Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

GitHub Audio

github.audio

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

91–100 of 133 posts

Re: GitHub Audio

#91

Post by djsumdog »

Aldo_MX wrote: post #38
eriknstr wrote: post #17

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I think the name "GitHub Audio" is confusing and probably a trademark violation. When I read "GitHub Audio", I figured it was a new service by GitHub for musicians to version control their music.

> When I read "GitHub Audio", I figured it was a new service by GitHub for musicians to version control their music. Same here, I was ready to let my mind explode with the implementation details.

Yea I will admit, when I saw the title, I thought Github was getting into the SoundCloud space, except where people could upload music source or midi files and it would render/play them. :)

Re: GitHub Audio

#93

Post by Something1234 »

nerdponx wrote: post #71
mojuba wrote: post #24

Earlier quoted context omitted.

That would be very very cool, but good luck with trying to version .logicx or .cpr I think popular software vendors should seriously reconsider their file formats in the 21st century, including graphical and audio ones.

For all of the things you can point fingers at Microsoft for doing wrong, opening up their second-generation document formats (docx, pptx, xlsx, etc) was a wonderful, positive move. It's a shame that the music industry hasn't had a similar revelation. I'm tempted to be cynical and accuse them of fear and greed, but more likely "open data" just isn't something they think about.

Really, I thought that docx abused it's specification using very rough edges to make it difficult for opensource applications to implement.

http://www.antipope.org/charlie/blog-static/2013/10/why-micr...

Re: GitHub Audio

#94

Post by ahabman »

calinet6 wrote: post #63

I've done sonification of data before, and it's not easy at all. This one is really well done -- it's really difficult to get the tonality and rhythm to be pleasant as well as accurately represent the data. Nice work whoever built this!

sonification of data sounds wonderful. any examples?

Re: GitHub Audio

#95

Post by [deleted] »

calinet6 wrote: post #63

I've done sonification of data before, and it's not easy at all. This one is really well done -- it's really difficult to get the tonality and rhythm to be pleasant as well as accurately represent the data. Nice work whoever built this!

[deleted]

Re: GitHub Audio

#96

Post by tracker1 »

eriknstr wrote: post #17
freditup wrote: post #8

This is an interesting example where the new expanded set of TLDs can get confusing. My brain interpreted the URL as something semantically like "audio.github.com". Put another way, I thought the site was actually GitHub-made at first glance at its domain. Of course, this was possible in various ways before expanding TLDs, but I think the problem, and thus the ease of phishing, is greater now.

I think the name "GitHub Audio" is confusing and probably a trademark violation. When I read "GitHub Audio", I figured it was a new service by GitHub for musicians to version control their music.

Funny, I thought it might be a normalizing set of audio interfaces to make web audio easier to use... A bit more than their fetch shim.

Re: GitHub Audio

#97

Post by timehastoldme »

sctb wrote: post #68
timehastoldme wrote: post #57

Well, there's a new world's worst thing.

If this is all you have to say about something on Hacker News, we kindly ask that you avoid saying anything at all.

It's shorthand for "I have a distaste for this thing which I presume to be understood if not necessarily shared." I was wrong about that.

This isn't musical at all! It's some lazy shit a high-schooler with free time and a vague understanding of the Web Audio API could do. Moreover, there's no value in it. The abstract "sonificiation of real data" is such a low bar, there's so much room for creativity, and there are so many brilliant artists who (rightfully) don't want to wade in the depths of the hacky web-tech garbage necessary to make something like this work that it's a wonder anyone gives a fuck about this. To find any value in this, one would have to have tuned out somewhere between having an abstract understanding of the project and actually listening to the darn thing.

Now, do you really want to discuss the merit of the thing, or would you rather Get Offended on the Internet?

Re: GitHub Audio

#99

Post by sctb »

timehastoldme wrote: post #97
sctb wrote: post #68

Earlier quoted context omitted.

If this is all you have to say about something on Hacker News, we kindly ask that you avoid saying anything at all.

It's shorthand for "I have a distaste for this thing which I presume to be understood if not necessarily shared." I was wrong about that. This isn't musical at all! It's some lazy shit a high-schooler with free time and a vague understanding of the Web Audio API could do. Moreover, there's no value in it. The abstract "sonificiation of real data" is such a low bar, there's so much room for creativity, and there are s…

Sorry if I wasn't clear, but my comment was strictly procedural and divorced from the topic. We ask that community members post civilly and substantively on Hacker News or not at all, because we're here to learn and to gratify our intellectual curiosity. Any substantive discussion of the merit of the original post would include information, which your comment lacked.

Re: GitHub Audio

#100

Post by afandian »

Something similar from a project I'm working on. Just a silly debugger tool but turned into a way to show how how lots of components in a system are interacting:

http://status.eventdata.crossref.org/thing-action-service/in...

(if you want to know what this is about, the service is under development, you can read about it here http://eventdata.crossref.org/guide/ )

Post reply on HN