SV: Hardware recording...

[Brian Olesen]

Hi,
Well there is the Olympus ls100 and a Fostex + a Yamaha, which all will do.

Brian


-Oprindelig meddelelse-
Fra: Pc-audio [mailto:pc-audio-boun...@pc-audio.org] På vegne af John
Chilelli
Sendt: 7. februar 2016 07:12
Til: 'PC Audio Discussion List'
Emne: Hardware recording...
Følsomhed: Personlig

Hi all,

 

Does anyone know of an accessible, or at least a somewhat accessible
solution for us to be able to do some decent music / studio recordings via a
hardware device?

 

Thanks much,

 

John >

Re: Hardware recording...

[Andy Logue]

Hi John.

Around November last year I took the plunge and bought a portable didgital 
recorder of extraduanery quality, called the Zoom H6.  In the UK this cost 
me about £370.00.


I didn't tell my wife just how expensive it was, haha.

As far as accessability is concerned, it's not too good but I have listened 
to all Mr. Neal Ewars, a well known blind sound engineer from the US, 
podcasts on the machine.


It is aparently the best such device anywhere on the planet and yes, a blind 
person can easily record sound at 24 bit sterio.


I'm currently recording a local band in Kilcreggan, who meet every Wednesday 
night.


I use Goldwave to edit my recording and Nero to burn onto disk.

I must tell you that the quality of the recordings I make blow the minds of 
my friends.  They think that I must really know my stuff as the recordings 
are as good as you'll get in a recording studio.  I'm loving this attention!


I'm thinking of helping my small community magazine to make their monthly 
paper accessable to blind people, by recording it and posting it on memory 
sticks to people in my community  who cannot read print.


So, for a portable recording studio, which you can hold in your hand that 
gives you the best sound quality possible in the world, please consider the 
Zoom H6.


All the very best.
Andy from a wet and dreary Scotland.




- Original Message - 
From: "John Chilelli" 

To: "'PC Audio Discussion List'" 
Sent: Sunday, February 07, 2016 6:12 AM
Subject: Hardware recording...



Hi all,



Does anyone know of an accessible, or at least a somewhat accessible
solution for us to be able to do some decent music / studio recordings via 
a

hardware device?



Thanks much,



John >

Re: High Quality Music Streams

[Anders Holmberg]

Hi!
Is it tidal you’re looking for?
/A
> On 06 Feb 2016, at 18:01, hamitcampos  wrote:
> 
> There's HD tracks and I tracks. Just remember you need 1 of the new players 
> that will play 96 KHZ 24 bit files.
> 
> Sent from my iPhone
> 
>> On Feb 6, 2016, at 11:01 AM, Steve Jacobson  wrote:
>> 
>> Recently, I heard of a high quality music source called Deezer.  It appears
>> to have quite a few tracks, but it requires Sonus hardware as I understand
>> it.  Do those here have experience with other high quality download or
>> streaming music sites that are not particular about the hardware used?
>> Certainly I am aware that it is necessary to have good hardware to take full
>> advantage of such sources.
>> 
>> 
>> 
>> Best regards,
>> 
>> 
>> 
>> Steve Jacobson
>> 
>> 
>> 
> 

RE: Hardware recording...

[Hamit Campos]

You mean an accessible recorder? There's always the Olympus LS 100. Or if
you don't need XLR connecters or almost $300 is out of reach there's the LS
14.

-Original Message-
From: Pc-audio [mailto:pc-audio-boun...@pc-audio.org] On Behalf Of John
Chilelli
Sent: Sunday, February 7, 2016 1:12 AM
To: 'PC Audio Discussion List' 
Subject: Hardware recording...
Sensitivity: Personal

Hi all,

 

Does anyone know of an accessible, or at least a somewhat accessible
solution for us to be able to do some decent music / studio recordings via a
hardware device?

 

Thanks much,

 

John >

RE: Hardware recording...

[Hamit Campos]

Ah I forgot about the Zoom H6. Yeah it's epic. It could if you used all the
XLR connecters 
With mikes and set it up right and had the software to create this later
theriticly do 5.1 surround sound. John has to remember though unless like
Neal he can remember the  menues or uses 1 of the podcasts as a reference,
it'll be set and forget. Maybe it's just me. Maybe I like things super easy.
But since the thing doesn't talk I'd get confused. So I'd have a sighted
person set it than forget about it. Yes recording with this should be easy
enough.
-Original Message-
From: Pc-audio [mailto:pc-audio-boun...@pc-audio.org] On Behalf Of Andy
Logue
Sent: Sunday, February 7, 2016 3:57 AM
To: PC Audio Discussion List 
Subject: Re: Hardware recording...

