Tonight was notable for two reasons:
1) I finally got to see Dressy Bessy. The last time they came through there, I had to work and get Tammy Ealom's autograph vicariously. Tonight they rocked my socks off for reals.
2) I was totally and utterly ditched by
a) the bassist in my band
b) my girlfriend
c) my ex-girlfriend
d) my ex-girlfriend's gay boyfriend
Clearly, I am the world's biggest loser. If I don't get the job for which I just interviewed, I'll probably off myself. Thanks, guys.
1) I finally got to see Dressy Bessy. The last time they came through there, I had to work and get Tammy Ealom's autograph vicariously. Tonight they rocked my socks off for reals.
2) I was totally and utterly ditched by
a) the bassist in my band
b) my girlfriend
c) my ex-girlfriend
d) my ex-girlfriend's gay boyfriend
Clearly, I am the world's biggest loser. If I don't get the job for which I just interviewed, I'll probably off myself. Thanks, guys.
VIEW 7 of 7 COMMENTS
I'm a recording engineer and I am interested in exploring the possibilities of improving the MP3 codec or the quality of compressed audio in general.
I was wondering if you had an opinion as to whether the MP3 codec is something that could be compacted so as to allow for real-time encoding and decoding. That way we could monitor source audio at MP3 quality while mixing so that the sound of music played as MP3's can be improved in the short-run.
Of course, this is all assuming that it would be worthwhile placing effort in to improving MP3 technology as opposed to developing a new way of coding audio, but whatever. Its something to ponder.
Your sister also mentioned that you had studied the compression of high-fidelity audio in some depth and I would love to pick your brain as to the newest developments and the future of coding. Im not a programmer or mathematician, but I do hold a professional interest in the future of encoded audio. Thanks!
Thanks!