Re: poem recordings (was: Re: [lojban] Re: brify)

[Robin Lee Powell <rlpowell@digitalkingdom.org>]

On Sat, Apr 13, 2002 at 10:50:25PM -0600, Jay Kominek wrote:
> 
> On Sat, 13 Apr 2002, Robin Lee Powell wrote:
> 
> > 1. Speech is *REALLY* simple to encode. If your mp3 files are larger
> > than, say, 256KB per *minute*, you need to turn your mp3 encoding *way*
> > down. 24KHz, mono, 64Kbps should be *more* than sufficient. Heck,
> > 32Kbps is probably plenty. Voice is *really* cheap to encode.
> 
> *dee*doo*dee*doo*dee*doo*
> 
> Signal Processing Police! :)
> 
> Actually if you know you're going to turn your recording into an MP3,
> you should record it at absolutely the highest quality you can manage.
> Stereo isn't worthwhile, but 44.1kHz, 16 bit is good. That gives the
> MP3 encoder more to work with, and doesn't affect the size out of the
> output. (You pick that with your bitrate, and is unaffected by the
> quality parameters you chose.)

Ahem. Sorry, I was kind of tavla sepi'o le mi ganxo .u'i.

I knew that it was possible to make *very* small voice MP3s, but wasn't
clear on the details.

> 48 to 64Kbps MP3s ought to be plenty for monoaural voice, particularly
> with a decent mic that will cut out background noise. (Plenty as in,
> flawless encoding.)

<nod>

Personally, I find 32Kbps acceptable (just barely) with *music*, unless
the stereo system is *very* good. But I'm weird.

-Robin

-- 
http://www.digitalkingdom.org/~rlpowell/ BTW, I'm male, honest.
le datni cu djica le nu zifre .iku'i .oi le so'e datni cu to'e te pilno
je xlali -- RLP http://www.lojban.org/