Date:         Tue, 22 Aug 2006 23:00:55 -0400
Reply-To:     Association for Recorded Sound Discussion List
              <[log in to unmask]>
Sender:       Association for Recorded Sound Discussion List
              <[log in to unmask]>
From:         steven c <[log in to unmask]>
Subject:      Re: Podcasting--explained a bit...
Comments: To: Association for Recorded Sound Discussion List <[log in to unmask]>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1"

Okeh...first things first...
----- Original Message ----- 
From: "Lou Judson" <[log in to unmask]>
> Wow, are you behind the times! ;-) grin - no offense!
>
> Podcasts are no different from radio programs. It's just the audio
> format and the delivery method.
>
That's what I assumed...so my problem is how to get my 78's, and my
voice, into the computer so I can combine it into programs aka
podcasts...

> Create your audio program with your favorite method, be it cassette or
> tape or Wav files, whatever, and then encode it as an MP3 and send it
> offf! That is very simplistic but that is all there really is to it.
> Some of us have been making programs like that for 30 or 40 years or
> more...
>
It's that second step...encoding all the desired audio as a single .mp3
file...that I'm "not convinced about" (to quote "Jose Jimanez"...)...
>
> DO NOT make individual MP3s and then combine them somehow, unless you
> are using a playlist type of sequencing, in which case they will be
> played in their original format as separate songs.
>
I wasn't sure if I converted them individually into mp3 files,
which I then combined...or if creating an mp3 file was like recording
a CD-R, meaning it isn't over until you tell the computer it is...

> MP#s can be encoded with rate from 8kbps to 320 or so, with
> correspondingly better sound, and 8 bit or 16 bit or more. The encoding
> rate determines both the sound quality and the file size, and the
> bigger the file the better it sounds.
>
Okeh...that answers my question. Now, what would be the usual compromise
between listenable quality and files the size of Ohio?

> As aa audio professional, I only use Macs (too lazy to learn the other
> kind of computer) so cannot advise what programs to use, but there are
> plenty here who can!
>
Used Wintels are easier to find, and cheaper, than used Macs...so, when
you're trying to survive on the pittance you get as a "disabled" person.
you make do...

> But the basic thing is, a podcast is nothing more or less than a radio
> program in digital MP3 form. Well, generally they are far less in the
> matter of content, but that is personal taste... mine!
>
> Hope this helps demystify it a little.
>
> <L>
>
> Lou Judson . Intuitive Audio

Okeh, now...
----- Original Message ----- 
From: "Tom Fine" <[log in to unmask]>
> This is a very hacked up way to do this, but to each his own ...
>
> The more standard (and easier) way is to record to WAV, edit/sequence to
taste and then save the
> final podcast file as an MP3.
>
> I can almost guarantee you that any modern recording/editing software will
be more feature-rich,
> faster and easier to use than RealAudio.
>
I also have Audacity. On my budget, I have to use what I have...and what I
can
get for free...

> I'll be the first to say that 78's are of inferior audio quality,
especially when played without
> proper EQ through a ceramic cartridge, but if you go thru the effort of
playing them (and I'm
> assuming you clean them first, which is still more effort), it would seem
to me you'd want to start
> without a hand tied behind your back, which is what essentially is
happening with a lossy
> compression format like Real, MP3, Apple MP4 or anything else except WAV
or Apple Lossless Format.
>
Thing here is that I want to feature the music on the 78's...which I
enjoy and which I know a lot about. This music, of course, was recorded
as "non-hi-fi" and can't be improved beyond what it is (unless I could
afford to hire new musicians, find the original charts, usw...). Yes,
78's...
especially ACOUSTIC 78's...aren't of present-day 5.1, wide bandwidth,
professionally mixed and engineered sound quality...but if I want to
give my vast (half-vast?) public Billy Murray doing "On the 5:15," I have
to settle for c.1914 sound quality! And, yes, giving them a good wash (I
can't afford the good Doctor's miracle elixir, so it will be detergent
and water) before inflicting them on listeners should be part of the
process.

I just had no workable idea how one went from "point A" (a stack of
records I want to inflict on total strangers, and a decent "radio
voice") to "point B" (aka "Click here to listen to Steven C. Barr
and his famed shellac archive"...which will also mean being able
to afford a real web site!). Now I'm learning...

Steven C. Barr