Thanks Raimund, very precise.
I'll follow your advice to chop up the recording into smaller pieces.
WaveLab has that facility, I had just forgotten about it.
WaveLab has somthing called "Batch Processing". Does that mean one can make
it do an extra "batch" copy?? I don't have the manual.
Another question: What is it that makes WaveLab so speedy? It is 4-5 times
quicker than CoolEdit. If I want to find other programs of the same kind,
what should I look for??
How about SoundForge? Is that as slow as CoolEdit, or what?
Klas.
At 14:36 2003-06-08 -0000, you wrote:
>Hi Klas,
>
>It could be, that the problem was the large file size caused by your
>extremely long recording session. Generally, there is a limitation
>in the maximum file size that can be saved onto disk. This is a
>limitation of both the sound file format and the file system (FAT)
>of your harddisk. For example, common .wav files are limited to a
>maximum file size of 2 GB. But six hours of uncompressed stereo,
>sampled at 44.1 kHz would require 3.5 GB. Perhaps, your software was
>not prepared to handle that overrun condition properly. The FAT32
>file system allows maximum file sizes of 4 GB. Instead, the NTFS
>file system, which is available under Windows 2000 and XP does not
>have any file size limitations (except the harddisk size of course).
>
>One way around this problem would be to configure the recording
>software in such a way, that new files are created (and saved)
>automatically at fixed time intervals (e.g. each hour a new one).
>Specific software would do that without any gaps between the
>successive files. However, I'm afraid, that WaveLab, CoolEdit and
>SoundForge do not support that mode of operation.
>
>Another solution would be to use a software that supports a sound-
>activated recording mode. A threshold comparison would then control
>the recording process. This would be appropriate if you want to
>record occasional sounds only. The advantage of this method would
>be, that the file sizes were much smaller (and locating the
>interesting events would be much easier).
>
>I have a very specific recording software, that supports both of
>these methods. However, it has been designed primarily for
>scientific monitoring purposes and has many other options as a real-
>time spectrogram display and more advanced triggering options. It is
>therefore not extremely cheap.
>
>Regards,
>Raimund
>
>Avisoft Bioacoustics
>
>
>
>--- In Klas Strandberg
><> wrote:
>> Tonight I recorded nearly 6 hours into my computer. It took some
>10-15
>> minutes to save it. When the bar showed 99% saved, the software
>crashed. I
>> lost it all, but it doesn't matter, it was nothing important.
>> But how to avoid this? It could have been a valuable recording.
>>
>> I usually use WaveLab, as it is so fast to work with. Perhaps i
>should
>> download the recordings and save in CoolEdit instead?? Is that
>software
>> stable? Which software is the most stable and reliable, recording
>and saving?
>>
>> Klas.
>>
>> Telinga Microphones, Botarbo,
>> S-748 96 Tobo, Sweden.
>> Phone & fax int + 295 310 01
>> email:
>>
>
>
>
>To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
>
>
>
>
>Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
>
>
>
Telinga Microphones, Botarbo,
S-748 96 Tobo, Sweden.
Phone & fax int + 295 310 01
email:
________________________________________________________________________
________________________________________________________________________
|