Talk:Audio Quality
From Homestar Runner Wiki
I don't know about this article. I hear very little difference in the audio quality; even the very old material on the site has good audio quality, the voices are just different. · · T2|Things 20:48, 29 May 2007 (UTC)
This content of this article would be pretty hard to keep objective. — Lapper (talk) 20:52, 29 May 2007 (UTC)
- On the contrary, audio quality is measurable in terms of bitrate and such. Please don't slap {{tbd}} tags on this kind of an article before it has a chance to be developed. — It's dot com 20:55, 29 May 2007 (UTC)
- It's dot com, I totally agree bitrate or some other objective standard would be a good measuring stick. But then we need an objective standard bitrate for high quality, low quality, etc. I'd also think we'd need to put the bitrate of each toon/email/whatever next to the toon/email/whatever in the article. Does that make any sense? CoveredinSuudzu 15:05, 1 June 2007 (UTC)
- Dot com: So what ARE the bitrates and such? I'm personally against this article without numbers, and I'm only slightly for it with numbers. Just seems too subjective. --Jaybor Day (Talk) 18:41, 1 June 2007 (UTC)
- PS. Don't be a hypocrite. Adding "to be discussed" is not the same thing as "this article is doomed for ultimate deletion in five... four... three...!" --Jaybor Day (Talk) 19:05, 1 June 2007 (UTC)
- Jay has a point about the bitrate. Most people who aren't audio aficionados probably have very little idea of what exactly bitrate is, so an explanation is certainly in order.· · T2|Things 01:53, 3 June 2007 (UTC)
- Jay: I stand behind each one of those nominations: "Pining" barely meets our standards for inclusion, if at all; "Personification of Strong Bad's Technology" was largely redundant until it was moved and expanded into "Pseudocharacters"; "Ketchup" has survived only because there was no consensus in the discussion; "Absence of Females" needed to be discussed and moved to "The Only Girl" (something I myself did) before it was a suitable article. Also, I don't have a problem with a {{tbd}} tag being applied here, but I do have a problem with such a tag being applied by someone as a reaction to the fact that a lot of their articles had been recently nominated and/or deleted. As for discussion of this article, there's only so many times you can read that such-and-such toon or this-and-that quote have a higher audio quality before you try to organize the information into some kind of chart or list. For example, this fact on Homestar Presents: Presents has been there for two and a half years. This article is based directly on claims like that. If the claims are valid, then there must be some underlying technical reason, and thus this article has a reason to exist. — It's dot com 15:16, 4 June 2007 (UTC)
- I'm not claiming the articles I linked to are the cream of the crop around here, but the fact of the matter is that all of them still exist in one form or another. I was never keen on the "audio quality" facts in the first place, but if you want to make a page about it, I would think that why it is not subjective would be a good starting point. You made claims about the bitrate above; care to back them up? And is this really a necessary page to the project? Very rarely do we have pages about the details of the creation, rather than content, of the toons; in fact, I can't think of any off the top of my head besides this one if you don't count the bios of the creators. --Jaybor Day (Talk) 16:35, 4 June 2007 (UTC)
- Homestar Runner (body of work), homestarrunner.com, DVDs, Sound Effects, Fonts, Site Components, Harmless Junk, Inc., and so on. Regarding the necessity, I'll say again: If we are going to make claims about various toons (of which there are several such instances) and quotes and things that the audio quality is better than in most toons, then we ought to have a page detailing what exactly is different. Either that, or the claims should go away. To address your other question, I don't have specific numbers yet. That's why this page is a stub. I'm getting the ball rolling. Feel free to add content if you have it. — It's dot com 18:32, 4 June 2007 (UTC)
- I'm not claiming the articles I linked to are the cream of the crop around here, but the fact of the matter is that all of them still exist in one form or another. I was never keen on the "audio quality" facts in the first place, but if you want to make a page about it, I would think that why it is not subjective would be a good starting point. You made claims about the bitrate above; care to back them up? And is this really a necessary page to the project? Very rarely do we have pages about the details of the creation, rather than content, of the toons; in fact, I can't think of any off the top of my head besides this one if you don't count the bios of the creators. --Jaybor Day (Talk) 16:35, 4 June 2007 (UTC)
