Jim Henderson wrote:
> On Sun, 10 Feb 2008 14:57:54 +0100, Tor Olav Kristensen wrote:
> 
>>> I'd think that the conversion back and forth would modify an attempt
>>> like this enough.  Remember that mp3 encoding is lossy, not lossless.
>> Yes, I know. And to overcome that, just don't make the changes to the
>> sound THAT small.
> 
> The thing is, the watermark, in order to be meaningful, would have to re-
> encode exactly the same way.  Otherwise, you end up with a scrambled 
> watermark.  So you can maybe tell it was there, but not what it was.

Redundancy. Error correction codes.

-- 
Tor Olav
http://subcube.com

Post a reply to this message