No, the point of MP3 is to compress audio in a lossy manner while minimizing the introduction of artifacts detectable by human hearing using psychoacoustic analysis. The coincidence that the necessary parasitic EM signal induced by speaker drivers happens to be created by a signal that doesn’t suffer degradation by a relatively specific lossy compression method is remarkable.
Right, but artifacts in the ~8khz range will be detectable by human hearing. mp3s are going to be perfectly acceptable for many sounds in that frequency range… The fact that this works is evidence of that.
Plus, you know what else is lossy? Radio. If the signal is that fragile there’s a good chance the locking mechanism wouldn’t work in the first place.
No, the point of MP3 is to compress audio in a lossy manner while minimizing the introduction of artifacts detectable by human hearing using psychoacoustic analysis. The coincidence that the necessary parasitic EM signal induced by speaker drivers happens to be created by a signal that doesn’t suffer degradation by a relatively specific lossy compression method is remarkable.
Right, but artifacts in the ~8khz range will be detectable by human hearing. mp3s are going to be perfectly acceptable for many sounds in that frequency range… The fact that this works is evidence of that.
Plus, you know what else is lossy? Radio. If the signal is that fragile there’s a good chance the locking mechanism wouldn’t work in the first place.
Go actually read about MP3 compression before you continue misusing the term “lossy.”
It’s just going to be pulses of an 8khz signal. Why would an MP3 not encode this just fine?
Like I said before, the coincidence is what’s remarkable.