On Thu, 16 Nov 1995, Pete Ashdown wrote:
quoted 10 lines Irdial blathered:> Irdial blathered:
>
> >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.
>
> 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.
It's suckiness is probably no worse than listening to music over the phone, and
probably better.
quoted 4 lines If they're intentionally trying to use this as a form> 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'm not familiar with previous statements.
quoted 5 lines I could run music through an Apple II sound device if I really wanted it to>
> 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.
>
Distorting and rendering music through low-fidelity devices is a time honored tradition,
going back to fuzz bass (which first appeared on a buck owens song, believe it or not),
distorted guitar, and Linc Wray who used to shred speaker cones with a knife to get the sound
he wanted.
I've heard of a guy who regularly uses a wire recorder to record folk music, because then it
sounds like the original Smithsonian recordings, and gives it a sheen of authenticity.
If anything Irdial probably toots their horns too much over using a substandard medium to process
their music, since it's been going on since the beginning of recording.