Support and General Use > Recording

New recording idea, a bit crazy

<< < (5/9) > >>

bigtrouble77:
Sorry, I only skimmed through the previous posts so I may be suggesting the same thing, but this is the only way I can see multitrack recording working....

- Creates a session file organizing all the recorded tracks with meta data for each track to set things like volume level, pan, etc. (simple xml file?)

- At recording time only a session mixdown is played back- I can't imagine that rockbox can do a realtime mixdown.

- Two mixdown process types, Session and Final.  Session process is purely for recording and Final is for listening to the final result. (you may only want to record to drums and bass, or you may want to record with all tracks played back so there needs to be the ability to set the tracks to record along with)

If rockbox can play and record simultaneouly this could be an amazing tool. 

lenny:
Well, I saw this in the mailing lists...


--- Quote from: Linus Nielsen Feltzing ---David Pedersen wrote:
> If there is any such tone, it is close to useless. It can't be heard,
> unless you mean that low frequent buzz that is in the left channel, when
> you start a recording. But that is so low, that almost whatever you do
> record, the input sound would far outrange this buzz. What we really
> ned, is a BEEP, that would be in the range of 500-1000hz, and I guess,
> approximately 0.3-0.5 second duration. And maybe even adjustable in volume.

Yes, we know it hardly audible, but it's the best we can do. The
hardware won't let us play audio and record at the same time.

Linus
--- End quote ---

He was addressing a different question, but it does seem pertinent. Please say this doesn't mean what I think it does! Is this true? Are you reading this by any chance Linus?

fizze:
is he talking about the iRiver H100/300s ?

I also havent taken a look at the specs, but the fact that I actually can enable monitoring in the iRiver firmware gives a hint. maybe its only true for a single buffer, but tbh I doubt it. gonna take a look at that.

lenny:
honestly I don't know fizzie, the model name wasn't mentioned
Thanks for checking on it though!

and while you do that... dare I ask again?

--- Quote from: lenny on December 10, 2005, 08:16:12 PM ---One more thing, humor me please. If I were to say that I wanted to learn how to program just so I could write this thing I'm dreaming up, what would I need to learn and how long would it take me to do learn so I could write this assuming I've got a good head on my shoulders? (the most complex I ever got language wise was php)
--- End quote ---
I've figured out that I should probably learn C, but does that mean I just go to the store and get a "learn to program in C" book? Would this be overkill? Would it be insufficent? Should I just give up the question already?

fizze:
well, you'd have to mess with hardware internas. C is fun, yeah. but its quite different from PHP ;)

take a look at classical "hello world" stuff online, no need to buy a book (yet).
theres plenty of online tutorials which are very good.


edit:
I just read the datasheet on the UDA1380, and there is no word of it not being full duplex capable.

the unit is capable of "mixing" input with a digital output without an external DSP though. but this is mostly restricted to amplification.

in other news, the "detection" that was mentioned is restricted to clipping on the headphone out, as well as "short circuiting" the unit.

Navigation

[0] Message Index

[#] Next page

[*] Previous page