Hi John.

Around November last year I took the plunge and bought a portable didgital
recorder of extraduanery quality, called the Zoom H6.  In the UK this cost
me about £370.00.

I didn't tell my wife just how expensive it was, haha.

As far as accessability is concerned, it's not too good but I have listened
to all Mr. Neal Ewars, a well known blind sound engineer from the US,
podcasts on the machine.

It is aparently the best such device anywhere on the planet and yes, a blind
person can easily record sound at 24 bit sterio.

I'm currently recording a local band in Kilcreggan, who meet every Wednesday
night.

I use Goldwave to edit my recording and Nero to burn onto disk.

I must tell you that the quality of the recordings I make blow the minds of
my friends.  They think that I must really know my stuff as the recordings
are as good as you'll get in a recording studio.  I'm loving this attention!

I'm thinking of helping my small community magazine to make their monthly
paper accessable to blind people, by recording it and posting it on memory
sticks to people in my community  who cannot read print.

So, for a portable recording studio, which you can hold in your hand that
gives you the best sound quality possible in the world, please consider the
Zoom H6.

All the very best.
Andy from a wet and dreary Scotland.




- Original Message -
From: "John Chilelli" 
To: "'PC Audio Discussion List'" 
Sent: Sunday, February 07, 2016 6:12 AM
Subject: Hardware recording...


> Hi all,
>
>
>
> Does anyone know of an accessible, or at least a somewhat accessible
> solution for us to be able to do some decent music / studio recordings via

> a
> hardware device?
>
>
>
> Thanks much,
>
>
>
> John >
>
> 

RE: Now I know why music on the Apple TV 3rd Gen doesn't sound sogood...

[John Gurd]

That's a very helpful explanation. So no Voice Over with the Apple TV without 
resampling. Oh well, at least now we know. I might go ahead and buy the new 
Apple TV anyway. My wife would probably use some of the apps, so I can pretend 
it's not really for me. (smiles)

John


-Original Message-
From: Pc-audio [mailto:pc-audio-boun...@pc-audio.org] On Behalf Of Dane 
Trethowan
Sent: 06 February 2016 17:54
To: PC Audio Discussion List
Subject: Re: Now I know why music on the Apple TV 3rd Gen doesn't sound 
sogood...

Hi!

I wrote to an audio engineer friend of mine forwarding him the original email 
from this list written by john and his explanation is an interesting one, 
certainly the practise is more common it seems than I thought:

> Unfortunately, this is *very* common practice.  Horrible as it is for decent 
> audio, forcing everything to one output sampling rate and bit-depth is 
> unavoidable for the vast majority of consumer hardware, otherwise which 
> wouldn't be able to support playing multiple simultaneous output streams of 
> differing formats.  The SoundBlaster Live and above do exactly this in 
> hardware, which is why SB cards always sounded bloody horrible at anything 
> other than 48KHz.  XP and above do it in software; OSX and IOS do the same, 
> as (I imagine) does Android; Linux and BSD do it if you use a Sound Server. 
> It's an absolutely attrocious way to handle audio, but necessary if you want 
> the sound device to be able to do more than one thing at a time. Fortunately, 
> Linux at least can be made to pass the stream directly to the hardware, but 
> of course the device loses the ability then for multiple streams for that 
> particular sound device. So, e.g., no speech output wilst playing music.  If 
> you want the best possible precision and still want multiple streams, the 
> simplest solution is to install a professional Sound Server such as Jack 
> Audio Connection Kit (Linux, Win, and (I believe) OSX), which, although it 
> has to resample, has very high-precision resampling algorithms, and does a 
> very good job.  Of course, it's more CPU-intensive.

