Bit torrenting session files?
Home > Home Recording Forum > Music & Composition > Bit torrenting session files?
Posted on Jun 30, 2005 01:43 am
thermocaster
Appenine
Member Since: Dec 13, 2004
I've been sitting here thinking about ways that we can better facilitate our recording projects with one another...
Has anyone tried setting up a bittorrent of their files for download by another member?
I don't know much about the technology, but it seems like it'd be possible.
It might make transferring large WAV files and so forth a lot easier...heck, it might even allow complete session transfers for people using the same platforms.
Thoughts? Ideas?
[ Back to Top ]
Jun 30, 2005 11:15 am from what i understand about that ap, (and i don't understand much) is it grabs pieces from the whole file from multiple users, then reassembles it on your computer....so i'd think that if you are the only sorce for the file (cuz nobody else has it) that you wouldn't really benifit from it.... ya could host a secret FTP site
er atleast i think
TadpuiI am not a crook's headMember
Since: Mar 14, 2003
Jun 30, 2005 11:23 am You're right on the nose WYD. BitTorrent succeeds over other peer-to-peer apps when there are more than one seed to download from. Your download still has to be active (even if it's completed) for others to download from you. If you have a dedicated ring of members doing it, it can be extremely fast. Otherwise, it's on par with simply downloading via IM, FTP, or HTTP.
As an alternative to slinging .WAV files around the net, I've suggested a few times to use lossless compression schemes like FLAC or Shorten to compress .WAV files without sacrificing quality, sample rate, or bitrate. I don't think that anybody's tried it tho.
Jun 30, 2005 11:32 am Quote:
lossless compression
i'd hafta say that's somewhat of an oxymoron....anyform of compression for audio files is gonna have some effect on the track.
there was a thread about this (file compression)on gearslutz, lemme dig it up.....
gearslutz.com/board/showthread.php3?t=36260
very interesting stuff
[quote]FLAC is a lossless format, as is SHN, however the files are huge
Ogg Vorbis seems promising, no liscense fees, better sound quality than MP3 at low bitrates...
The solution? I say kill mp3 and go with Ogg Vorbis plus FLAC and make the developers of the two formats add support for 32bit 192Khz rates :) that'd rule... then we could use Vorbis on the web sites for those slow *** modem users use and use high quality FLAC files, stick em on DVDs and: voila... the audiophile quality music of the future! yeehaw![/quote]
hmmm i guess i could be wrong
Jun 30, 2005 11:38 am lossless is more of a reality today than it was a few years back, lots of strides have been made in that regard...
TadpuiI am not a crook's headMember
Since: Mar 14, 2003
Jun 30, 2005 11:48 am FLAC and SHN files are huge, but smaller than WAV. I think that's the point. They take out all of the information that they can without affecting the original content of the WAV file. Not nearly as compressed as MP3, OGG, or WMA, but also superior in sound quality when converted back to WAV.
It wouldn't save you hours on a download or anything, but every little bit helps.
Jun 30, 2005 03:14 pm Interesting thoughts, and I appreciate everyone chiming in.
I guess my thought was this: Yes, it'll still take hours for the files to download, and you'll have to have your connection open. BUT...it would at least allow a transfer to take place between two users, AND it wouldn't require having to MP3 the files and email them.
So for instance, if dbMasters is working on his cover version of "That's How Strong My Love Is" and he needs me to dub a Hammond organ solo, he could theoretically send me an mp3 for reference. I could then record a full 16-bit WAV file, set it up as a bittorent, and he could then download it that way...giving him a high-quality file to use instead of an mp3-quality file.
I dunno, it was just an idea. Obviously it's not going to be lightning-quick, but since many of us here are concerned with sound quality (and rightfully so), I thought it might be an option worth exploring.
Jun 30, 2005 03:16 pm I can honestly say I'll never cover that song...
Jun 30, 2005 03:17 pm What, not a big Otis Redding fan, db? :)
Jun 30, 2005 03:20 pm No, just not a big fan of covering songs I have never heard of...or covering songs at all...
Jun 30, 2005 03:38 pm ya could just send it direct through msn messenger then...
BeerHunterwww.TheLondonProject.caMember
Since: Feb 07, 2005
Jun 30, 2005 04:26 pm FTP would work as well. Most ISP's give you "x" amount of space for web hosting. In my case I get at least 10 megs for free. Another option (although unexplored) could be to create a common gmail account that you all share. Install the "client drive" or gmail drive i think they call it. Whatever it is called, it allows you to copy and paste files as if it were just another drive. Gmail will give you 2 gigs of space.
TadpuiI am not a crook's headMember
Since: Mar 14, 2003
Jun 30, 2005 04:37 pm Thermocaster: the point is that if you're just sending the file from one person to another person, BitTorrent has no speed advantages over any other transfer method. It's just more software that the sender and the recipient have to download and install to get the same results as using an IM account, a FTP site, or a HTTP link to transfer the file.
Now, if you wanted to broadcast a file to a lot of users, and you can trust those users to keep their transfers open after they receive the file, then BitTorrent would be far superior to any other transfer method.
But for sending a file to a friend (whatever file type, of whatever size), it's a little too convoluted to set up a BitTorrent Tracker file, make a torrent out of the file, and get a link to the tracker to the recipient just to send 1 file to 1 person.
Jun 30, 2005 04:39 pm i colaborate with friends back in florida, and i just hook up with them on my instant messanger, or use g-mail
ciinxMember
Since: May 15, 2004
Jun 30, 2005 05:18 pm yeah.. me too... YM and we actually set up the band's gmail and apply for the gmail drive... put our "to share" stuffs in there and all the band members can access... Delete later.
Jun 30, 2005 08:51 pm Alright, I see your guys' point. Thanks for the tips...now I've got to try and get my direct connect module on Trillian working!
flame...bringing sexy backMember
Since: Jul 01, 2002
Jul 06, 2005 06:23 pm Quote:
I can honestly say I'll never cover that song...
ill give ya a million quid if you do*
*no i wont
Jul 10, 2005 03:22 am How much is a quid, exactly? I've always been confused by that.
Jul 16, 2005 03:28 am A quid is a pound Thermo...just like you guys say a buck which is a dollar.
If I had a million quid, I'd pay myself to cover that song :-) ! bwwwwwwwwhahahaaha.
BTW, whilst writing the pound is now worth $1.78 which is super-cool for us Scots purchasing in the USA but alas, most US suppliers i.e. Musicians Friend, DONT ship to the UK. Bummer really, I could save a fortune!
Still, thats life.
Coco.
flame...bringing sexy backMember
Since: Jul 01, 2002
Jul 16, 2005 12:41 pm if you paid yourself youd have to pay 40% tax dude...
