Re: [microsound] top cellular 40

[graham miller <grahammiller@xxxxxxxxxxxx>]

it's funny when you consider how much of our lives is spent on the phone,
key moments and pivotal intersections, conversations and relationships,
fights and felicitations, all squished into this tiny low-res version of
sound without face... i suppose the same is true of e-mail these days as
well: entire rapports beamed across cyberspace hinging upon the proper
interpretation of alphanumerics, emoticons and hyperlinks... this idea
that (reduced) bandwidth is actually intensifying physical experience and
face-to-face human interaction rather than atrophying it...

g.

ben nevile wrote:

> > this may have the effect of rendering standard telephone voice
> > conversations at higher quality, which would be amazing...
>
> no, i don't think so.  the limiting factor in the quality of voice
> telephony is bandwidth, not speakers or headphones.  it will always be
> in the company's best interest to keep bandwidth as low as possible to
> minimize their communication costs.  if there are advances made I think
> it will be in the wavelet codecs they use, the math that compresses and
> then reconstructs the signals.  there is a LOT of research being done
> in this area.
>
> bbn
>
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> To unsubscribe, e-mail: microsound-unsubscribe@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
> For additional commands, e-mail: microsound-help@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
> website: http://www.microsound.org

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