codecs I usually find 128kbps to be CD-transparency, which is what people used to say back in the day anyways. I've used AAC alot, but only HE-AAC a few times so I can't really compare them fairly. I find WMA, WMA Pro, AAC, and Vorbis comparable though I've not used Vorbis much. I've never used Musepack, MP1, or MP2. MP3 provides fine sound, but I find it not to be as good as WMA, AAC, or Vorbis. Of course that could just be a placebo affect of knowing the track is an MP3. I tried an Opus track for the purpose of this thread, and would rank it slightly below MP3, everything was there it just seemed a bit lifeless. LossyWAV doesn't currently provide presets for 128kbps ranges or CBR, but on it's lowest quality setting it still has great sound even after being reprocessed multipel times! I'd say lossyWAV (PCM) is equal to or better than a similaritly encoded AAC based on my limited uses. I operate off the definition that CD-transparency is the lowest possible quality level that still allows it's contents to be mistaken for CD quality, but this seems to a less popular definition. 128kbps is not great sound, but it's good enough that you can listen to a song and not be distracted by the quality. If it's a song I've never heard before I honestly cannot always tell the difference between 128kbps and CD quality (though I'd like to think I can). However it's easy to hear the difference between 128kbps and cd quality if you play them one after the other, the cd has more umph! and it seems wider. My prefered codec is currently AAC for lossy audio, and ALAC (PCM) for lossless. However lossyWAV allows the use of PCM audio which in principle makes it an attractive option but I haven't used it anywhere near enough to switch and the lack of lower bitrates and Linux support are huge downsides. I use the m4a (MPEG-4) container because it provides the widest range of compatibility with what I use, so I guess that would be my favorite container, but honestly if if were more viable I'd consider switching to mka (Matroska) instead.



BC AdBot (Login to Remove)

 


#2 jimbotoo

jimbotoo

  • Banned
  • 297 posts
  • OFFLINE
  •  
  • Gender:Male

Posted 21 February 2015 - 07:01 PM

hello hollow face  :hello:

 

 

At night, when I'm asleep, in the dark, I am not tormented by a fear monsters nibbling off any part of my leg that protrudes from beneath the sheets into open air. Rather I am haunted by the idea that someone might break into my home, intending to install Linux or a Windows upgrade on my Windows XP machine.

 

I agree with above, xp is the most simple gates ware to use, less geek, more subjectivity, the latter be the feeling and healing enjoyment factor and advast has made it so far safe as anything out there,,,,,,,so far.

 

BACK TO MUSIC

 

At the Chicago high end audio conference in 1999   The engineers at sony said "we will never make a CD sound better then a well made "Record"

 

And my friends will attest you have never heard "Dark Side Of The Moon" till you have heard a half speed super vinyl 1 minute 220 gram pressing of the albumn.

 

HOWEVER, that being history for the average music lover, it can be said that Digital compensation equipment has come light years, I can trully enjoy many recordings to the max, tho some CD's I just throw in trash cause the ADD stood for "another digital desaster" or DDD was just coldhearted beyound redemption., 30 inches per second of 1 inch thick recording tape may simply never be equiled in sound quality by 1 and 0's.

 

What i think is the real anserw to your question is, "what devices play back which codec the best" wmp sounds like hell on my equipment, but MP4 seems fine, on most all things that have been engineered to enhance the dig-a-bits back to a smoooth ribbon of music, ribbon effect takes place most in the lower ranges where the sine wave can be several hundred feet long.

 

althought as neal young pointed out almost all digital has a Dark Sound to it

And CD's and all digital music is famious for losing its living soul presence in the lower mid range spectrum, remember

no matter what you do, its just a little D to A converter trying to reproduce all the magic of a "huge living sound"

 

And it still remains a crime that one has to become a cold anylitcal scientist first, just to get to a healing hypnotizing lost to the clouds of beauty and light recording experance. pick and play with out a lot of NASA questions and head scratching is the only way to feel/enjoy/drink up anything with your heart, like sex or a kiss music is not numbers, it is poetry and feeling not something you analyze, its something you feel with  your heart.

 

I would find a codec that makes your heart leap the most, and right now most digital play back devices are gonna do that with mp4

 

with or with out video.

 

IMHO

 

jimbotoo

 

check this guy out, he make digital work---http://jeffrowlandgroup.com/jrdg_video_gallery.html


Edited by jimbotoo, 21 February 2015 - 07:16 PM.


