Re: Shiny new portable recorder.
- From: mrivers@xxxxxxxxxxx (Mike Rivers)
- Date: 31 Jul 2005 17:03:46 -0400
In article <3l4dh4F10hbvcU1@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx> chel@xxxxxxxxxxxx writes:
> On Sun, 31 Jul 2005 16:26:25 +0200, Mike Rivers wrote:
> > But is the equipment we have ABSOLUTELY reliable, and idiot proof?
> > Suppose I have 30 files to copy and I get the cards out of order and
> > skip one? No equipment failures, but no copy either.
> If you have the habit of using your tapes in your car for weeks, tapes are
> not "ABSOLUTELY reliable, and idiot proof"
Please explain why you posted this response to my statement above.
Because I gave you the opportunity to use the word "idiot?"
> If you use 4GB or 8GB flash cards, a single card can store 6 or 12 hours
> of audio at tape quality (44.1/16).
May I send you the bill? It's about money as well as storage.
> you wrote, quality is not your primary focus, so 44.1/16 or even 320kbps
> MP3 (27 hours on 4GB, 55 hours on 8GB) or maybe even 256 kbps MP3 (35
> hours on 4GB or 70 hours on 8GB) could do well.
I would never use MP3 for an archive project. You really need about 30
years more experience here.
> I think you are overestimating your problems. But I think it is clear you
> prefer tapes.
I prefer a less expensive solution than a weekend's (or a week's)
worth of flash memory card, or a solution that doesn't require me to
do extra chores at the end of the day and delete my original
recordings, for a cost that won't require a major grant.
--
I'm really Mike Rivers (mrivers@xxxxxxxxxxx)
However, until the spam goes away or Hell freezes over,
lots of IP addresses are blocked from this system. If
you e-mail me and it bounces, use your secret decoder ring
and reach me here: double-m-eleven-double-zero at yahoo
.
- Prev by Date: Re: Audio Editing program that can visually overlay two waveforms?
- Next by Date: Re: Shiny new portable recorder.
- Previous by thread: Re: Shiny new portable recorder.
- Next by thread: Re: Shiny new portable recorder.
- Index(es):
Relevant Pages
|