--- Forwarded Message from Beth Secrist <[log in to unmask]> ---

>Date: Wed, 14 Feb 2001 15:00:47 -0500
>From: Beth Secrist <[log in to unmask]>
>Reply-To: [log in to unmask]
>Organization: University of Tennessee
>To: Language Learning and Technology International Information Forum     <[log in to unmask]>
>Subject: Re: #5946.1 quicktime files
>References: <[log in to unmask]>

------------------
I just wanted to clarify: QT will read Mp3 files fine. I have talked to
the people who originally digitized the file and they are trying to
figure out what they used -- but it's not mp3. It just shows as "mpeg
audio". When selecting export, the "options" button is greyed out.

I am interested in the discussion of Qualcomm vs. mp3. I had used the
Qualcomm PureVoice compressor in QT Pro for the audio track on some of
the videos I had done and it worked fine (although I'm familiar with
that "hollow" sound Otmar is talking about and it can be attenuated
somewhat in experimenting) and was wanting to use the same compressor
for all the audio. Is anyone knowledgeable about the compression ratio
of Qualcomm vs. mp3? If the compression ratio is about the same, I
assume that mp3 is better quality and would be preferable. But if the
compression ratio is much higher with Qualcomm and given that we are
streaming these files, saving the audio as QT .mov files using Qualcomm
compression may be preferable -- especially since the files are only
voice and not music. But I can also see the advantage of saving these as
mp3 files rather than .mov files to give students added flexibility if
using the mp3 gadgets. Any comments?

I am concerned about the issue of standards vs. proprietary systems
(Real). We have run into some "Real" ; - ) problems when our poor old
Macs could no longer be updated to run the new players (about 3-4
versions ago!) and we were left out in the dark since we couldn't play
any Real files. At least QuickTime is standards-based and QT3.0 will
play files produced in QT4. Anyone feel like addressing "defacto"
standards vs. real (no pun intended) standards?

These questions are becoming crucial as we are migrating to an
all-digital lab and some people on campus (and publishers developing web
pages) wave the standards issue  aside thinking that "everyone" can use
Real. Although I think we'll finally get a lab upgrade this year and
will therefore be able to run Real files, I think the issue remains an
important one.

Now, back to work... Beth

Beth Secrist, Director
Language Resource Center
Dept. of Modern Foreign Langs. & Lits.
University of Tennessee
Knoxville, TN  37996
(865)974-6494; [log in to unmask]