Re: [microsound] [ot] the 56k challenge

[Sean Rooney <srooney@xxxxxxxx>]

I think the reason most people focused on that is because that's what 
was explicitly asked for:

From the original email proposal:
"i have an idea for a microsound project . lets all compose a work that 
is over one minute and is no more than 56k in size [wav or mp3]"


/sean


On Jan 23, 2005, at 8:29 PM, Scott Carver wrote:

> Exactly. If the central tenets of the challenge are (a) 56k (b) sound, 
> then mp3 is probably the the least interesting ways of going about 
> this. It seems to me there are any number of ways a sound (a sonic 
> experience?) could be transmitted in a 56k file... I don't think the 
> way to start is thinking in terms of off-the-shelf data compression 
> like mp3. Software is one way to approach the problem, but I think 
> there is a lot of territory here that is left being unexplored.
>
> - Scott Carver
>
> > Certainly.
> >
> > I found it kind of interesting that most people on this list who 
> > responded immediately focused on mp3s and reducing their size. As if 
> > the only way to do it is to externally source a larger linear audio 
> > file you captured and compress it as much as possible
>
>
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> To unsubscribe, e-mail: microsound-unsubscribe@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
> For additional commands, e-mail: microsound-help@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
> website: http://www.microsound.org


---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: microsound-unsubscribe@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
For additional commands, e-mail: microsound-help@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
website: http://www.microsound.org