The miracle of human hearing goes well beyond audiophile snobbery over “high fidelity,” or the machinations of sometimes-arbitrary, designed-by-committee industry specifications. But, in the context of my rant about perceived myths in audio, what can we hear, really?

And how much perceptible sound can you squeeze into an MP3?

For his master’s thesis at the Experimental Media and Performing Arts Center of Rensselaer Polytechnic Institute, Kyle McDonald investigated the deeper, existential issues behind common digital audio specifications. The question: what if you could play every single distinguishable sound that the MP3 specification can accommodate? (For the technically minded, that means iterating through every possible MP3 frame.)

The resulting sonic composition holds a mirror to the way the specification describes our own psychoacoustic capabilities. Just don’t expect to be able to process the answer if you’re in a hurry. Kyle’s “answer” to this ultimate question of noise, encoding, and everything takes some 10^450 years to complete. (That’s a lot of zeros, if you’re keeping score at home.)

Kyle explains:

The composition iterates through all the possible sounds MP3 can handle, and assuming that corresponds to our psychoacoustic limitations, all the sounds we can handle. I have some hour-long excerpts up, which should be easier to skip through than the live stream from last month :)

I wrote a short thesis exploring these ideas, too:

http://oelf.googlecode.com/files/mcdonald-thesis.pdf [link fixed]
Dealing with questions like “what is noise” and “how are biases embedded and revealed”.

I’m not as interested in copyright issues as I am in asking MP3: “what do you sound like, really?”, exploring the intersection of glitch art and enumerative pieces (Every Icon/Wishing Well) + “empty” conceptual art (4’33″, Duchamp’s “Fountain”).

The results aren’t going to settle any debates, but they might at least silence a debate. The results, to me, are strangely beautiful. The sonification vibrates and chirps like a small collection of half-cyborg insects, humming away a summer evening on an alien world. You could meditate to it. (If CDM ever starts a digital audio healing center, we’ll be set.)

The visualizations, at top, are just as aesthetically beautiful, and begin to provide actual information about the quantity and patterns of data that emerge.

A question like “does this MP3 sound good?” or “is this recording any good?” seems simple enough. Kyle’s thesis doesn’t answer any questions, so much as reframe those questions in a beautiful way. But that’s not to say this is all meaningless. The scale of real-world frequencies your ear and brain can perceive is immense and measurable. It’s enormous to conceive, but it’s a real thing. The potential data storage of our technology is vast, too, but it’s still no match for your mind. And if that doesn’t give you an excuse to invest in some ear protection before the next concert, or just give yourself part of this afternoon off, listen to an album, and let your brain relax a bit, I don’t know what will. If you’re still not convinced, breathe deeply and listen to some of Kyle’s sound excerpts for half an hour and get back to me.

http://kylemcdonald.net/oelf

  • Neal Johnson

    link for pdf is dead…

  • dyscode

    indeed this does not solve anything…

    but it´s incredible fun and awesome at the same time to listen to.

    Something I can attribute only to very few of today´s electronic composers.

    Autechre and Raster Noton would be proud of this.
    :)

  • Randal Davis

    Lovely project – congratulations! And thanks for the link to your thesis, which is very nicely done as well. Thanks to Peter, too, for finding another very interesting project for CDM.

  • http://siunit.clanteam.com Si Leary

    Wow, awesome. Perception and technology make an interesting combination.

  • Orubasarot

    This is the best example of digital being "alive" I've seen/heard yet.

    Reminds me of streaming totally incomprehensible video on 28k back on Sputnik7, and just being mystified trying to discern what the hell it was that I was looking at and listening to.

  • http://Lokeymassive.net Lokey

    Ha! Reminds me of that guy in Australia who went through and 'copyrighted' every conceivable combination of telephone number

    melodies, to prove a point. This is a wonderful compliation of the potential audiospace of the format, can't wait to cut it up for samples ;)

  • http://routeit.noisepages.com gbsr

    well, that is quite damned awesome right there.

  • Alex

    Perception of sound has a common base but its not exactly the same for every human and every acoustic environment. MP3 works well in some situations of specific audio content/acoustic environment, but, at least for me, it never worked in a proper hi-fi home listening setup. Even at the highest rates i was able to hear the difference in dynamics and frequency content, especially in "classical type" of music.

  • http://kylemcdonald.net/ Kyle McDonald

    Thanks so much everyone :)

    @Lokey: I've been thinking of doing a call for remixes… while I'm not as interested in copyright, notice that I've shared all these sounds as CC-by :)

    @Alex: yes, perception is definitely not the same for every human and environment. While MP3 was crafted as a solution for "humanity", in the end it was wrapped up in decades of acoustics research and the personal biases of the developers. This piece serves partly as a critique of that process.

  • Pingback: Your Hearing, According to MP3: Sounds for Humans, Played for 10^450 Years | VJ Heaven