Post by Fokke NautaPost by NicPost by Fokke NautaI just found out that AI can write short scripts that use FFMPEG. I asked it to write an app that would convert stereo mp3s into mono mp3s and it did it in one take.
This could make using FFMPEG easier for certain tasks.
Why would you convert a stereo mp3 into a mono mp3?
Fokke
The resultant file is smaller.
But the quality of the music is less.
Monophonic does not imply lower fidelity or quality. I recall many years ago that monophonic was the better quality and stereo which was new at the time was not the first choice of high fidelity enthusiasts.
A little music to exercise those voice coils-
http://youtu.be/rMp7M3kx3E4
Sibelius Karelia suite Op 11
But part of this is psychology.
Back when we had 78 RPM records, there would be clicks
and hiss and a non-flat spectrum.
You become so used to the artifacts, that the artifacts
become "an objective", an expectation, of the listener.
You're not listening to "an immersive recording of the
Philharmonic", you're listening to "a 78RPM recording
of the Philharmonic with original pops and hiss".
"It doesn't sound right", when a new technology comes along.
"It sound flat and lifeless". Yes, if you're used to a lot
of high frequency artifact, and you listen to a cleaner system,
it does not sound right.
Multichannel systems are intended to be immersive. CD recordings
would have had more than two tracks (stereo), if we could have
fitted them in.
At one time, long play albums were recorded in the studio on
four track tape, and mixed down to stereo. There were no
fancy HRTFs to do that, just like making soup "I will take
40% from channel1 and 60% from channel2 and make L". The studio
was not really all that much more sophisticated than the user.
Even today, people have a fetish for certain sound qualities.
We don't go for "the most realistic immersive experience",
we like the even harmonics of vacuum tube distortions.
I bet people who were inured to low bandwidth MP3s with
compression artifacts, those people have the same kind of
expectations as the 78RPM listeners waiting for the hiss
and pops :-) If you gave them sample-accurate (uncompressed)
sound, it would not sound right. But that's the psychology
of it, at work.
Too much "digital mutilation" of recorded content, and when
you actually do go to the Philharmonic, it's nothing like
the 22 channel Dolby ATMOS you were listing to at home :-)
The live session doesn't sound right.
At least one of the concert halls, was redesigned, and
has improved acoustics (and fewer seats). Now at least, when
you visit in person, it's getting closer to the
22 channel Dolby ATMOS they made artificially in the mixer.
Paul