So I just downloaded some shit from an Anon on p2p, including

that image is too small to contain any useful amount of audio in that style
it's probably just a preview thumbnail of sorts for some program

>>59399048
It's about 600 of these PNGs and one normal looking image of a banner. Nothing else in the folder. Trolling p2p is weird.

>>59399048
Thanks for the reply Anon.

File: a.jpg (19KB, 300x218px) Image search: [Google]

19KB, 300x218px

>>59399048
>>59399108
np, it's worth noting storing audio optically like that is a thing, it resembles that used on film (before they started putting digital frames on them)

you'll notice this picture only shows a fraction of a frame worth of audio

>>59399147
I say put them together and post results

>>59399186
Except that my computer is from 2001 (freezes for 7 seconds each time I switch tabs, i.e. something in the browser would slow down, I'd forget where I was in the project while waiting for windows to work again), I don't have a mouse, and each file is labeled with the name of a different lecture. Also to me it looks like the visual audio is long enough that the names would be other then to throw you off - looks like an hour of talking rather then 5 minutes - though I am no audio expert else I might already have known if they were readable.

>>59399186
i say "resembles" as in it looks similar, but they're clearly not made in the same way

>>59399475
Hmm... I was thinking of the visuals used in SoundCloud. Yet you're saying even in a digital age such a large amount of changes could still only be a second or two, or 30 seconds or less in the whole image I uploaded? I thought the image would be an hour because it would be if it was shown like that on SoundCloud. Or that was only true at the time when they printed it?

>>59399691
the way film analog audio works is that each line (vertically if looking at OP's pic) effectively corresponds to a sample of audio
since op's image is digital, there are only 800 such samples in the picture (the number of vertical lines, aka, the horizontal resolution)
even shitty telephone quality audio is at least 8000 samples per second, making op's picture 1/10th of a second if interpreted as shitty telephone audio, less if anything else

Hm, so they are numbered - At least most of them, which I didn't see before because the ones at the bottom are all named.

I put this into a torrent in this space, but it won't let me include it in the post!

Looks like it's this: https://archive.org/details/TheDr.WilliamL.PierceCollectionaudio

Apparently, he is a famous Nazi who did ancient YouTube videos.

Then why someone decided to present it in the form of 600 weird .png files I wouldn't know.

>>59400746
So it's actually a horizontally compressed representation of a waveform that you can't possibly return to its previous form (800 pixels for 1542 seconds of audio), and >>59399691 was right.

you discovered cicada 3301