> On 5 Feb 2016, at 8:36 AM, Brent Harding  wrote:
> 


So there we are, take it or leave it 


> I heard the 48k sampling rate is more common in video than it is for music or 
> anything else. Maybe it's what a TV would expect to see if HDMI is used.
> 
> - Original Message - From: "Dane Trethowan" 
> 
> To: "PC Audio Discussion List" 
> Sent: Thursday, February 04, 2016 3:06 PM
> Subject: Re: Now I know why music on the Apple TV 3rd Gen doesn't sound 
> sogood...
> 
> 
> Well to be perfectly honest that s Apple for you and where would you find any 
> serious audio reviews about anything Apple?
> 
> Okay, I did find plenty of reviews and information regarding the audio for my 
> 2012 Mac Mini machine but Apple just won t release too much information about 
> anything else it seems when it comes to audio.
> 
> I m glad you mentioned that about the Apple TV and now I m having second 
> thoughts about that purchase for myself too.
> 
> 
>> On 5 Feb 2016, at 5:38 AM, John Gurd  wrote:
>> 
>> I got an Apple TV 3rd Gen a year or so ago to use with MusicMatch and 
>> my HiFi. I was really disappointed to discover that it really didn't 
>> sound that great even with a HDMI connection. I recently read that 
>> for some reason it resamples music from 44.1KHZ to 48KHZ. This is the 
>> equivalent to transcoding on the fly which is inevitably going to sound 
>> terrible.
>> 
>> 
>> 
>> The thing is, I really love the new Apple music service and I am 
>> tempted to buy the Apple TV 4th Gen in order to use the service with 
>> my living room system. But once bitten, twice shy. I haven't been 
>> able to find out if it handles music in the same way. I haven't even 
>> been able to find any serious reviews of its audio quality.
>> 
>> 
>> 
>> John
>> 
>> 
>> 
> 
> **
> Those of a positive and enquiring frame of mind will leave the rest of the 
> halfwits in this world behind.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 

**
Those of a positive and enquiring frame of mind will leave the rest of the 
halfwits in this world behind.

hear the music as intended on your iPhone through headphones

[Dane Trethowan]

If you wish to keep your iPhone but want to listen to the music in far better 
quality than what Apple’s Headphone output gives then the pair of headphones 
reviewed here may be exactly what you’ve been after, even I’m tempted to get a 
pair though I don’t use the iPhone for much these days but there’s no doubt 
about the convenience these cans would offer.

The cans use the Lightning connector of your iPhone/iPad/iPod so the music is 
digitally transferred to DAC’S in the cans themselves.

According to the review Philips have brought us the first set of headphones 
with a Lightning connector and more will follow I’m sure.


http://www.techradar.com/au/reviews/audio-visual/hi-fi-and-audio/headphones/philips-fidelio-m2l-1292276/review
 

**
Those of a positive and enquiring frame of mind will leave the rest of the 
halfwits in this world behind.

Re: Now I know why music on the Apple TV 3rd Gen doesn't sound sogood...

[Dane Trethowan]

Yep point taken or you can just grin and bare it and consider how convenient 
the device might be, at least you can stream your content at the tap of the 
control.

> On 8 Feb 2016, at 8:15 AM, John Gurd  wrote:
> 
> That's a very helpful explanation. So no Voice Over with the Apple TV without 
> resampling. Oh well, at least now we know. I might go ahead and buy the new 
> Apple TV anyway. My wife would probably use some of the apps, so I can 
> pretend it's not really for me. (smiles)
> 
> John
> 
> 
> -Original Message-
> From: Pc-audio [mailto:pc-audio-boun...@pc-audio.org] On Behalf Of Dane 
> Trethowan
> Sent: 06 February 2016 17:54
> To: PC Audio Discussion List
> Subject: Re: Now I know why music on the Apple TV 3rd Gen doesn't sound 
> sogood...
> 
> Hi!
> 
> I wrote to an audio engineer friend of mine forwarding him the original email 
> from this list written by john and his explanation is an interesting one, 
> certainly the practise is more common it seems than I thought:
> 
>> Unfortunately, this is *very* common practice.  Horrible as it is for decent 
>> audio, forcing everything to one output sampling rate and bit-depth is 
>> unavoidable for the vast majority of consumer hardware, otherwise which 
>> wouldn't be able to support playing multiple simultaneous output streams of 
>> differing formats.  The SoundBlaster Live and above do exactly this in 
>> hardware, which is why SB cards always sounded bloody horrible at anything 
>> other than 48KHz.  XP and above do it in software; OSX and IOS do the same, 
>> as (I imagine) does Android; Linux and BSD do it if you use a Sound Server. 
>> It's an absolutely attrocious way to handle audio, but necessary if you want 
>> the sound device to be able to do more than one thing at a time. 
>> Fortunately, Linux at least can be made to pass the stream directly to the 
>> hardware, but of course the device loses the ability then for multiple 
>> streams for that particular sound device. So, e.g., no speech output wilst 
>> playing music.  If you want the best possible precision and still want 
>> multiple streams, the simplest solution is to install a professional Sound 
>> Server such as Jack Audio Connection Kit (Linux, Win, and (I believe) OSX), 
>> which, although it has to resample, has very high-precision resampling 
>> algorithms, and does a very good job.  Of course, it's more CPU-intensive.
> 
>> On 5 Feb 2016, at 8:36 AM, Brent Harding  wrote:
>> 
> 
> 
> So there we are, take it or leave it 
> 
> 
>> I heard the 48k sampling rate is more common in video than it is for music 
>> or anything else. Maybe it's what a TV would expect to see if HDMI is used.
>> 
>> - Original Message - From: "Dane Trethowan" 
>> 
>> To: "PC Audio Discussion List" 
>> Sent: Thursday, February 04, 2016 3:06 PM
>> Subject: Re: Now I know why music on the Apple TV 3rd Gen doesn't sound 
>> sogood...
>> 
>> 
>> Well to be perfectly honest that s Apple for you and where would you find 
>> any serious audio reviews about anything Apple?
>> 
>> Okay, I did find plenty of reviews and information regarding the audio for 
>> my 2012 Mac Mini machine but Apple just won t release too much information 
>> about anything else it seems when it comes to audio.
>> 
>> I m glad you mentioned that about the Apple TV and now I m having second 
>> thoughts about that purchase for myself too.
>> 
>> 
>>> On 5 Feb 2016, at 5:38 AM, John Gurd  wrote:
>>> 
>>> I got an Apple TV 3rd Gen a year or so ago to use with MusicMatch and 
>>> my HiFi. I was really disappointed to discover that it really didn't 
>>> sound that great even with a HDMI connection. I recently read that 
>>> for some reason it resamples music from 44.1KHZ to 48KHZ. This is the 
>>> equivalent to transcoding on the fly which is inevitably going to sound 
>>> terrible.
>>> 
>>> 
>>> 
>>> The thing is, I really love the new Apple music service and I am 
>>> tempted to buy the Apple TV 4th Gen in order to use the service with 
>>> my living room system. But once bitten, twice shy. I haven't been 
>>> able to find out if it handles music in the same way. I haven't even 
>>> been able to find any serious reviews of its audio quality.
>>> 
>>> 
>>> 
>>> John
>>> 
>>> 
>>> 
>> 
>> **
>> Those of a positive and enquiring frame of mind will leave the rest of the 
>> halfwits in this world behind.
>> 
>> 
>> 
>> 
>> 
> 
> **
> Those of a positive and enquiring frame of mind will leave the rest of the 
> halfwits in this world behind.
> 
> 
> 
> 

