Using the prerecord does not save power, it uses it, so I utilise this feat=
ure in only certain situations when I feel an animal is about to call. Nor=
mally I only let this go on for a few minutes. Its main use is to prevent r=
ecording lots of 'blank' time so you have less recording to process until y=
ou find your call. As Peter says with advances in technology I think its on=
ly really consumer demand that is not pushing the buffer time issue. We wil=
dlife sound recordists don't constitute a big enough market to drive improv=
ement in this area, its only processing power after all.=0D
=0D
=0D
=0D
---In <> wrote:=0D
=0D
Dan Dugan wrote=0D
> =0D
>> When buffering came out as an option on digital recorders =0D
>> it was for me one of the most important recording advances. I =0D
>> had pressed record 1/2 sec too late and lost the beginnings =0D
>> of calls too many times as tried to conserve battery power. =0D
=0D
Does using the prerecord buffer actually save any power? It still has to d=
igitise the sound and buffer it, even if it's then discarding it. I use it =
to save having to go through so much audio to find the call I intended capt=
uring, and to save memory, although that's not such an issue now that large=
memory cards are so cheap. $1 an hour, and it'll last me for days of inter=
mittent recording.=0D
=0D
>> For me 2 sec is just about enough. I would like to see the =0D
>> manufacturers at the affordable end of the market offer a =0D
>> menu of say 2, 4,6 & 10sec buffering. It cant be technically =0D
>> too difficult these days.=0D
> =0D
> It requires a large buffer memory, costing $$ and power. You =0D
> won't find it in consumer-level products because consumers =0D
> aren't asking for it. =0D
=0D
Surely with the price of memory dropping yearly, a couple of extra MB for =
the buffer wouldn't cost much. I've no idea about its power consumption. Bu=
t if the Sony PCM-M10 can have a 5 second buffer for a reasonable cost and =
still have good battery life, there's no reason why the others can't too. L=
ots of the lower cost recorders have either no prerecord buffer or only a c=
ouple of seconds.=0D
=0D
Maybe consumer choice is the main reason it's not so common.=0D
=0D
Peter Shute=0D
=0D
"While a picture is worth a thousand words, a
sound is worth a thousand pictures." R. Murray Schafer via Bernie Krause.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Yahoo Groups Links
<*> To visit your group on the web, go to:
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/naturerecordists/
<*> Your email settings:
Digest Email | Traditional
<*> To change settings online go to:
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/naturerecordists/join
(Yahoo! ID required)
<*> To change settings via email:
<*> To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
<*> Your use of Yahoo Groups is subject to:
http://info.yahoo.com/legal/us/yahoo/utos/terms/
------------------------------------------------------------------------
|