- Jay: I stand behind each one of those nominations: "Pining" barely meets our standards for inclusion, if at all; "Personification of Strong Bad's Technology" was largely redundant until it was moved and expanded into "Pseudocharacters"; "Ketchup" has survived only because there was no consensus in the discussion; "Absence of Females" needed to be discussed and moved to "The Only Girl" (something I myself did) before it was a suitable article. Also, I don't have a problem with a {{tbd}} tag being applied here, but I do have a problem with such a tag being applied by someone as a reaction to the fact that a lot of their articles had been recently nominated and/or deleted. As for discussion of this article, there's only so many times you can read that such-and-such toon or this-and-that quote have a higher audio quality before you try to organize the information into some kind of chart or list. For example, this fact on Homestar Presents: Presents has been there for two and a half years. This article is based directly on claims like that. If the claims are valid, then there must be some underlying technical reason, and thus this article has a reason to exist. — It's dot com 15:16, 4 June 2007 (UTC)
- Jay has a point about the bitrate. Most people who aren't audio aficionados probably have very little idea of what exactly bitrate is, so an explanation is certainly in order.· · T2|Things 01:53, 3 June 2007 (UTC)
Contents |
[edit] the to be discussed tag
The question isn't whether there's been work on it or not. the question is whether it is a necessary page. I don't think you can make any claim that it's not. therefore, if any tag belongs here, it's either page in progress or cleanup. not discussion. Feel free to go ahead and put one of those on if you like. — Defender1031*Talk 13:32, 4 June 2007 (UTC)
- Regarding: I don't think you can make any claim that it's not. Um, see, that's the problem. I am making the claim that it's not. Dot com promised that this page would look worthwhile when finished, but I'm not seeing his point and I'm seeing no results. Did you read the discussion above? Dot com was the only person in that discussion (at least so far) unambiguously for this article. --Jaybor Day (Talk) 14:38, 4 June 2007 (UTC)
- "When it's finished." It's not finished, and it is a worthwhile article. — Defender1031*Talk 14:39, 4 June 2007 (UTC)
- I have my doubts that it will be a worthwhile article even when it's finished. I was waiting for Dot com to prove me wrong. --Jaybor Day (Talk) 14:41, 4 June 2007 (UTC)
- This article is not my personal project; it's a wiki page. Information may be slow in coming, but, as I said above, if the claims in the various articles are valid, then they should be described in an article. — It's dot com 15:18, 4 June 2007 (UTC)
- I have my doubts that it will be a worthwhile article even when it's finished. I was waiting for Dot com to prove me wrong. --Jaybor Day (Talk) 14:41, 4 June 2007 (UTC)
- "When it's finished." It's not finished, and it is a worthwhile article. — Defender1031*Talk 14:39, 4 June 2007 (UTC)
[edit] Stereo versus high quality
Some of these examples are not any higher quality, just in stereo. For this reason, I do not believe it belongs in this page unless a section is added detailing stereo sound. However, if the examples are kept here, then that would mean Some Stupid Turkey belongs as well, as it is in stereo.
...calls the low quality section a stub... grumble grumble... the high quality section is more of a stub... grumble grumble... -- ■■ PURPLE WRENCH ■■ 21:27, 20 May 2010 (UTC)
- Homestar's voice is the only one that goes to the left, everything else is mono, which is not enough to call it "stereo." TBC might just have made a mistake in panning. —ColdReactive 02:42, 21 May 2010 (UTC)
- But do we have proof that the other Flash files are even compressed in stereo? -- ■■ PURPLE WRENCH ■■ 00:56, 22 May 2010 (UTC)
- Well, all the podstar runner toons/videos are not stereo, did you know that? What they did for those is double up the mono sound so that it sounds like stereo, and made some of the sounds higher quality to stay mono. —ColdReactive 12:24, 22 May 2010 (UTC)
- In that case, do we know that the files themselves are mono? If so, then the only surefire way we have to check if they are stereo is using the DVDs. If the Flash files are compressed in stereo, that would also back up your point, but if they are mono, then that means the stereo effect was done purposely. -- ■■ PURPLE WRENCH ■■ 21:17, 25 May 2010 (UTC)
- Well, all the podstar runner toons/videos are not stereo, did you know that? What they did for those is double up the mono sound so that it sounds like stereo, and made some of the sounds higher quality to stay mono. —ColdReactive 12:24, 22 May 2010 (UTC)
- But do we have proof that the other Flash files are even compressed in stereo? -- ■■ PURPLE WRENCH ■■ 00:56, 22 May 2010 (UTC)
[edit] A JUMPING JACK CONTEST EXPLANATION, POSSIBLY!
I just realized that all the low-quality sounds from A Jumping Jack Contest on the DVD are separate audio clips on the actual Flash file, while none of the high-quality sounds are. That means they could have compressed the sound before putting it in the 'toon so it would loop, similar to some Main Pages, or so that it wouldn't take up lots of space. Either way, that means that the Chaps could still have the higher-quality sounds but didn't use them because they weren't already in the file. -- ■■ PURPLE WRENCH ■■ 20:26, 27 January 2011 (UTC)
[edit] Low-quality removals
I wanted to bring this edit up for discussion. All of the removed items definitely seem to me to be lower in audio quality than other comparable stuff around them—with the possible exception of Marzipan in MAM 17.2, though her line at the end of the toon seems lower-quality than her opening message. That said, this is based just on me listening to them, and perhaps it could use a second opinion or better analysis. DEI
DAT
VM
┌datvm center\super contra┘ 18:45, 21 February 2023 (UTC)
