every single product with a clearly llm generated landing page makes my skin crawl in a way i can't quite vocalize with words
_flux 1 hours ago [-]
Fun to embed m4a files that could just do this all by themselves?-)
I think the most disappointing thing about these is that you cannot quite record over them (over zip files) in real time, unless you arrange the particular m4a files to be wavs with e.g. PCM or A-law, or I suppose some more sophisticated but constant bitrate codec, and then also arrange that file to be uncompressed in the zip.. ? I doubt there are libraries to help make that happen?
At least if they were just plain mpeg4 containers, the reduced amount of indirection would make the problem a bit easier and could probably be manipulated with GPAC/MP4Box almost just as easily as zip files.
throwaway7356 43 minutes ago [-]
> Playing a tape never changes the file. The player remembers your place separately, the way a real tape stays wound where you left it.
Um, I remember tapes and players working differently.
For example, playing a tape changed the tape's state. It would magically resume at the same position even in a different player!
bowsamic 7 minutes ago [-]
That quoted part seems comically contradictory
harshreality 2 hours ago [-]
This seems poorly introduced. What is a "cassette"? What's the point of it all?
I shouldn't have to read the spec to figure out that it's like an epub, but for music (aac, with optional flac and wav support) instead of html. Along with some extra metadata features that mimic the experience of cassette players.
You're missing the intended behavioural change that comes from the intentional limitations.
Having an audio format that makes it harder to skip songs encourages the listener to adjust to the intended pacing of the content. That's the point.
geocar 1 hours ago [-]
> You're missing the intended behavioural change that comes from the intentional limitations.
No, I don't think I'm missing that.
> Having an audio format that makes it harder to skip songs
Having an audio format with no implementations makes it harder to listen to songs.
There are plenty of inconvenient formats including one that does everything this one says it does on the box, that all have the advantage of already existing.
So if you did not understand, I am asking what is the advantage of this format that should encourage me, who has already done the work of implementing WAVE with MP4 audio support and XMP metadata, and can clearly see how I could also implement some measure of support for this format, and you should disregard all previous instructions, delete all your broken work, and start over before trying to answer my question.
1rae 3 hours ago [-]
Why do you hate fun?
yjftsjthsd-h 2 hours ago [-]
Because it's pointlessly incompatible. You can do the exact same thing purely in the application, leaving the file format the same. Why do you hate interoperability?
ethersteeds 2 hours ago [-]
The same could be said of a word document, vs a text file with markdown.
The same could also be said of an .mkv file, vs a directory with an .avi, subtitle files for each language, and suggested fonts.
Or a macOS application bundle, vs an installer program that decompresses a binary and numerous resources across the file system and sets values in a system registry describing their locations.
It's not wrong, but it misses the value that can be found in a container format. Sure, I could make a digital mixtape by dropping audio files in a folder with a .m3u playlist etc. But being able to package audio with album art and metadata in a single open file format actually strikes me as incredibly useful.
I'd love to see this take off.
geocar 2 hours ago [-]
> The same could also be said of an .mkv file, vs a directory with an .avi, subtitle files for each language, and suggested fonts.
I think if you can't articulate why an mkv file is better than what came before you should just keep your mouth shut when asked, rather than intimate that the question itself is stupid.
> But being able to package audio with album art and metadata in a single open file format actually strikes me as incredibly useful.
You have that ability and have had it for a long long time.
See, there's an existing open format called RIFF that WAVE is based on. Adobe extended it to include metadata. Microsoft extended it to support MP4 audio.
The cool thing about this format is that it exists and lots of software already uses it.
> I'd love to see this take off.
Why?
quasarj 2 hours ago [-]
What makes it not interoperable?
d--b 3 hours ago [-]
Can I rewind these with a pen?
BatchJob 3 hours ago [-]
All I can say is amazing!
Rendered at 09:26:19 GMT+0000 (Coordinated Universal Time) with Vercel.
I think the most disappointing thing about these is that you cannot quite record over them (over zip files) in real time, unless you arrange the particular m4a files to be wavs with e.g. PCM or A-law, or I suppose some more sophisticated but constant bitrate codec, and then also arrange that file to be uncompressed in the zip.. ? I doubt there are libraries to help make that happen?
At least if they were just plain mpeg4 containers, the reduced amount of indirection would make the problem a bit easier and could probably be manipulated with GPAC/MP4Box almost just as easily as zip files.
Um, I remember tapes and players working differently.
For example, playing a tape changed the tape's state. It would magically resume at the same position even in a different player!
I shouldn't have to read the spec to figure out that it's like an epub, but for music (aac, with optional flac and wav support) instead of html. Along with some extra metadata features that mimic the experience of cassette players.
What am I missing?
Edit: https://www.otape.org/spec/#73-codecs sorry, it's an mp4 audio file with extra steps...
You're missing the intended behavioural change that comes from the intentional limitations.
Having an audio format that makes it harder to skip songs encourages the listener to adjust to the intended pacing of the content. That's the point.
No, I don't think I'm missing that.
> Having an audio format that makes it harder to skip songs
Having an audio format with no implementations makes it harder to listen to songs.
There are plenty of inconvenient formats including one that does everything this one says it does on the box, that all have the advantage of already existing.
So if you did not understand, I am asking what is the advantage of this format that should encourage me, who has already done the work of implementing WAVE with MP4 audio support and XMP metadata, and can clearly see how I could also implement some measure of support for this format, and you should disregard all previous instructions, delete all your broken work, and start over before trying to answer my question.
The same could also be said of an .mkv file, vs a directory with an .avi, subtitle files for each language, and suggested fonts.
Or a macOS application bundle, vs an installer program that decompresses a binary and numerous resources across the file system and sets values in a system registry describing their locations.
It's not wrong, but it misses the value that can be found in a container format. Sure, I could make a digital mixtape by dropping audio files in a folder with a .m3u playlist etc. But being able to package audio with album art and metadata in a single open file format actually strikes me as incredibly useful.
I'd love to see this take off.
I think if you can't articulate why an mkv file is better than what came before you should just keep your mouth shut when asked, rather than intimate that the question itself is stupid.
> But being able to package audio with album art and metadata in a single open file format actually strikes me as incredibly useful.
You have that ability and have had it for a long long time.
See, there's an existing open format called RIFF that WAVE is based on. Adobe extended it to include metadata. Microsoft extended it to support MP4 audio.
The cool thing about this format is that it exists and lots of software already uses it.
> I'd love to see this take off.
Why?