Re: [LAU] LAU collaboration coordination?

plutek-infinity wrote:
>> Date: Thu, 15 Nov 2007 20:44:02 -0500
>> From: Frank Pirrone <frankpirrone@email-addr-hidden>
>>
>
>
>> plutek-infinity wrote:
>>
>>> <snip>
>>> i did some quick "back-of-an-envelope" figuring while riding around on the bus today, and came up with this worst-case scenario (well... BEST-case, really.... he-he..):
>>>
>>> assume 44.1kHz/32-bit - that's around 11MB/track/min
>>> assume we want to produce a complete record (~60min) - that's about 2/3 GB per track
>>> assume we're going 24 tracks deep - that's about 16GB
>>> assume we need some headroom (text files, presets, screenshots, whatever) - call it 20GB instead
>>> assume we have 20 users, who ALL upload AND download EVERYTHING twice every week - that's somewhat less than 4TB/mo
>>>
>>> SO........
>>> 20GB storage
>>> 4TB/mo. bandwidth
>>>
>>> <snip>
>>>
>> This is absolutely NOT the way to construct a song through on-line
>> collaboration. See my postings for an alternative detailed proposal.
>> They generated little comment, so I assume little interest, but this
>> magnitude of traffic and bandwidth is both whacked and needless.
>>
>
> frank -- i take your point, absolutely. initially, i was unclear on how the substitution of uncompressed tracks for compressed ones would be made, but i guess if there is a standard naming convention or session file with timestamps, that will not be a problem.
>
> when the suggestion of CcHost came up, i simply jumped on it as a way of getting the ball rolling, and began to imagine worst case scenarios, not wanting to jump into something i couldn't handle. upon sober reflection, a dead-simple repository of compressed tracks with a clear file-naming and/or session-file protocol is killer -- lean and mean. i like it.
>
> let's continue the discussion tomorrow...
>
>
Paul,

I felt that even a session-file was unnecessary.

Assuming a reasonable submission flux, as small as one per user over the
course of the entire project, all that's required is, for example:
frank_lead-guitar_11-20-2007.ogg.

Folks will see that next time they FTP in, and grab it - both to have a
more complete collection of tracks against which they will play, as well
as a guitar track to play against or to "beat" if they also are
interested in submitting their own concept of a lead part.

Others will submit fills, and if Dickie Betts climbs onboard - a
parallel harmony guitar track, etc. Of course, others will upload
keyboard parts, MIDI parts they outputted as an audio .ogg.

Again, everything everyone uploads will have been developed "against"
the tune as it stands at that point, so alignment/registration is not an
issue. Folks will open Audacity, for example, and import each track
they downloaded, and will have a "complete" tune to enhance or extend.
Heck, embrace even...

Low overhead, low maintenance, low complication, low bandwidth.

What say?

Frank
_______________________________________________
Linux-audio-user mailing list
Linux-audio-user@email-addr-hidden
http://lists.linuxaudio.org/mailman/listinfo/linux-audio-user
Received on Fri Nov 16 20:15:05 2007