3 ms·

But a reencode is a reencode, you're gonna sacrifice some quality... (even if inaudible to human ears at 160kbits)

• deleted 2y ago
  [deleted]
• mikae1 2y ago
  I interpret the below quote as: if there was a wav file and an mp3 file, they dumped the mp3 and created an mp4/aac from the wav (saving both the wav and the mp4/aac pair). Where there only was an mp3 file I assume they kept the mp3. Hence, not a lossy transcoding process. > Some radio broadcasts were stored as mp3 and wav files, with accompanying checksum files. Other broadcasts were only stored as mp3. Before the re-archiving process began, it was decided to generate new MP4 playback files from the wav files to replace the varying qualities of the old mp3 files.
  • torbjornbp 2y ago
    This is correct. The mp3 is a an access file sitting on our streaming servers (wowza), outside of the preservation environment. The old access files were of very low quality, so new m4a/aac files were created. In the cases where we only had mp3 files, the mp3 file was preserved as our master in the preservation environment, with a copy sent to the streaming servers.
    • mannyv 2y ago
      Why wowza instead of using backblaze or a some other cheap service? Backblaze has no egress, pair it with fastly for a super cheap cdn.
      • torbjornbp 2y ago
        Our wowza streaming servers are hosted in-house, and are integrated with our authentication software. I don't know the nitty gritty details about the solution though, access is outside of my domain