#3 Rocky Bennett

Rocky Bennett

  • Members
  • 2,566 posts
  • OFFLINE
  •  
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:New Mexico, USA
  • Local time:11:16 AM

Posted 22 February 2015 - 10:13 AM

I can not listen to MP3s of any bitrate, they really make my ears hurt. An MP3 at 320 kbps is definitely distinguishable from a CD if you actually listen to the percussion and the sound stage. There is not really a lossey CODEC that I find that can reproduce the sound quality of a CD, but for a lossless CODEC FLAC is just fine. I have about 5,000 CDs stored on my hard drive in lossless PCM, and also I have a bunch of high resolution audio downloads like Led Zepplin in 24 bit 96 kHz lossless. Digital storage is so cheap that there is never any reason to encode music to a lossey  CODEC.

 

As far as music players go, I don't really like the way that WMP sounds, it is dead and lifeless. I use foobar2000 which is free and very easy to use. When I have done my A/B tests of 320 kbps MP3 vs. lossless 1,411 kbps PCM audio, the sound is so obviously different, that even an audio novice can hear it fairly quickly.


594965_zpsp5exvyzm.png


#4 jimbotoo

jimbotoo

  • Banned
  • 297 posts
  • OFFLINE
  •  
  • Gender:Male
  • Local time:09:16 AM

Posted 23 February 2015 - 02:28 AM

Hi folks

 

for me there is a huge hole in these conversations--what are you listening to this stuff through

 

"CD quality" is a marketing term, it means nothing. the actual recording and producer means everything and what you play it back through.

 

A certian format may sound great cause it compensates for the junk i am using to hear it.

 

then i put it on $ 500.00 dollar phone with a great set of head phones and ZIP it goes crud.

 

Air, lower midrange and and that elusive ability to hynotize you are all you want to ever seek.

 

cause eguipment that does that cost a lot of money to make it happen.

 

Facts are many folks have no ability to listen to music, they just don't have the sensitivity to hear "depth" "space" and "Color"

 

Never assume cause it walks and talks it can hear, for many folks this stuff just does not matter cause they can't hear these "little things" but those of us who can almost lift out of our bodies when we watch with our ears-

the drumer just be right of center behind a singer in a two mike left to right recording stage, and the bass player all the way left, and folks who do not experiance these things are quick to scream folks who do have lost their minds. PC magizine half deft critic said about pono

 

 "The device does offer great sounding music. But the clearest thing about Pono is not the sound quality—it’s that it plays tricks on your mind."

 

now magic is the problem with those of us who can hear these things, we are witches and ride brooms.

 

When you watch music producer after music producer rave about the digital wall missing after they hear pono in neal youngs car, fact is most folks have never even heard that wall, I choked the first time I heard it, but lots has been done to get the soul back, but it was 20 years it took to rebuild all the equipment that is now actually bringing Natural  d/a sound to your ears.

 

see pono hear---https://ponomusic.force.com/

 

in the end it is as it was for records, each part of the system must compliment the other parts

 

CDs can sound great, buy the dire straits albumn "On every street" thats a cd recording that worked, problem is as the owner of "Audio Quest" told me, who is the largest manufactuer of sound wire in the world, "recording engineers have no control over how a digital recording will turn out" and that still exist today.

 

Nashville has made great inroads to produce real CD's, but i don't like much from that neck of the woods.

But this is why you will see real non nashville type musicians going there to record.

 

there is no easy match between wall plug and your ears, but i highly recomend for many real tec users, get Cyber Accustics $ 60.00 and up speakers with sub woofer and use KMplayer to decode it, mp4 with or with out video, for most there will be depth, color, lower mid range and AIR WITH BLOOM........ the speakers will disappere and the music will simply fill the room, cause all these parts of the "whole" system help each other

 

IMHO

 

gotta go ride my broom

 

jimbotoo :hello:


Edited by jimbotoo, 23 February 2015 - 03:43 AM.


#5 Rocky Bennett

Rocky Bennett

  • Members
  • 2,566 posts
  • OFFLINE
  •  
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:New Mexico, USA
  • Local time:11:16 AM

Posted 23 February 2015 - 09:36 AM

That is a great post jimbotoo.  My "desktop" stereo is based on PSB Alpha's, powered by a Marantz amplifier. My computer based audio library has about 5 terabytes of "CD quality" lossless files that I very carefully created myself using dbPowerAmp and Accurate Rip software. I also have about 800 high resolution albums on my hard drive. The computer is driving an outboard DAC that interfaces with an Audioquest USB cable and then the USB DAC feeds my Marantz through Audioquest RCA cables. It is a very nice "desktop" system", but it also acts as a music player for my sunroom. I use foobar2000 because I feel that it is the most transparent music player for my system, but I have played around with many different players. The thread starter had some very legitimate questions, but for some people(like me) there is no lossey CODEC that can even come close to capturing the beauty and majesty of good music. Read more here;

 

http://www.computeraudiophile.com/

 

And in my main system I listen mostly to SACDs because I love DSD.


