Working Via The Net

[ChrisW]

This is an issue for me, and I'm wondering if more savvy netheads, tech minded people, even those of you who haven't just arrived in Oz like me can pass on some advice.

My business plan was to record at home and send audio files over the net.
For various reasons I haven't really got it going yet.
One reason though is my net set up.
I live rural, but I'm lucky enough to have access to ADSL.
I live 4kms away from the exchange and I think my maximum speed is officially 2Mbps. My actual speed is much slower I think.
I tried to upload a few stereo audio files once, percussion overdubs, and it took hours. Not really a viable option for remote work.
I'm using Optus by the way.
Questions:
Is there a faster service available in rural locations? I think satellite is slower, no? What about mobile technology like 3G?
A Faster service available if I go with a different provider?

Finally.......
I would like to move, and my preferred location might not even have DSL availability.
Is anyone successfully working remotely with any of the alternatives to DSL, like satellite, or 3G wireless etc...
Is it expensive and slow?
Is working remotely even possible outside of urban locations with the fastest net speeds, 8Mbps to 20Mbps.
Thanks for any advice.

[Kurt]

Look into lossless compression formats like wavpack, monkeys audio or flac, cutting file sizes by 30-40% cuts transfer times without having to pay anything.

[ChrisW]

Thanks Kurt.
Will potential clients accept compression, even if it's 'lossless'?

Angus,
I assumed isp's like Optus and Telstra offered similar performance.
My line is owned/maintained by Telstra, but Optus can use it to supply me phone and DSL.
Should I see if Telstra offers a faster speed on the same line?

--------

Thanks for the help so far.

[lonearranger]

Pretty much all ADSL or ADSL2 plans have a much faster download speed than upload speed. So even getting good download speed does not mean your uploads will be as quick.

You could talk to telstra or your ISP and see if they offer any services with a higher upload speed. These are often business or professional plans.

You could also use MP3s for work in progress - and then upload the lossless versions at the end. If you are doing percussion then some digital gateing or remove silence type of approach, along with the lossless compression as mentioned by Kurt might see you cut down the transfer size quite a bit. Might mean an over night upload/longish at the end of the project, but at least you can be quicker during the compose/colaborate cycle.

When I had drums for You do some stuff for me a while ago, I was only given an MP3 stereo mix to approve and did not get the parts as waves till the money was in the bank.

Cheers

[Kurt]

If the client is even vaguely computer savvy then letting them know where to find a simple decompression utility should be all you need to do. I think all the ones I mentioned have very easy drag'n'drop decoders available.

Thanks Kurt.
Will potential clients accept compression, even if it's 'lossless'?

Angus,
I assumed isp's like Optus and Telstra offered similar performance.
My line is owned/maintained by Telstra, but Optus can use it to supply me phone and DSL.
Should I see if Telstra offers a faster speed on the same line?

--------

Thanks for the help so far.

[headman]

Chris ,I'm just down the road from you and have uploaded to Abbey Road 48/24 files without too much trouble (about 15 mins per song) using Telstra, this was DSL 1. It just maybe your provider as others are saying, and who'd want to move into the city anyhow?

headman

[ChrisW]

OK, but I don't like Telstra. (ha, ha).

I'll look into it.

Regarding compression, on my journey's around the net I see a lot of people prejudiced against any form of compression.
I'm hoping to be fully professional standard, so I was assuming the worst, that most people would want 24 bit, 44.1 or more likely 96khz uncompressed files.

[musikwerks]

If you're on a mac....

Skype/ichat for video and Nicecast for audio.

I have a mate in Nashville who mixes for the majors and does this all the time. I have also seen Michael Brauer or Tim Palmer (can't remember which) mention it on their twitter feed.

[lonearranger]

OK, but I don't like Telstra. (ha, ha).

I'll look into it.

Regarding compression, on my journey's around the net I see a lot of people prejudiced against any form of compression.
I'm hoping to be fully professional standard, so I was assuming the worst, that most people would want 24 bit, 44.1 or more likely 96khz uncompressed files.

Thing to keep in mind is that lossless compression is different to MP3 type compression. Once uncompressed a lossless file will be digitally identical to the original. The size and contents are the same once they are uncompressed. The size can be reduced by a heap - esp if a track contains 3 minutes of silence and then one cymbal crash. Understand you might need to play the game, but you may be able to educate some of your partners/clients.

Cheers

[Kurt]

I archive completed sessions in wavpack format. It's faster than creating a zip or rar and saves a lot of disc space.

Comparison between some different archiving methods. 11 wav files 22:39mm:ss 24/44.1 from a live recording.

Wav: 1.84 GB (1,977,868,288 bytes)
Zip: 1.54 GB (1,657,352,192 bytes)
Rar: 1.13 GB (1,224,089,600 bytes)
Flac: 0.99 GB (1,063,739,392 bytes)
Wavpack: 0.98 GB (1,052,966,912 bytes)
Monkeys Audio: 0.97 GB (1,035,104,256 bytes)

All formats set to their highest lossless* compression ratio.

Flac and wavpack were both very fast (75-85xrealtime) zip and rar somewhat slower, monkeys audio much slower (30xrealtime)
All formats are totally lossless, upon extraction/decompression you will have bit identical copies of the original wavs.

I believe monkeys audio de-compresses much faster than it compresses but can't be bothered checking that right now.

*wavpack also has a lossy mode.

[ChrisW]

Just to be clear, I'm not against compressing files myself (and I understand it having an affiliation with Toontrack who use TPC data compression), just seeing it regarded as a negative by many of my potential clients.

Well, I guess I can give it a go.

[ChrisW]

Skype/ichat for video and Nicecast for audio.

Is net speed a factor when using Nicecast?
I think my connection is too slow for Skype. At least I think it would judder and drop out a lot.
For example, YouTube videos keep stopping and the HD videos are impossible to watch.