**
Those of a positive and enquiring frame of mind will leave the rest of the 
halfwits in this world behind.

RE: High Quality Music Streams

[John Gurd]

At the risk of annoying Dane (LOL) Winamp does a very good job of playing HD 
files. I've just checked it on a 24bit 9600 sample rate. You have to tick a 
setting in preferences to allow it.

John


-Original Message-
From: Pc-audio [mailto:pc-audio-boun...@pc-audio.org] On Behalf Of Anders 
Holmberg
Sent: 07 February 2016 15:29
To: PC Audio Discussion List
Subject: Re: High Quality Music Streams

Hi!
Is it tidal you re looking for?
/A
> On 06 Feb 2016, at 18:01, hamitcampos  wrote:
> 
> There's HD tracks and I tracks. Just remember you need 1 of the new players 
> that will play 96 KHZ 24 bit files.
> 
> Sent from my iPhone
> 
>> On Feb 6, 2016, at 11:01 AM, Steve Jacobson  wrote:
>> 
>> Recently, I heard of a high quality music source called Deezer.  It 
>> appears to have quite a few tracks, but it requires Sonus hardware as 
>> I understand it.  Do those here have experience with other high 
>> quality download or streaming music sites that are not particular about the 
>> hardware used?
>> Certainly I am aware that it is necessary to have good hardware to 
>> take full advantage of such sources.
>> 
>> 
>> 
>> Best regards,
>> 
>> 
>> 
>> Steve Jacobson
>> 
>> 
>> 
> 

Re: High Quality Music Streams

[Dane Trethowan]

Winamp has always come with good Encoding/Decoding options, I’ll stick with my 
VLC thanks  and a new update has just been released I see.


