Re: MP4


Subject: Re: MP4
From: Phil Thomson (hellomynameisphil@gmail.com)
Date: Sun Aug 28 2005 - 15:20:22 EDT


On 8/28/05, Dennis Bathory-Kitsz <bathory@maltedmedia.com> wrote:
> At 07:42 PM 8/28/05 +0100, Rick wrote:
> >As long as we're talking higher quality: Any interest in FLAC? It's
> >open source, runs on Mac, Win and Linux but the user would probably
> >have to download a player for it.. It probably isn't very practical,
> >but possibly worth discussing this early in the process.
>
> Some pop groups are issuing in FLAC because it's non-destructive
> compression. I have the encoder/player, but have never had occasion to use
> the encoder.
>
> As storage media become denser and broadband becomes faster, perhaps the
> need for these compression schemes will begin to slip away.

I agree, and I think our standard of what constitutes "full-quality"
(as opposed to "compressed") will begin to change too. Currently
"CD-quality" (oxymoron?) sets the standard, but I can see that
changing. I mean, 16 bits is not actually all that great for encoding
the full audible dynamic range of sound, and there may actually be a
reason to use sampling rates greater than 44.1 or 48 kHz. And maybe
multi-channel sound systems and sound formats will become more
popular, leaving stereo in the dust (though they said the same thing
about quad in the 70's).

Phil

-- 
Phil Thomson, BFA, MFA
010100000110100001101001011011000010000001010100011010000110111101101101011100110110111101101110
hellomynameisphil@gmail.com
http://www.sfu.ca/~pthomson/
http://del.icio.us/hellomynameisphil



This archive was generated by hypermail 2b27 : Sat Dec 22 2007 - 01:46:10 EST