[blessingx]

I don't know if this is related, but for instance with Air Americas Al Franken show, someone posted bittorrent links on the second day which wouldn't broadcast though 4.9. There were a few of these that showed up the first day streamed from (guess http), then switched to bittorrent the second day, and then became non-functional and removed.

 

[wolfen68]

Quote:

Originally Posted by Mike Walker Don't slam podcasts just because most are at 64kbps! My podcasts are each an hour. Even with a broadband connection, that's going to take several minutes to download. So the producer (of the podcast) must balance sound quality with the convenience of a fast download. Here's the deal: MP3 files can be "tweaked" in a number of ways by producers who know what they're doing. Think 64kbps audio can't sound good? CLICK HERE! http://www.theproductionroom.net/july7high.mp3 I'm not telling you exactly HOW I tweak the audio, but that is surprisingly good sound for 64kbps, huh? Nope, it's not artifact-free. Neither is radio. But it sure does shatter preconceptions about what lower-bitrate audio in general, and mp3 (being an "old" codec) in particular can sound like. How did I do it? Just as radio stations won't tell you exactly what they use for audio processing, I WILL NOT tell exactly how I prepare my mp3 files...because I humbly submit that they sound better than ANY OTHER 64kbps audio out there! Yes bitrate has an impact on sound quality. But it's not the be-all and end-all that those who don't work with pro autio often assume it to be! For every perceived limitation, there is a way to mitigate it!

64 kbps is fine (and prudent) for longer length content....especially talk radio and similar programs. But for music, it just doesn't fire me up.

Nothing against your technique as I'm sure it is excellent, but to be honest, even acheiving regular FM quality results doesn't make me want to listen to music in that format....at least not with decent headphones on

.

 

[Mike Walker]

Don't forget Podcasting isn't intended to be competiton for super-high quality media such as SACD and DVD-A, or even good cd. Podcasting, like all radio, is CONTENT driven! I've yet to hear anybody say "Did you hear Limbaugh/Franken/Stern today? Wasn't the audio FANTASTIC?" It's about the CONTENT. Audio quality is analogous to paper in printed media. YES the print quality of Playboy (or Sports Illustrated) is far better than a newspaper, but that sure as hell doesn't diminish the CONTENT in the NY Times! Once the quality is "good enough" (to not be a factor for the vast majority of the intended audience), then CONTENT is all that matters!

I listen to TONS of radio...from shortwave (sometimes fascinating content, HORRID audio), to XM Satellite (sometimes decent audio, sometimes awful, usually just good enough), to internet radio (some of it SHOCKINGLY good...try Yahoo Music Engine's streaming services at 192kbps Windows Media 9! It's astounding). There's even a university station or two "Shoutcasting" UNCOMPRESSED audio over the 'net, at 1,400kbps! LOL! I hope they've got plenty of bandwidth if they hope to have more than three or four listeners!

Today's photo gear is light-years ahead of that from a generation or two ago. Does this fact detract from our fascination for classic images from our past? IT'S CONTENT, BABY!

 

[iDesign]

Quote:

Originally Posted by blessingx I don't know if this is related, but for instance with Air Americas Al Franken show, someone posted bittorrent links on the second day which wouldn't broadcast though 4.9. There were a few of these that showed up the first day streamed from (guess http), then switched to bittorrent the second day, and then became non-functional and removed.

This explanation checks out with what happened within the first few days of iTunes 4.9. A Majority Report Podcast would be great. The WKIZ stream is too inconsistent.

 

[wolfen68]

Quote:

Originally Posted by Mike Walker Don't forget Podcasting isn't intended to be competiton for super-high quality media such as SACD and DVD-A, or even good cd. Podcasting, like all radio, is CONTENT driven! I've yet to hear anybody say "Did you hear Limbaugh/Franken/Stern today? Wasn't the audio FANTASTIC?" It's about the CONTENT. Audio quality is analogous to paper in printed media. YES the print quality of Playboy (or Sports Illustrated) is far better than a newspaper, but that sure as hell doesn't diminish the CONTENT in the NY Times! Once the quality is "good enough" (to not be a factor for the vast majority of the intended audience), then CONTENT is all that matters! I listen to TONS of radio...from shortwave (sometimes fascinating content, HORRID audio), to XM Satellite (sometimes decent audio, sometimes awful, usually just good enough), to internet radio (some of it SHOCKINGLY good...try Yahoo Music Engine's streaming services at 192kbps Windows Media 9! It's astounding). There's even a university station or two "Shoutcasting" UNCOMPRESSED audio over the 'net, at 1,400kbps! LOL! I hope they've got plenty of bandwidth if they hope to have more than three or four listeners! Today's photo gear is light-years ahead of that from a generation or two ago. Does this fact detract from our fascination for classic images from our past? IT'S CONTENT, BABY!

I agree with all this and acknowledged the content aspect in my earlier post.

I guess I just have the personal paradigm (right or wrong) that my HD DAP is for high quality music listening. If other people find different ways to get their money's worth from their DAP's...I can't argue.

 

[The_X]

ABC News' Nightline is great for really in-depth reporting. Also, I love Cinecast (two guys discuss movies). Loveline also has a podcast, but it's just a direct-from-radio recording, commercials and everything. I listen to that once in a while though.

 

[blessingx]

For those that want an alternative to Cinecast, there's KCRW's Film Reviews (featuring Wall Street Journals Joe Morgenstern) and The Treatment (Elvis Mitchell). As much as Cinecast is fun (and their breath of knowledge with film facts pretty good), I often find their specific references just plain wrong. For example that previous director is on record not trying to do X, so comparing it to the action in contemporary film Y is well incorrect, etc. Couple with a lot of 'I just felt X' or 'I really liked Y' isn't terribly useful in a film review. Not nearly as bad as that hack Roeper though.

 

[SEMC]

I noticed a number of talk show media requests for podcasts, so here are two Conservative radio talk show hosts that support podcasting (they've been supporting mp3 downloads for a while but changed the name to podcasting). There's always Rush Limbagh (don't flame: I don't listen either) and Glenn Beck (my favorite: comedic commentary). However, it seems you have to pay a subcription of $7/month or such to do so? I haven't bothered to check in on this as my patience for political material is limited and I don't own an mp3 player...yet.

Anyways, someone beat me to the Coast to Coast broadcast.

 

[DJGeorgeT]

Limbaugh pwns

I should subscribe