> On 8 Feb 2016, at 8:31 AM, John Gurd  wrote:
> 
> At the risk of annoying Dane (LOL) Winamp does a very good job of playing HD 
> files. I've just checked it on a 24bit 9600 sample rate. You have to tick a 
> setting in preferences to allow it.
> 
> John
> 
> 
> -Original Message-
> From: Pc-audio [mailto:pc-audio-boun...@pc-audio.org] On Behalf Of Anders 
> Holmberg
> Sent: 07 February 2016 15:29
> To: PC Audio Discussion List
> Subject: Re: High Quality Music Streams
> 
> Hi!
> Is it tidal you re looking for?
> /A
>> On 06 Feb 2016, at 18:01, hamitcampos  wrote:
>> 
>> There's HD tracks and I tracks. Just remember you need 1 of the new players 
>> that will play 96 KHZ 24 bit files.
>> 
>> Sent from my iPhone
>> 
>>> On Feb 6, 2016, at 11:01 AM, Steve Jacobson  wrote:
>>> 
>>> Recently, I heard of a high quality music source called Deezer.  It 
>>> appears to have quite a few tracks, but it requires Sonus hardware as 
>>> I understand it.  Do those here have experience with other high 
>>> quality download or streaming music sites that are not particular about the 
>>> hardware used?
>>> Certainly I am aware that it is necessary to have good hardware to 
>>> take full advantage of such sources.
>>> 
>>> 
>>> 
>>> Best regards,
>>> 
>>> 
>>> 
>>> Steve Jacobson
>>> 
>>> 
>>> 
>> 
> 
> 
> 

**
Those of a positive and enquiring frame of mind will leave the rest of the 
halfwits in this world behind.

An Introduction to the Amadeus Pro Audio Editor from HairerSoft - AccessWorld® - January 2016

[Dane Trethowan]

Not a bad review for for this editing package though as the author states its 
an “Introduction” so a lot has been left out such as multi track audio editing 
and production and that’s understandable given the review discusses basic ways 
to use the App.

I’ve been using Amadeus Pro now since 2007 I think was when I bought the first 
software licence.



> http://www.afb.org/afbpress/pub.asp?DocID=aw170106 
> 


**
Those of a positive and enquiring frame of mind will leave the rest of the 
halfwits in this world behind.

RE: Hardware recording...

[John Chilelli]

Brian,

Which Models of the Fostex + and the Yamaha are said to be accessible for us
to be able to use effectively?

Thanks,

John

-Original Message-
From: Pc-audio [mailto:pc-audio-boun...@pc-audio.org] On Behalf Of Brian
Olesen
Sent: Sunday, February 07, 2016 4:03 AM
To: 'PC Audio Discussion List'
Subject: SV: Hardware recording...
Sensitivity: Personal

Hi,
Well there is the Olympus ls100 and a Fostex + a Yamaha, which all will do.

Brian


-Oprindelig meddelelse-
Fra: Pc-audio [mailto:pc-audio-boun...@pc-audio.org] På vegne af John
Chilelli
Sendt: 7. februar 2016 07:12
Til: 'PC Audio Discussion List'
Emne: Hardware recording...
Følsomhed: Personlig

Hi all,

 

Does anyone know of an accessible, or at least a somewhat accessible
solution for us to be able to do some decent music / studio recordings via a
hardware device?

 

Thanks much,

 

John >

RE: Hardware recording...

[John Chilelli]

Thank you Andy,

I will do some research on it to see if I can integrate it into my little
home studio.

Best wishes to you as well,

John

-Original Message-
From: Pc-audio [mailto:pc-audio-boun...@pc-audio.org] On Behalf Of Andy
Logue
Sent: Sunday, February 07, 2016 3:57 AM
To: PC Audio Discussion List
Subject: Re: Hardware recording...

Hi John.

Around November last year I took the plunge and bought a portable didgital
recorder of extraduanery quality, called the Zoom H6.  In the UK this cost
me about £370.00.

I didn't tell my wife just how expensive it was, haha.

As far as accessability is concerned, it's not too good but I have listened
to all Mr. Neal Ewars, a well known blind sound engineer from the US,
podcasts on the machine.

It is aparently the best such device anywhere on the planet and yes, a blind
person can easily record sound at 24 bit sterio.

I'm currently recording a local band in Kilcreggan, who meet every Wednesday
night.

I use Goldwave to edit my recording and Nero to burn onto disk.

I must tell you that the quality of the recordings I make blow the minds of
my friends.  They think that I must really know my stuff as the recordings
are as good as you'll get in a recording studio.  I'm loving this attention!

I'm thinking of helping my small community magazine to make their monthly
paper accessable to blind people, by recording it and posting it on memory
sticks to people in my community  who cannot read print.

So, for a portable recording studio, which you can hold in your hand that
gives you the best sound quality possible in the world, please consider the
Zoom H6.

All the very best.
Andy from a wet and dreary Scotland.




- Original Message -
From: "John Chilelli" 
To: "'PC Audio Discussion List'" 
Sent: Sunday, February 07, 2016 6:12 AM
Subject: Hardware recording...


> Hi all,
>
>
>
> Does anyone know of an accessible, or at least a somewhat accessible
> solution for us to be able to do some decent music / studio recordings via

> a
> hardware device?
>
>
>
> Thanks much,
>
>
>
> John >
>
>