Wouldn’t it be based on a few factors? Rate, volume, etc? Not too different than radio at some level? I could be totally wrong. Guessing here.
If in audible range a faster song would have more data capability - techno vs hip hop? Ha.
If in audible range a faster song would have more data capability - techno vs hip hop? Ha.
It also brings up an interesting thought I never had before. With early home computers, and I assume before that as well, you would place a phone handset onto a coupler to receive data. It is odd to think now that there is a little air in there that is transferring sound between the handset speaker and the coupler microphone. I assume that without that little bit of air it wouldn't function.
Also if air was such an issue then the dynamics of a song being played live would be of series inconsistent patterns leading to error in rate based on environmental factors. Rate would be whatever air density allows but whether you received that rate is different.
Song recorded vs song played vs song heard when recorded vs song heard when played over speakers.
The waveform of both should be highly similar in a way that wouldn’t be considered error besides amplitude or echoes from acoustics.
So it’s a distributed message sensing problem?
In my perspective I just saw the waveform of a techno song == the rate of data being communicated.
120 bpm is 120 bpm. Loss over distance is it’s own factor based on ability to ack.
Physical waves depend on a fluid?
EM seems to be affected by a medium/fluid.
Wonder where the distinctions are more poignant. Maybe degree of affects?