Irdial blathered:
quoted 12 lines There is however, a drawback to compression.>There is however, a drawback to compression.
>
>The algorithms used to achieve these high compression ratios are
>destructive to the sound that is encoded, so much so, that the
>compression-distortion creates a beautiful, fractured sound making
>compression software systems into a new form of musical instrument.
>Immediately after trying RealAudio, we thought of writing
>music specifically for the RealAudio player. This piece of music is
>carefully designed so that it will <i>not</i> survive the
>compression/decompression cycle. When this piece arrives at your
>speakers via the web, it will be utterly destroyed/mutilated as it
>is performed by the player.
Blah blah blah. More of the same garbage. Nobody ever said that "Real Audio"
was intended for high-fidelity music reproduction. In fact, most people have
stated that it sucks. If they're intentionally trying to use this as a form
of art, bravo, but if it is more of the schmear against any form of digital,
then they're making asses out of themselves again. Their spiel against JPEG
was similarly retarded.
I could run music through an Apple II sound device if I really wanted it to
sound bad via digital encoding. Or perhaps if I was on a tyrade against
analog, a low wattage AM broadcast would be more appropriate.