The relevant example is here:
http://tibor.szasz.hu/post/customizing-the-soundcloud-waveform-image/43
From: =
.com] On Behalf Of Peter Shute
Sent: Wednesday, 25 January 2012 9:44 AM
To:
Subject: RE: [Nature Recordists] Re: Sonograms of long recordings [was natu=
re recordists group]
No, if that's the case then I probably misunderstood what I was reading. Th=
e example of a modified waveform was black and white, perhaps he'd done som=
e other things to it that I didn't notice. Perhaps he just wanted a colour =
choice that isn't offered in the widget. I think he wanted to make the make=
ground of it match the background of his website exactly.
Peter Shute
From: <naturerecordists%40yahoogroup=
s.com> <naturerecordists%40y=
ahoogroups.com>] On Behalf Of NordicNature
Sent: Wednesday, 25 January 2012 9:31 AM
To: <naturerecordists%40yahoogroups.=
com>
Subject: [Nature Recordists] Re: Sonograms of long recordings [was nature r=
ecordists group]
"It seems some developers are desperate to change the colour of the wavefor=
m."
When embedding the player on your website you can choose whatever color you=
want on the waveform. Just click "share" on your sound and then "edit your=
widget" and then choose the color you want.
Did I misunderstand you?
--- In <naturerecordists%40yahoogrou=
ps.com><naturerecordists%40yahoogroups.com>, Peter Shute <=
> wrote:
>
> I had a look at the Soundcloud developer's documentation. It appears that=
the waveform that's displayed is just an image, and I assume it's created =
just after you upload a sound file. I think one can download this image, bu=
t it's not clear if you can replace it with one you've created yourself.
>
> If you could then it would be relatively simply to replace it with a sono=
gram display, but I doubt you can. I've posted a question about it on their=
forum, just in case.
>
> If not, then judging by other developers' attempts to make cosmetic chang=
es to the waveform, the alternative is to display the desired image on one'=
s own website, and somehow use Soundcloud to do the streaming of the audio.=
You'd have to program the moving cursor yourself, I'd say. It seems some d=
evelopers are desperate to change the colour of the waveform.
>
> If that's what you have to do then I think I'd rather try to manipulate i=
t onto a YouTube video.
>
> I'd say that the owners of Soundcloud could probably offer the choice of =
a sonogram with just a few lines of code if they can get hold of a program =
to create the images for them. I imagine licensing might be their biggest d=
ifficulty. Perhaps if enough of us requested it then they'd do it.
>
> Good idea changing the subject line to match the topic, Dan.
>
> Peter Shute
>
> ________________________________
> From: <naturerecordists%40yahoogro=
ups.com><naturerecordists%40yahoogroups.com> [naturerecordist=
<naturerecordists%40yahoogroups.com><naturer=
ecordists%40yahoogroups.com>] On Behalf Of Dan Dugan
> Sent: Tuesday, 24 January 2012 2:08 PM
> To: <naturerecordists%40yahoogroup=
s.com><naturerecordists%40yahoogroups.com>
> Subject: Re: [Nature Recordists] Nature recordists group
>
>
>
> Peter Shute wrote:
>
> > I like the 24 hour display. I've been thinking a system like SoundCloud=
might be more useful for nature recordings if it displayed sonograms inste=
ad of wave forms. Displaying them vertically might be more useful too, so t=
hat the comments can all be displayed alongside the relevant section.
>
> Amen to that! To me, a sonogram is hugely more valuable than a waveform d=
isplay for any purpose, nature, speech, music.
>
> > If no such system exists, I wonder if Sonic Visualiser output could be =
manipulated into a scrolling movie file with scrolling comments for upload =
to YouTube.
>
> I note that SoundCloud is an open system and they encourage developers to=
write apps that interface with their database.
>
> -Dan
>
>
>
>
>
|