naturerecordists
[Top] [All Lists]

Re: MP3 bit rate minimums and the Archive

Subject: Re: MP3 bit rate minimums and the Archive
From: "Rob Danielson" danielson_rob
Date: Sun May 13, 2007 1:38 pm ((PDT))
At 11:28 AM -0400 5/13/07, Walter Knapp wrote:
>Posted by: "Rob Danielson"
>
>>  One could upload any file type-- within some limits. I used the
>>  16/44.1K example to illustrate how a high-quality copy would be
>>  preserved and a mp3 generated.  I'd suggest that any compatible sound
>>  file be accepted from a list member if the required date-site data
>>  info was provided.  There would be no need to up-sample a lower
>>  quality file that was uploaded/posted.
>
>So you would not be requiring a uncompressed file to accompany the mp3
>or whatever? You seem to be expecting a upload of a uncompressed file to
>then be generated into a mp3 by your archive.
>
>It's not file type, it's file size we are discussing.

Using scripting, the web interface for the list/archive could take 
any mp3, wav, aiff etc and generates a file and a link to it while 
preserving the higher res file for the archive (when its better). 
The interface could be designed to allow the person who is uploading 
the file to choose the data rate, but I feel its would be easier to 
make it default to something like mp3/256kbs.  If one posted a 
smaller mp3, that would be the format/size posted-- there's no point 
in upsampling unless the programming proved to a lot easier with 
standardization.


>
>>  Uploading a file to the archive would take the same amount of time as
>>  uploading to one's own server.
>
>Of course, though you loose control of it. I prefer to generate my own
>mp3s for people to listen to, I know what the original site sounded like.

If your mpeg3 was over 256 kbs, (with settings I'm tossing out for 
discussion), your file would be converted to 256kbs but members would 
also have access to the larger file. If you thought 128 kbs sounded 
fine or you didn't want to share a higher quality version, 128kbs is 
what would be uploaded and posted.

>
>>  I understand that some folks pay step access rates and can only
>>  afford to receive and send emails.  I'm not sure how we overcome this.
>
>They have been ignored by the group for some time. The group is split
>with many unable to participate because of the huge file sizes involved.
>
>
>>  When I had dial-up (~three years ago) I did my up-loading and
>>  downloading over night. There was no extra charge. There are some
>>  nifty, free scheduling programs that allow you to toss files/urls
>>  into a folder during the day and auto transfer/download them at night.
>
>Some of the files that have been put up in this group would take me much
>more than overnight to download. And upload runs at a slower speed than
>download.

Some, yes, but not that many.

>
>I am getting around some of the problems by taking the MacBook out and
>pirating high speed wireless connections. Not so much for sounds, but
>most software updates are now downloads, and they can be very big. Not
>everyone has that option, however.
>
>>  mp3 seems to be what people are set-up to make and play at the
>>  moment. The compression rate could be selectable, but I'd just go
>>  with a fixed mp3 format to get started.  Rob D.
>
>It's in transition. I've not yet moved my website to MPEG4. But I expect
>to do so in the next few years. I was pointing out that a long term
>archive needs to be updated from time to time.

The default format could be changed pretty easily at any time.

>
>>  Painting the house. We had six, different species of Warblers in our
>>  blossoming apple tree yesterday. A stiff North wind had them
>>  grounded. Rob D.
>>
>
>I got caught out by heavy afternoon thunderstorms on my trike that built
>up right across my route while I was out. Spent a hour on the porch of a
>abandoned house waiting it out. That was after managing to stay ahead of
>it for 15 miles. Then in a break in the rain and lightning went another
>mile down the road to a country store and sat under their awning with
>several farmers discussing weather, how they had been rained out of the
>fields by the storm, bike touring, etc. Anyway, only did 25 miles of a
>planned 50+ mile trip.

Better sights and exercise than my painting! Rob D.

>
>Good way to see and hear birds out on the trike. And inventory roadkill.
>
>Our feeders are not being attended by Pine Warblers like they were all
>winter. Most must have migrated. Instead it's Goldfinches and Blue
>Grosbeaks, plus the usual Cardinals, assorted sparrows, chickadees, etc.
>And last night the frogs were busy filling our water garden spots with
>eggs. We are way, way behind on rain.
>Walt
>

-- 
Rob Danielson
Peck School of the Arts
Department of Film
University of Wisconsin- Milwaukee




<Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread>
Admin

The University of NSW School of Computer and Engineering takes no responsibility for the contents of this archive. It is purely a compilation of material sent by many people to the naturerecordists mailing list. It has not been checked for accuracy nor its content verified in any way. If you wish to get material removed from the archive or have other queries about the archive e-mail Andrew Taylor at this address: andrewt@cse.unsw.EDU.AU