594965_zpsp5exvyzm.png


#6 Rocky Bennett

Rocky Bennett

  • Members
  • 2,566 posts
  • OFFLINE
  •  
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:New Mexico, USA
  • Local time:09:16 AM

Posted 24 February 2015 - 12:33 PM

I voted, but I did not see that very many other people voted. I guess that maybe not a lot of people are interested in music.


594965_zpsp5exvyzm.png


#7 jimbotoo

jimbotoo

  • Banned
  • 297 posts
  • OFFLINE
  •  
  • Gender:Male
  • Local time:09:16 AM

Posted 25 February 2015 - 04:36 AM

What do you consider to be CD-transparency for: AAC, HE-AAC, MP1, MP2, MP3, Vorbis, WMA,, WMA Professional, PCM (LossyWAV), Musepack, and Opus. Due to poll size limitations MP1 & MP2 aren't included in poll, but you can still comment on them.

 

What is your prefered audio codec?

 

What is your prefered audio container?

 

I voted, but I did not see that very many other people voted. I guess that maybe not a lot of people are interested in music.

 

who wants to wade thru all that number stuff to hear a song, no calculator made, can calculate a kiss.

that was the music engineneers job, the asbergers geeks have made it our job, they have put their inability to feel in our bedrooms, arts and poetry is just gone.

 

I think there is a loss in mass public music interest, because there is a post trumatic loss of the semi serenty trance state it takes to be hypnotized by music, plus alot of new music just plain sucks, from the cradel to the microphone the artist never had a chance.

 

fear and distrust cavitated the upper mamilian brain that craves harmony

 

Plus the industry eats it young, look how taylor swift went from a warm blooded mamal to a reptile with angry eyes.

 

plus intuitive playing is gone, I mean music that could never be written to a music sheet, but was wonderfully harmonius and stored in a musicians heart.

 

plus much of the eqiupment is gone that made the music "revolution", there is no way any band can play the following song today, the "Paper" pure midrange leslie speakers that spun in circles at very high speeds "THROWING" music in a 360 degree circle is gone.

 

the effects in this song are as much spining speakers as tube electronic effects

and the lower mid range "punch" of vinyl you hear here is lost for ever cause it took 30 inches of 1 inch tape PER SECOND across a recording head to capture it, theres not that much storage space on a 32 GB flash

 

Music was a mother to us all once. technophilia killed her

 

                                                   TAKE NOTE AT 1:08 THATS LESLIES SPINING

 

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=upBkIxPtLmU


Edited by jimbotoo, 25 February 2015 - 05:01 AM.


#8 Guest_hollowface_*

Guest_hollowface_*

  • Guests
  • OFFLINE
  •  

Posted 26 February 2015 - 07:09 PM

@Rocky Bennett

 

I voted, but I did not see that very many other people voted. I guess that maybe not a lot of people are interested in music.

 

Not many people voting, but at least now there are some replying.

 


My computer based audio library has about 5 terabytes of "CD

 

Wow!

 

@jimbotoo

 


What i think is the real anserw to your question is, "what devices play back which codec the best"

 

Very true. Even something as simple as using a different pair of headphones can have a huge effect.



#9 jimbotoo

jimbotoo

  • Banned
  • 297 posts
  • OFFLINE
  •  
  • Gender:Male
  • Local time:11:16 AM

Posted 27 February 2015 - 03:53 AM

What is important is that we have total escape into beauty away from chaos.

 

don't let the asbergers number runners ruin your life with numbers, find the beauty and healing in music, move parts, speakers, sub woofers. and

 

your mind around, turn all the darn lights out, forget the geek freak box.

 

listen till you know why the artist wrote the song.

 

fleet foxes are trying to bring hypnosis back to music, people are saying I want harmony back

 

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DrQRS40OKNE


Edited by jimbotoo, 27 February 2015 - 04:02 AM.


#10 Rocky Bennett

Rocky Bennett

  • Members
  • 2,566 posts
  • OFFLINE
  •  
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:New Mexico, USA

Posted 27 February 2015 - 09:09 AM

@Rocky Bennett

 

I voted, but I did not see that very many other people voted. I guess that maybe not a lot of people are interested in music.

 

Not many people voting, but at least now there are some replying.

 

 


My computer based audio library has about 5 terabytes of "CD

 

Wow!

 

@jimbotoo

 

 


What i think is the real anserw to your question is, "what devices play back which codec the best"

 

Very true. Even something as simple as using a different pair of headphones can have a huge effect.

