[Top] [All Lists]

Re: Re: software crash

Subject: Re: Re: software crash
From: Klas Strandberg <>
Date: Sun, 08 Jun 2003 21:13:49 +0200
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?


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.
>Avisoft Bioacoustics
>--- In  Klas Strandberg 
><> wrote:
>> Tonight I recorded nearly 6 hours into my computer. It took some 
>> 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 
>> download the recordings and save in CoolEdit instead?? Is that 
>> 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 
Telinga Microphones, Botarbo,
S-748 96 Tobo, Sweden.
Phone & fax int + 295 310 01


<Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread>

The University of NSW School of Computer and Engineering takes no responsibility for the contents of this archive. It is purely a compilation of material sent by many people to the naturerecordists mailing list. It has not been checked for accuracy nor its content verified in any way. If you wish to get material removed from the archive or have other queries about the archive e-mail Andrew Taylor at this address: andrewt@cse.unsw.EDU.AU