[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: [microsound] anyone up for a .microsound project?
- To: microsound <microsound@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
- Subject: Re: [microsound] anyone up for a .microsound project?
- From: Andras Hargitai <andras.hargitai@xxxxxxxxx>
- Date: Thu, 10 Jan 2008 19:29:12 +0100
- Dkim-signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=gamma; h=domainkey-signature:received:received:message-id:date:from:to:subject:in-reply-to:mime-version:content-type:references; bh=YnOTkukbESc9WZOge0kFQTIe9SQOefKeOswbJcbs/qs=; b=ACsCuq8GvtNcCvkk801FbVgiqCsx9Zu8XZxtYCAMFklyBidDD6ShJBsrlhQyaGwERzflBdYXj2tEVvL+Bj8X/1KjevQRVrjDCmOO73dwoIUUN7z3Djwi8z4tVg5WEz0fq8tx188L4c4nOoQ3C89pB6rbk1H5T5SY90hZv86+8XQ=
i own this one, it has been mentioned here on the list also:
http://www.discogs.com/release/631223
2008/1/10, Graham Miller <grahammiller@xxxxxxxxxxxx>:
>
> i have never heard of 'symphony of the planets'!
>
> what is it? sounds pretty interesting... where would one pick this up?
>
> g.
>
> On 10-Jan-08, at 1:15 PM, Andras Hargitai wrote:
>
> > the original versions doesn't sound like this... lo-fi mp3s always
> > do their
> > worst.
> > i have downloaded the "symphonies of the planets" 5 disc set which
> > is of
> > course definitely edited material, but you know.. flac vs lo-fi mp3...
> > dynamics are always sensible i believe.
> > so we may ask the scientists then for better encoded versions. :)
> >
> > 2008/1/10, Graham Miller <grahammiller@xxxxxxxxxxxx>:
> >>
> >> i like this response.
> >>
> >> but still, one wonders if this is what the original sound file sounds
> >> like, or has it been mp3 compressed to death by scientists that
> >> aren't audiophiles?
> >>
> >> if the original sound files are this quality, so be it. but i always
> >> like to work with the best possible sounding source material before i
> >> start to screw around w/ it.
> >>
> >> g.
> >>
> >> On 10-Jan-08, at 12:03 PM, Owen Green wrote:
> >>
> >>> Can't it be both?
> >>>
> >>> As representations of 'pure' phenomena - and not ones we could ever
> >>> directly hear, it's worth noting - the files' limited bandwidth and
> >>> dynamic range can be understood as inhibiting.
> >>>
> >>> As representations of an (imperfect) reconstruction of some
> >>> phenomena, we hear the results of, e.g., technical ambiguity (in
> >>> the construction of a sound from sensor data) and of choices (made
> >>> about *how* to sonify,
> >>> how much to clean up, the resolution at which to publish online
> >>> etc.).
> >>>
> >>> For me, it's the messy ambiguity that I find 'meaningful character'
> >>> in...
> >>>
> >>> --
> >>> Owen
> >>>
> >>>
> >>>
> >>> Visa Kuoppala wrote:
> >>>> My thoughts also... And I don't think this adds any meaningful
> >>>> "character" to the sounds, but reduces their subtle otherworldly
> >>>> qualities...
> >>>> I'm in anyway, but higher quality soundfiles would make it more
> >>>> interesting...
> >>>
> >>>
> >>>
> >>>
> >>> --------------------------------------------------------------------
> >>> -
> >>> 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
> >>
> >>
>
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> To unsubscribe, e-mail: microsound-unsubscribe@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
> For additional commands, e-mail: microsound-help@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
> website: http://www.microsound.org
>
>