 

 

 

I started collecting albums in 1965 and I started ripping my collection about 5 years ago, so having 5 terabytes of CD quality sound files on my system is not really a lot. I am really close to finishing the project, I should finish this year and at that point I will have about 7 or 8 terabytes of music on my server. My Grateful Dead collection is actually derived from original master mother board analog tapes and I have them stored at 2116 kbps files. The Grateful Dead collection is about 200 terabytes. It is a fun hobby.


594965_zpsp5exvyzm.png


#11 Rocky Bennett

Rocky Bennett

  • Members
  • 2,566 posts
  • OFFLINE
  •  
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:New Mexico, USA
  • Local time:11:16 AM

Posted 27 February 2015 - 09:53 AM

 

@Rocky Bennett

 

I voted, but I did not see that very many other people voted. I guess that maybe not a lot of people are interested in music.

 

Not many people voting, but at least now there are some replying.

 

 


My computer based audio library has about 5 terabytes of "CD

 

Wow!

 

@jimbotoo

 

 


What i think is the real anserw to your question is, "what devices play back which codec the best"

 

Very true. Even something as simple as using a different pair of headphones can have a huge effect.

 

 

 

I started collecting albums in 1965 and I started ripping my collection about 5 years ago, so having 5 terabytes of CD quality sound files on my system is not really a lot. I am really close to finishing the project, I should finish this year and at that point I will have about 7 or 8 terabytes of music on my server. My Grateful Dead collection is actually derived from original master mother board analog tapes and I have them stored at 2116 kbps files. The Grateful Dead collection is about 200 terabytes. It is a fun hobby.

 

 

 

To fix my last entry, my Grateful Dead collection is approx. 200 gigabytes on my hard drive, not 200 terabytes. Sorry about that. To be exact my Grateful Dead collection takes up 197 gigabytes, which is all uncompressed 24 bit 96 kHz audio that runs at 2116 kbps. It sounds awesome.


594965_zpsp5exvyzm.png


#12 Rocky Bennett

Rocky Bennett

  • Members
  • 2,566 posts
  • OFFLINE
  •  
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:New Mexico, USA
  • Local time:09:16 AM

Posted 28 February 2015 - 06:26 AM

Take a look at the link and you will see some of the stuff that is actually lost during MP3 conversion.

 

http://www.deathandtaxesmag.com/237292/all-the-ghostly-sounds-that-are-lost-when-you-compress-to-mp3/

 

 

And of course you all know that the song Tom's Diner was the song that the scientists and engineers that developed the MP3 file used in the original demonstrations of MP3 technology. Seriously, there was a real need for lossey CODECs back in the '90s, but we are well into the 21st century, there is absolutely no need for any human being to ever use a lossey CODEC like MP3 for anything.  


594965_zpsp5exvyzm.png


#13 jimbotoo

jimbotoo

  • Banned
  • 297 posts
  • OFFLINE
  •  
  • Gender:Male
  • Local time:09:16 AM

Posted 01 March 2015 - 04:23 AM

we listen to music to release from where we should not be to where we want to go.

 

getting to that place is beyound the average digitiot, they have not known a moments peace.

 

there is a race to find something promised that never arrives in many PC quests

 

this mechine will not heal you, have we forgotten the most famious quote of all time

 

crap in, crap out, but  we want peace of mind, some how we bought/thought this mechine is going to give us what we did not put in to it. but thats what fox's in disguist promised.

 

instead in a healing quest, we fight dragon virus's and news that leaves us feeling helpless

 

your life is what you consume, sewer in sewer out.

 

I thank god i can still read a poem.

 

and realize anything i read on the net is a twisted condensed version of the truth.

 

if truth at all.

 

music is beauty, truth is beauty, as is justice beauty, all ths quick you got to steal what ever you want in a down loader has freaked the sacred in the artist out.

 

The soul returning artist is a figment of the past, killing every where, kids shooting up schools, a cop shoots you in the back and walks, beauty runs for its life

 

so now you have little to fill the mechine with and cause crap in is crap out.

 

GET A FRIGGIN LIFE

 

go feed the birds starving in your apt back yard, watch them what for you daily

 

hear the music in that.

 

beauty  in will mean beauty out

 

and you will be the the flower, in what ever you do.

 

take some time to hear the silence and the noise will freak you out and let you know where what is what.

 

and the first realization will be you have been displaced.

 

and if you can not hear the poets your will be lost, cause what we need and what we get has been confused and convined

 

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=559eWB93jW4


Edited by jimbotoo, 01 March 2015 - 04:37 AM.





0 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 0 guests, 0 anonymous users