These sound terrible. The lowest-quality audio from Youtube is about 10x the size (which is still small), but at least it doesn't sound like a rescued wax cylinder recording from the turn of last century.<p>I had hoped from the title that this would be a summarized or edited cut of the salient points from these lectures. My limited resource these days is not bandwidth or disk space, but time.
Thank you! these are very cool.<p>> you can save some bandwidth in exchange for recording quality by using high compression of Speex algo<p>how about using opus[0], the comparison chart[1] shows that opus is supposedly significantly better even at a lower bitrate.<p>[0]: <a href="https://www.opus-codec.org/" rel="nofollow">https://www.opus-codec.org/</a><p>[1]: <a href="https://www.opus-codec.org/comparison/" rel="nofollow">https://www.opus-codec.org/comparison/</a>
I really like the idea, but I find Speex distorts the audio way too much in a way that makes it hard to understand afterwards. I'm willing to sacrifice as much quality as I can as long as the speech remains easy to understand, but after that, any space savings aren't worth it.
I cannot recommend highly enough, You and Your Research. Great life and career advice from a great man near the end of his life.<p><a href="https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=a1zDuOPkMSw" rel="nofollow">https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=a1zDuOPkMSw</a>
Why are people thanking the OP?<p>Cool how you CAN compress 47 minutes of audio down to 1.6MB if you're willing to accept awful sound quality, sure. Why though? I mean, why thank the OP for their service? I don't get it.